# Politics in 2018



## Edward Campbell (28 Dec 2017)

Bird_Gunner45 said:
			
		

> Sure it does... debt all goes into the same lump and is "mostly" bad regardless of the party who created it.




Although he is still resting, quite comfortably, on top of the most recent polling, the last half of 2017 was less than kind to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and some of his ministers. Some people are suggesting that he and his government are looking a bit tattered ...

                    
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





... but the news isn't any better for Andrew Who? Andrew Scheer and Jagmeet Singh, neither of whom have managed to "connect" with Canadians, close the polling gaps or win any new seats in by-elections, all of which Justin Trudeau has done.

The economy is booming, well, moving along nicely at any rate even as the national debt climbs inexorably ... as someone else has pointed out it is the people, you and me, and the companies, large and small for which we work, that grow (or shrink) the economy while governments do (relatively) little in the short to medium terms. Governments make fiscal policies and they can have beneficial (or damaging) impacts in the medium to long terms. (Monetary policy is something else, again, but also important.) I'm going to suggest that a robust economic performance in 2017 owes next to nothing to Justin Trudeau, and whatever credit is due to any politicians goes to Stephen Harper, Paul Martin and Jean Chrétien.

Military matters have received short shrift from the Trudeau Liberals ... my suggestion is that you cannot find many ways to merge the military with the prevailing _green_, *First Nations*, _feminist_ and "*sunny ways*" political agenda and, therefore, the Canadian Armed Forces are of little interest to this government. Absent something exciting from Kim Jong-un or Vladimir Putin that's unlikely to change in 2018.

NAFTA is looking a bit weak and flabby ... likely to go down for the count in 2018; if that's the case will the old Canada-US Free Trade arrangement kick in again or will that get shoved aside too and will we trade on WTO rules?  The CETA was signed, but that's Stephen Harper's deal ... had nothing to do with the Trudeau regime. Free(er) trade with Asia, which i would have thought might be a priority if NAFTA is going down the drain, took a sh!t kicking in late 2017 when the prime minister decided that "virtue signalling" to win by-elections in Canada was more important than global trade ... but that's only my opinion.

2018 should be a vital year for Team Trudeau ... Canadians are most likely to forget and forgive the bumbles and bungles in 2017 as the Liberals reshape themselves for the 2019 campaign (which, in fairness, began in November 2015). As things stand, IF Prime Minister Trudeau can stay out of trouble in 2018 ~ which might mean a cabinet shuffle ~ then he looks good to be re-elected in 2018 ... it's a big *IF*.


----------



## Kirkhill (28 Dec 2017)

And how politics are done in the 21st century.

Facebook and the SNP 



> Facebook boasts of helping the SNP achieve victory with politics unit


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/26/facebook-boasts-helping-snp-achieve-victory-politics-unit/

Twitter and the Labour Party



> Revealed: Twitter admits how it helped Labour win the social media general election battle


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/27/revealed-twitter-admits-helped-labour-win-social-media-general/

But they weren't really biased donchano.....

The services could have been bought by the Tories too..... (if they had known about them?)


----------



## PuckChaser (28 Dec 2017)

The Tories aren't the ones missing meetings on TPP to hang out with the Facebook COO. Trudeau must be old friends with her, that absolves any ethics and lobbying conflict.


----------



## FJAG (28 Dec 2017)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> . . .
> Military matters have received short shrift from the Trudeau Liberals ... my suggestion is that you cannot find many ways to merge the military with the prevailing _green_, *First Nations*, _feminist_ and "*sunny ways*" political agenda and, therefore, the Canadian Armed Forces are of little interest to this government. Absent something exciting from Kim Jong-un or Vladimir Putin that's unlikely to change in 2018.
> . . .


This isn't a Trudeau Minor issue but a Liberal Party issue in general for over half a century now.

Short CIA summary of Trudeau the Elder's reign.

https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP85T01058R000202840001-0.pdf

 :cheers:


----------



## jollyjacktar (28 Dec 2017)

FJAG said:
			
		

> This isn't a Trudeau Minor issue but a Liberal Party issue in general for over half a century now.
> 
> Short CIA summary of Trudeau the Elder's reign.
> 
> ...



The more things change, the more they stay the same.  The son is just like the father both in running up the deficit and doing as little as possible for the military.  You need to go back 60 years to see decent Liberal spending.


----------



## Bird_Gunner45 (29 Dec 2017)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> The more things change, the more they stay the same.  The son is just like the father both in running up the deficit and doing as little as possible for the military.  You need to go back 60 years to see decent Liberal spending.



To be fair, you'd have to go back almost as far to see any real decent conservative spending either. The current state of the CAF is a 2 party issue


----------



## Edward Campbell (29 Dec 2017)

Bird_Gunner45 said:
			
		

> To be fair, you'd have to go back almost as far to see any real decent conservative spending either. The current state of the CAF is a 2 party issue



Agreed.

The last time we had any sort of "revolution" in the military was in the late very 1940s and very early 1950s when Louis St Laurent was the (Liberal) prime minister and Brook Claxton was the defence minister. They subscribed to the emerging "come-as-you-are" war theory and that meant that Canada's traditional reliance on a (mythical) strong reserve that could be quickly mobilized had to end and a tough, professional, "regular" military had to be created. 

That was nearly 70 yers ago ... nothing much has changed since, except for lots and lots of cheese paring. No one has suggested a better basic model. All Paul Hellyer really wanted to do, 15 years St Laurent) was to make it, a professional, standing military, more cost effective.

Diefenbaker and Pearson subscribed to the St Laurent/Claxton doctrine but wanted to spend less and less on defence and more on social programmes; Pierre Trudeau really would have liked to disarm Canada but was persuaded to just cut deeply ~ way past the fat and into the muscle and bone; Mulroney didn't hate the military, but it wasn't a priority; Chrétien made further, deep, damaging cuts; Martin tried, briefly, to restore some strength; so did Harper ~ until 2012 when I think he just gave up on DND as a whole; Clark, Turner and Campbell didn't count.

It was a political wash, _in my opinion_. St Laurent was very good to, even, great on foreign and defence policy; the rest were fair to poor to god-awful (the Trudeaus, père et fils).


----------



## ModlrMike (29 Dec 2017)

Some illuminating charts on the subject here: Canada - Military expenditure


----------



## Jed (29 Dec 2017)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> Agreed.
> 
> The last time we had any sort of "revolution" in the military was in the late very 1940s and very early 1950s when Louis St Laurent was the (Liberal) prime minister and Brook Claxton was the defence minister. They subscribed to the emerging "come-as-you-are" war theory and that meant that Canada's traditional reliance on a (mythical) strong reserve that could be quickly mobilized had to end and a tough, professional, "regular" military had to be created.
> 
> ...



I prefer fair to poor over god-awful any day of the week.


----------



## Altair (30 Dec 2017)

Jed said:
			
		

> I prefer fair to poor over god-awful any day of the week.


By the end of the last CPC term we were heading into god awful territory. 

Both parties are trash when it comes to support for the military. And there is one that would disband us altogether.


----------



## Edward Campbell (30 Dec 2017)

Altair said:
			
		

> By the end of the last CPC term we were heading into god awful territory.
> 
> Both parties are trash when it comes to support for the military. And there is one that would disband us altogether.



_*But why?*_ Why did Prime Minister Harper turn his attentions (and affections) away from the military and focus, instead, solely on deficit reduction? Some analysts believe that he could have done both: rebuilt the military, or, at least, not cut defence spending, and balanced the budget, but (and I'm agreeing with you) he decided to ignore DND and put all his efforts into balancing the budget.

I believe the answer lies in the a letter he wrote in the Spring of 2012 to then MND Peter MacKay ... it was a directive to cut "overhead," specifically in headquarters;it was a directive that was ignored.

I don't know how things are where you work, but in 37 years of soldiering and a decade in the private sector, in the tech community, I learned to recognize orders, even when they are given politely, and I learned that it was best to obey them.

What, I wonder, prompted Peter MacKay to ignore the prime minister's clear direction? Is (was) he the sort of fellow to go "off the reservation" like that? I don't think so ... _I think_ the admirals and generals who surrounded him (and who, I have heard ~ _*rumours*_ ~ had great influence over him) convinced him that:

     1. The PM was wrong, the CF's command an control superstructure was NOT bloated; and

     2. It would be a good idea to let them, the generals and admirals, manage things while he, MacKay, got out and met the troops in the field, which was something he seemed to honestly like doing.

I think you're on the right track, both parties have, indeed, ignored DND and Canada's legitimate defence needs, but cabinet is not solely to blame ... it might be that the military leadership needs to look in the mirror when it looks for the enemy.


----------



## ballz (30 Dec 2017)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> _*But why?*_ Why did Prime Minister Harper turn his attentions (and affections) away from the military and focus, instead, solely on deficit reduction? Some analysts believe that he could have done both: rebuilt the military, or, at least, not cut defence spending, and balanced the budget, but (and I'm agreeing with you) he decided to ignore DND and put all his efforts into balancing the budget.
> 
> I believe the answer lies in the a letter he wrote in the Spring of 2012 to then MND Peter MacKay ... it was a directive to cut "overhead," specifically in headquarters; [http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/politics/defence-figures-suggest-headquarters-not-cut-as-directed-1.1372007]it was a directive that was ignored[/url].
> 
> ...



 :goodpost:

I also think this is not an issue that belongs to any particular party.... each government / PM has not prioritized having any real military capability, which is an honest reflection of Canadian popular opinion quite frankly.

But, in it's current form, I also wouldn't support spending another dime on the DND / CAF until it sorts itself out. And I worry that Strong Secure Engaged will be nothing but wasted treasure... luckily I don't believe the money will actually be given to the DND.


----------



## Altair (30 Dec 2017)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> _*But why?*_ Why did Prime Minister Harper turn his attentions (and affections) away from the military and focus, instead, solely on deficit reduction? Some analysts believe that he could have done both: rebuilt the military, or, at least, not cut defence spending, and balanced the budget, but (and I'm agreeing with you) he decided to ignore DND and put all his efforts into balancing the budget.
> 
> I believe the answer lies in the a letter he wrote in the Spring of 2012 to then MND Peter MacKay ... it was a directive to cut "overhead," specifically in headquarters; [http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/politics/defence-figures-suggest-headquarters-not-cut-as-directed-1.1372007]it was a directive that was ignored[/url].
> 
> ...


or the war was over and we had out lived our photo op usefulness


----------



## PuckChaser (30 Dec 2017)

Altair said:
			
		

> or the war was over and we had out lived our photo op usefulness



At least we got some kit while the photo op's were good. I'd rather get something if I've got to get #$%ed afterwards. Last guys gutted us for kit and personnel and still wanted the pictures. Didn't even get offered a smoke afterwards.


----------



## Underway (30 Dec 2017)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> _*But why?*_ Why did Prime Minister Harper turn his attentions (and affections) away from the military and focus, instead, solely on deficit reduction? Some analysts believe that he could have done both: rebuilt the military, or, at least, not cut defence spending, and balanced the budget, but (and I'm agreeing with you) he decided to ignore DND and put all his efforts into balancing the budget.



Harper was nothing if not efficient.  They won elections with an extremely efficient vote spread almost ideally over the country to give them the seats they needed.  The CPC policies were specifically targeted to get maximum effect from small groups that could win in specific ridings and move them over to the CPC.  Policies like the GST cut (not very conservative cutting a consumption tax vs income tax), choice in childcare and the sports/music for your kids tax cuts.  Supporting the military would not move votes in strategic ridings.

The investment in the military was not paying off from the years previous and the war was not a popular subject.  I suspect "Harper the strategist" was frustrated by that.  So, doing what the Conservatives under him always did, they pivoted.  It wasn't like they were going to lose votes to the Liberals and NDP because they stopped supporting the military as it was obvious that the Liberals or NDP wouldn't do that either.  And it turns out that was exactly what happened; with the military (moral) support maybe even becoming a liability to them (Party of the Afghan war, F-35 sole source contract etc...).

I believe that he misjudged the demographics though.  The millenials are voting now.  And like most young adults who have nothing to protect they vote left.  It's a pretty standard voting pattern that you get more conservative as you get older.  There is also the increases in urban density and urban voters tend to vote more left as well.  And of course there was fatigue and the perception that the CPC were mean people (Canadian values...*facepalm*).

But to be fair a there were some good things from the Harper gov't for the military.  We took delivery of new tanks; the LAV UP program went ahead; the NSPS now NSS was started; C-17, new Hercs and Chinooks were purchased.  Cyclone was kicked down the field despite the temptation to cancel it.  They kept the subs under similar temptations.


----------



## jollyjacktar (30 Dec 2017)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

>



That photo of him looking stupid with his helmet on backwards never gets old with me.  I can only hope the present selfie loving denizen will provide a similar faux pas one day.


----------



## PuckChaser (30 Dec 2017)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> That photo of him looking stupid with his helmet on backwards never gets old with me.  I can only hope the present selfie loving denizen will provide a similar faux pas one day.


Probably never catch Trudeau anywhere near a place that requires a helmet. Harper, on the other hand, visited Afg 3 times, 07, 09 and 11. Trudeau's been shepherding IMPACT for over 2 years and has yet to even visit Kuwait, let alone Iraq.


----------



## McG (30 Dec 2017)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Probably never catch Trudeau anywhere near a place that requires a helmet. Harper, on the other hand, visited Afg 3 times, 07, 09 and 11. Trudeau's been shepherding IMPACT for over 2 years and has yet to even visit Kuwait, let alone Iraq.


Mr Harper visited Kandahar in 06. Either you listed a wrong year, or you missed a visit.


----------



## dapaterson (30 Dec 2017)

Underway said:
			
		

> But to be fair a there were some good things from the Harper gov't for the military.  We took delivery of new tanks; the LAV UP program went ahead; the NSPS now NSS was started; C-17, new Hercs and Chinooks were purchased.  Cyclone was kicked down the field despite the temptation to cancel it.  They kept the subs under similar temptations.



Not certain that the NSPS / NSS is anything to brag about...


----------



## PuckChaser (30 Dec 2017)

MCG said:
			
		

> Mr Harper visited Kandahar in 06. Either you listed a wrong year, or you missed a visit.


Quick Google search, definitely wasn't a hard and fast list. Thanks for the catch. Its also interesting that he went in his first year in office, in a minority government.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (30 Dec 2017)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> That photo of him looking stupid with his helmet on backwards never gets old with me.  I can only hope the present selfie loving denizen will provide a similar faux pas one day.



I know that I have said this before, but ALL of the shame in this picture lies with the military.  This should not have been allowed to happen, and it certainly should never have been photographed.  WE failed our government and our people on that day.


----------



## ModlrMike (30 Dec 2017)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Its also interesting that he went in his first year in office, in a minority government.



Not only that, it was his first foreign trip. (Mar 11-12, 2006)


----------



## jollyjacktar (30 Dec 2017)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Probably never catch Trudeau anywhere near a place that requires a helmet. Harper, on the other hand, visited Afg 3 times, 07, 09 and 11. Trudeau's been shepherding IMPACT for over 2 years and has yet to even visit Kuwait, let alone Iraq.



I have a photo of Harper handing me an IceCapp on the Boardwalk in 09 during his visit.


----------



## jollyjacktar (30 Dec 2017)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> I know that I have said this before, but ALL of the shame in this picture lies with the military.  This should not have been allowed to happen, and it certainly should never have been photographed.  WE failed our government and our people on that day.


Didn't fail me one little bit or make me feel shameful.  Leave me out of your "WE", thank you.  If he hadn't been such a shit to the military l might feel some pity.  But alas....


----------



## Good2Golf (31 Dec 2017)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> I know that I have said this before, but ALL of the shame in this picture lies with the military LdSH.  This should not have been allowed to happen, and it certainly should never have been photographed.  WE failed our government and our people on that day.



Agree with the sentiment against deliberate and unprofessional behaviour that only served to further the PM’s set against the military.  Those who set the PM up to look stupid, whether or not they (he) were (was) a fan of PMJC’s policies, knew full well what they/he were/was doing. :not-again:

:2c:

G2G


----------



## FSTO (31 Dec 2017)

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> Agree with the sentiment against deliberate and unprofessional behaviour that only served to further the PM’s set against the military.  Those who set the PM up to look stupid, whether or not they (he) were (was) a fan of PMJC’s policies, knew full well what they/he were/was doing. :not-again:
> 
> :2c:
> 
> G2G



JC was a total arsehat towards the military and I still laugh at the picture but you are right is shouldn't of happened. Reminds me of a story about Paul Hellyer's visit to Bonnie. Supposedly when he was to be flown off, the pilot comes out to the aircraft acting like he's blind, deaf and dumb. Everyone else thought it was hilarious but many felt that the RCN in general and the RCN fixed wing community in particular sealed their demise with that stunt.

We in the military community love to play tricks on our fellow travellers but it seems that many of our political leaders have no ability to laugh at themselves. They have the power over us and we should tread carefully around their delicate sensibilities.


----------



## Halifax Tar (31 Dec 2017)

Underway said:
			
		

> Harper was nothing if not efficient.  They won elections with an extremely efficient vote spread almost ideally over the country to give them the seats they needed.  The CPC policies were specifically targeted to get maximum effect from small groups that could win in specific ridings and move them over to the CPC.  Policies like the GST cut (not very conservative cutting a consumption tax vs income tax), choice in childcare and the sports/music for your kids tax cuts.  Supporting the military would not move votes in strategic ridings.
> 
> The investment in the military was not paying off from the years previous and the war was not a popular subject.  I suspect "Harper the strategist" was frustrated by that.  So, doing what the Conservatives under him always did, they pivoted.  It wasn't like they were going to lose votes to the Liberals and NDP because they stopped supporting the military as it was obvious that the Liberals or NDP wouldn't do that either.  And it turns out that was exactly what happened; with the military (moral) support maybe even becoming a liability to them (Party of the Afghan war, F-35 sole source contract etc...).
> 
> ...



Good post but one point Underway.  The Afghan War was a Liberal venture in all respects that the CPC inherited upon election.  

It is often cited as a Conservative venture, much like the NVC.  Both of which, in actuality, lay squarely at the feet of the LPC.


----------



## Underway (31 Dec 2017)

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> Good post but one point Underway.  The Afghan War was a Liberal venture in all respects that the CPC inherited upon election.
> 
> It is often cited as a Conservative venture, much like the NVC.  Both of which, in actuality, lay squarely at the feet of the LPC.



I agree that it was LPC venture however the Conservatives really didn't go out of their way to point that out did they.  They jumped in and supported the war with both feet tied together with yellow ribbons.  When he was Prime Minister was when the war got very hot as well (2006 onwards).  The majority of casualties happened when he was in charge. The Manley panel was an excellent way to ensure that the Liberals didn't get off scott free either (again a brilliant strategic decision by the Harper gov't) and ensure that the military got all those new tanks and aircraft needed without a big fight from the public or the opposition.

Rightly or wrongly I believe that the public perception of the Harper gov't was that the Conservatives through their own designs were the war party.


----------



## Halifax Tar (31 Dec 2017)

Underway said:
			
		

> I agree that it was LPC venture however the Conservatives really didn't go out of their way to point that out did they.  They jumped in and supported the war with both feet tied together with yellow ribbons.  When he was Prime Minister was when the war got very hot as well (2006 onwards).  The majority of casualties happened when he was in charge. The Manley panel was an excellent way to ensure that the Liberals didn't get off scott free either (again a brilliant strategic decision by the Harper gov't) and ensure that the military got all those new tanks and aircraft needed without a big fight from the public or the opposition.
> 
> Rightly or wrongly I believe that the public perception of the Harper gov't was that the Conservatives through their own designs were the war party.



One has to remember the war heated up for Canada because we were moved from Kabul to Kandahar.  Which was a political move made by the LPC in power at that time.  

The CPC had no choice but to carry on now that we were in with both feet.   Alliances and external pressures and all.

But you are correct the public perception of the CPC as the instigators of our Afghan mission wholly incorrect.


----------



## mariomike (31 Dec 2017)

This can go in US or Canadian politics.

QUOTE

Donald Trump becomes the first president in 40 years not to visit Canada in his first year
https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2017/12/30/donald-trump-becomes-the-first-president-in-40-years-not-to-visit-canada-in-his-first-year.html

END QUOTE


----------



## Edward Campbell (1 Jan 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> This can go in US or Canadian politics.
> 
> QUOTE
> 
> ...




It takes two to tango ...

State visits, even head-of-government level visits are complex diplomatic and political thingies, each requiring both an invitation and an _RSVP_. President Trump cannot be blamed for not visiting Canada if he has not been invited. I recall, in the first blush of 2017, that there were rumours that President Trump would be invited to London, even <gasp> to address parliament ...  :blah: That fell by the wayside, too. The number of countries willing to invite Donald Trump for an official visit seems to be dwindling; he is NOT a political asset to many (most?) Western leaders ... he's always welcome in China because he always makes Xi Jinping look, in comparison, a little less like a serious threat to liberal-democratic values and interests.


----------



## Altair (1 Jan 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Happy 2018 everyone!



You too, and may our disagreements and debates be polite and respectful into 2018


----------



## Journeyman (2 Jan 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> .....may our disagreements and debates be polite and respectful ....



I keep hoping for "informed"... (kind of like Diogenes' search for an honest man, I guess)


----------



## dapaterson (2 Jan 2018)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> I keep hoping for "informed"... (kind of like Diogenes' search for an honest man, I guess)



If we assume that philosophers know themselves, it's telling that Diogenes kept looking


----------



## Remius (2 Jan 2018)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> I keep hoping for "informed"... (kind of like Diogenes' search for an honest man, I guess)




I always find that some people consider “informed” being something that only conforms to their point of view and anything else is “uninformed”.


----------



## Journeyman (2 Jan 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> I always find that some people consider “informed” being something that only conforms to their point of view and anything else is “uninformed”.


Perhaps you misunderstand.  There are several people on this site, for example, who are ALWAYS mindlessly anti-Trump/Trudeau/etc or equally mindlessly pro-Trump/Trudeau/etc.  Sometimes they post sources for their views, which can be assessed for balance, veracity, relevance, etc.... but not often.  Quite frankly, I tend to dismiss most of those people out of hand.

By "informed" I mean the views of people who read widely (yes, even sources that are painfully biased in order to get opposing perspectives).  They then assess those readings based on the factors I just mentioned, plus history, cultural conditions, technology.... any relevant factors, then form their own _*informed *_ opinion.

That I would much rather read, even if I'm prone to disagree based upon my own ever-revised thoughts.

YMMV


----------



## Eye In The Sky (2 Jan 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Probably never catch Trudeau anywhere near a place that requires a helmet. Harper, on the other hand, visited Afg 3 times, 07, 09 and 11. Trudeau's been shepherding IMPACT for over 2 years and has yet to even visit Kuwait, let alone Iraq.



PM Harper not only went to Kuwait and ate with the troops etc he went to Erbil and not just to the Cdn location. He was in the city, close to the ISIS held ground.   He took it in with his own eyes and took time to share breakfast with the people there.  After the election the only visits were from talking heads who didn’t even understand what was happening.  We gathered at the HAS we worked out of to have the Div commander tell us we were a one of a kind asset in the coalition and no one else was doing what we were in a similar airframe.  Ironically he said all of this with an American P-3 AIP directly behind him as he faced us.  I always wondered if he wonder d what some of us were smirking about.  You don’t need a helmet on backwards to make yourself look stupid.


----------



## ballz (2 Jan 2018)

Maybe this is par for the course after a change in governments, I'm not sure because the former PM Harper was the only PM for literally all of my adult life up until Nov 2015.... but why is Harper the bar upon which we measure Trudeau? Why is the former PM Harper, who has not held the reigns for over 2 years now, still being brought up at all, especially by CPC supporters?

I get irritated every time I hear the Liberals bring up the former CPC government's shortcomings, it makes me want to jump through the TV when PM Trudeau references Stephen Harper and essentially makes Stephen Harper the bar for his own performance... and it only makes it worse for the CPC party and their supporters* when they actually allow that kind frame to control the narrative, much less actively play that same card.

Sorry for the tangent, but it feels like we've spent pages comparing the two... again.

*of which, I'm not sure I can honestly say I identify with at this point in time. The only thing Andrew Scheer has that I like about him is that he's not Justin Trudeau... that's pretty weak.


----------



## dapaterson (2 Jan 2018)

ballz said:
			
		

> I get irritated every time I hear the Liberals bring up the former CPC government's shortcomings, it makes me want to jump through the TV when PM Trudeau references Stephen Harper and essentially makes Stephen Harper the bar for his own performance... and it only makes it worse for the CPC party and their supporters* when they actually allow that kind frame to control the narrative, much less actively play that same card.



For the first mandate after tossing out a prior government, everything bad is their fault, everything good is due to your brilliance.

For the second mandate, all good is due to you, and all bad is due to world economic or political considerations outside your control, but if you look with squinted eyes at some absurd metric that no one cares about, all is wonderful.

Entering the third election, you promise, well, essentially the same things you promised two cycles ago and never delivered on. The true believers will rejoice and shout down anyone who points out that it's the same stuff, eight years later.

Your experience may vary...



> Sorry for the tangent, but it feels like we've spent pages comparing the two... again.
> 
> *of which, I'm not sure I can honestly say I identify with at this point in time. The only thing Andrew Scheer has that I like about him is that he's not Justin Trudeau... that's pretty weak.



Good news!  Scheer isn't Stephane Dion, Michael Ignatieff or Jagmeet Singh, either.


----------



## Jed (2 Jan 2018)

ballz said:
			
		

> Maybe this is par for the course after a change in governments, I'm not sure because the former PM Harper was the only PM for literally all of my adult life up until Nov 2015.... but why is Harper the bar upon which we measure Trudeau? Why is the former PM Harper, who has not held the reigns for over 2 years now, still being brought up at all, especially by CPC supporters?
> 
> I get irritated every time I hear the Liberals bring up the former CPC government's shortcomings, it makes me want to jump through the TV when PM Trudeau references Stephen Harper and essentially makes Stephen Harper the bar for his own performance... and it only makes it worse for the CPC party and their supporters* when they actually allow that kind frame to control the narrative, much less actively play that same card.
> 
> ...



I totally agree with all your comments up to the last sentence.

What is pretty weak is Justin Trudeau's proven record. You have to go far and wide to match the inane behavior and piss poor leadership coming from Canada's current Prime Minister. For people to deny the obvious are basic human flaws were they choose not to accept reality for their own reasons.


----------



## ballz (2 Jan 2018)

Jed said:
			
		

> I totally agree with all your comments up to the last sentence.
> 
> What is pretty weak is Justin Trudeau's proven record. You have to go far and wide to match the inane behavior and piss poor leadership coming from Canada's current Prime Minister. For people to deny the obvious are basic human flaws were they choose not to accept reality for their own reasons.



Perhaps I worded it poorly, but I was not saying I like Trudeau better than Scheer... I was saying that so far Justin Trudeau (and all the qualities you point out) is Scheer's only redeeming quality for me.... which is not something that exactly qualifies you as the PM-in-waiting.

With the lack of quality, I'll be voting for a fringe party again...


----------



## dapaterson (2 Jan 2018)

Canada's Ambassador to Indonesia greeted the new year by tweeting his praise of Myanmar as a tourist destination... then quickly deleted it.  A journalist captured it.

https://twitter.com/DHamamdjian/status/948178356301959168


----------



## Altair (2 Jan 2018)

ballz said:
			
		

> Perhaps I worded it poorly, but I was not saying I like Trudeau better than Scheer... I was saying that so far Justin Trudeau (and all the qualities you point out) is Scheer's only redeeming quality for me.... which is not something that exactly qualifies you as the PM-in-waiting.
> 
> With the lack of quality, I'll be voting for a fringe party again...


I may have considered switching my vote if the Conservatives had chosen Bernier.

But they chose Scheer, so I think Trudeau has my vote again.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (2 Jan 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> I may have considered switching my vote if the Conservatives had chosen Bernier.
> 
> But they chose Scheer, so I think Trudeau has my vote again.



Not a set up to a partisan shot, but I am genuinely interested why you prefer Bernier to Scheer. And why that leads to a Liberal vote.


----------



## Altair (2 Jan 2018)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> Not a set up to a partisan shot, but I am genuinely interested why you prefer Bernier to Scheer. And why that leads to a Liberal vote.


I'm not at all interested in social conservatism. I feel that Bernier would have been able to keep that part of the CPC in check. I do have some libertarian views, especially when it comes to deregulation. Seeing as how neither the LPC or CPC are really big on that, it's a wash between those two parties, which leads me to vote on social issues, in which case I'm far more aligned to the LPC than the CPC.

If Bernier was leader and was promising to get rid of things such as supply management and trade barriers between provinces I would have been tempted to see what he could do, especially if he the social conservative wing of the CPC was kept in check. 

As it stands, I don't believe that is the case with Scheer, and I think he owes his current position to the very wing that I want no part of. If the Libertarian party of canada wasn't a joke and waste of a vote I wouldn't support the conservatives or the Liberals, but as it stands, I'll keep supporting the liberals.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (2 Jan 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> I'm not at all interested in social conservatism. I feel that Bernier would have been able to keep that part of the CPC in check. I do have some libertarian views, especially when it comes to deregulation. Seeing as how neither the LPC or CPC are really big on that, it's a wash between those two parties, which leads me to vote on social issues, in which case I'm far more aligned to the LPC than the CPC.
> 
> If Bernier was leader and was promising to get rid of things such as supply management and trade barriers between provinces I would have been tempted to see what he could do, especially if he the social conservative wing of the CPC was kept in check.
> 
> As it stands, I don't believe that is the case with Scheer, and I think he owes his current position to the very wing that I want no part of. If the Libertarian party of canada wasn't a joke and waste of a vote I wouldn't support the conservatives or the Liberals, but as it stands, I'll keep supporting the liberals.



Thanks for that, Altair. I appreciate your opinion.


----------



## PuckChaser (2 Jan 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> If Bernier was leader and was promising to get rid of things such as supply management and trade barriers between provinces I would have been tempted to see what he could do, especially if he the social conservative wing of the CPC was kept in check.
> 
> As it stands, I don't believe that is the case with Scheer, and I think he owes his current position to the very wing that I want no part of. If the Libertarian party of canada wasn't a joke and waste of a vote I wouldn't support the conservatives or the Liberals, but as it stands, I'll keep supporting the liberals.



Sounds like the same fear-mongering the Liberals and NDP used to target Harper with. 8 years with a majority and not a single social conservative motion passed in the Commons to force his views on anyone.


----------



## jollyjacktar (2 Jan 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> I'm not at all interested in social conservatism. I feel that Bernier would have been able to keep that part of the CPC in check. I do have some libertarian views, especially when it comes to deregulation. Seeing as how neither the LPC or CPC are really big on that, it's a wash between those two parties, which leads me to vote on social issues, in which case I'm far more aligned to the LPC than the CPC.
> 
> If Bernier was leader and was promising to get rid of things such as supply management and trade barriers between provinces I would have been tempted to see what he could do, especially if he the social conservative wing of the CPC was kept in check.
> 
> As it stands, I don't believe that is the case with Scheer, and I think he owes his current position to the very wing that I want no part of. If the Libertarian party of canada wasn't a joke and waste of a vote I wouldn't support the conservatives or the Liberals, but as it stands, I'll keep supporting the liberals.



I'll stand with you on Scheer isn't desirable but for me neither is Trudeau and his party.  I really hate feeling up against the wall for choice.  

As for your feeling towards what seems to be your true interest, the Libertarians, how do you expect them to gain traction and become a contender if you won't support them with your vote?   They won't become anything with support like that.


----------



## Remius (2 Jan 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Sounds like the same fear-mongering the Liberals and NDP used to target Harper with. 8 years with a majority and not a single social conservative motion passed in the Commons to force his views on anyone.




I’m not sure I would call it fear mongering.  If the last leadership contest is any indication, the so-cons in the CPC are still very much a voice in that party.  Scheer may well follow Stephen Harper’s policy to steer clear of social issues though but there was just enough talk of it to turn me off as well.  My mind won’t be made up though until I see what the CPC chooses to run on and how much the Liberals screw up or not until the next tio .


----------



## dapaterson (2 Jan 2018)

In considering the years beyond 2018, there's an interesting Globe and Mail article at: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/multi-ethnic-mixed-race-canada-census-2016/article37475308/

As multi-ethnic population in Canada rises, complications arise

Navigating the many complications that come with a mixed identity, which range from political to sociological to health-related, is becoming more common across the country as an increasing swath of residents are reporting multiple ethnicities, according to data from the 2016 census.


----------



## Altair (2 Jan 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> I'll stand with you on Scheer isn't desirable but for me neither is Trudeau and his party.  I really hate feeling up against the wall for choice.
> 
> As for your feeling towards what seems to be your true interest, the Libertarians, how do you expect them to gain traction and become a contender if you won't support them with your vote?   They won't become anything with support like that.


I do struggle with not voting for the libertarians, but the party is truly too small for me to vote for.  They only had candidates in 72 ridings in 2015.

I have considered giving them money every time the LPC emails me asking me for some.


----------



## jollyjacktar (2 Jan 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> I do struggle with not voting for the libertarians, but the party is truly too small for me to vote for.  They only had candidates in 72 ridings in 2015.
> 
> I have considered giving them money every time the LPC emails me asking me for some.



This last go around and probably the next, l wasn't going to vote for any of the usual suspects.  There was an independent candidate in my riding.  They got my vote for the reasons that l would be doing my civic duty by voting, l would give the usual suspects the finger by not supporting them and with any luck, the independent would get enough votes to get his deposit back.  A win-win-win, so to speak.

And again, if you don't stand up and give the Libertarians your support that's one less vote they'll miss out on towards becoming a serious party.  Your vote would not be wasted, rather it would have in my opinion more weight by your voting with your principals and heart.  Be an enabler instead of an anchor, there's enough sheep out there to vote Liberal anyhow.


----------



## ballz (3 Jan 2018)

When I said I'd probably be voting for a fringe party, it was the Libertarians I was speaking of. I hope they learned a lesson in 2015 after some internal strife that caused them to go from about 140 candidates to 72... I don't want to get into the inner-party drama but I think the leader, Tim Moen, did learn a good hard lesson out of that. I hope they do better in 2019, even though 2015 was technically a record year for them so that's something I guess...

As I said in another post when I was advocating for them back in 2015, there is empirical data to support that when 10% of a population adopts a principled / unshakeable belief, the rest of population quickly follows... in other words, 10% is somewhat of an ideological tipping point. So in voting for the libertarians, that really was the short-term goal. I'd rather support a party that not only represents my views, but also I can sleep relatively well knowing my voice was not only heard but that the reprehensible ones among them won't actually be able to do any harm since they won't be in power, for now.

If I vote CPC or LPC, I'm culpable for the idiocy that ensues. It's pretty catch 22.



			
				PuckChaser said:
			
		

> 8 years with a majority and not a single social conservative motion passed in the Commons to force his views on anyone.



Bill C-51? Which the Liberals argued against and then passed shortly after coming into government :facepalm: Tough on crime legislation which had minimum sentences that were unconstitutional? (and now, of course, the Liberals are still jailing people for marijuana... frig sakes, the people just can't win). Even something like income splitting is socially conservative. It is literally the government providing financial support to those who live the way the party has decided is in best interest of society. (i.e. married and with kids). I don't disagree with some social conservative values, but I don't want a government that actively legislates or supports it through taxpayers.

The CPC Facebook page just ran an ad about how PM Harper had passed twice as much legislation in the same time PM Justin Trudeau has been Prime Minister.... what kind of "small government" CPC is that exactly? It made me sick.

I think Stephen Harper, Justin Trudeau, and Andrew Scheer are the same disease (big intrusive government) masking each other as the cure for one another.


----------



## Edward Campbell (4 Jan 2018)

From the "next RCAF fighter" thread ...



			
				Altair said:
			
		

> He's waiting for the knives to come out after Scheer loses to Trudeau.



I agree ... but he's not the only one.

My _guess_ (valid until end of the afternoon, only) is that Trudeau wins a minority in 2019 and both Scheer and Singh resign.

I have no views on who the NDP should select ... someone who doesn't alienate Quebecers for a start, I suppose.

The Conservatives need,_* in my opinion*_, to go young, female, bilingual and media savvy ... and there really aren't any obvious candidates, yet. Maybe one of Bernier or O'Toole is their best choice if:

     1. Scheer still cannot connect with Canadians in 2018; and

     2. Trudeau doesn't really, massively screw the pooch.


----------



## Remius (4 Jan 2018)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> From the "next RCAF fighter" thread ...
> 
> I agree ... but he's not the only one.
> 
> ...



Carolyn Mulroney.  She'll gain some experience provincially as an MPP then make the jump to federal politics when Scheer resigns and another drawn out leadership race starts up. young, female and media savvy plus has some family pedigree.


----------



## dapaterson (4 Jan 2018)

I expect the young Ms Mulroney will not hit the federal stage before 2023 or so; better to work out your mistakes on the provincial stage than the federal one.

Besides, when the Ontario Tories somehow inexplicably tank this year's Ontario election with their usual stream of unforced errors, she may be well positioned to take over the provincial party first...


----------



## Remius (4 Jan 2018)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> I expect the young Ms Mulroney will not hit the federal stage before 2023 or so; better to work out your mistakes on the provincial stage than the federal one.
> 
> Besides, when the Ontario Tories somehow inexplicably tank this year's Ontario election with their usual stream of unforced errors, she may be well positioned to take over the provincial party first...



Not implausible but do the math. 

She wins her seat provincially in 2018.  If Brown wins she'll likely get a cabinet post.  if Brown loses, my bet is someone more prominent than her will run.  Maybe a former federal CPC.  Anyways, we have a federal election in fall 2019.  Scheer loses and resigns.  Interim leader so and so takes over and leader (if history is any indication) is chosen in 2021 for a 2023 election.  I can see her make a run in 2023 with 2 years as the opposition leader and 3 years of cabinet work or as an opposition critic provincially.  She would have 5-6 years experience.  Trudeau had about 7 years before being elected PM.


----------



## Altair (4 Jan 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> Not implausible but do the math.
> 
> She wins her seat provincially in 2018.  If Brown wins she'll likely get a cabinet post.  if Brown loses, my bet is someone more prominent than her will run.  Maybe a former federal CPC.  Anyways, we have a federal election in fall 2019.  Scheer loses and resigns.  Interim leader so and so takes over and leader (if history is any indication) is chosen in 2021 for a 2023 election.  I can see her make a run in 2023 with 2 years as the opposition leader and 3 years of cabinet work or as an opposition critic provincially.  She would have 5-6 years experience.  Trudeau had about 7 years before being elected PM.


and she's a moderate.


----------



## ballz (4 Jan 2018)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> From the "next RCAF fighter" thread ...
> 
> I agree ... but he's not the only one.
> 
> ...



If Trudeau is reduced to a minority I can see Scheer staying on, particularly if the CPC came within striking distance of a minority.

I feel pretty confident Bernier will run again if there is another leadership contest. However, this time I think there are some prominent folks like Peter McKay that would run (God I hope not) and it would probably be a very contentious race, this time amongst some well-known people. Could Rona Ambrose return? I think, given her performance as interim leader (admittedly a much easier job than being the actual leader) and the fact that she is a woman would also make her a formidable option. If it can't be Bernier, I'd hope for Ambrose.

While it was happening, I thought she was doing a great job. Now that she's been replaced by Scheer, I just watched some YouTube clips of her and it really leaves you thinking how the Liberals would look now if they had been facing her every day in the HoC over the last few months.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3f4ts0Ob7o
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tVv2j7tbHsg
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jAJZYLgy41o


----------



## ModlrMike (4 Jan 2018)

ballz said:
			
		

> Could Rona Ambrose return? I think, given her performance as interim leader (admittedly a much easier job than being the actual leader) and the fact that she is a woman would also make her a formidable option.



Maybe that's her plan all along. Out of sigh, out of mind... for the time being. Distance herself from the old crowd and come back stronger than ever.


----------



## Underway (4 Jan 2018)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> I agree ... but he's not the only one.
> 
> My _guess_ (valid until end of the afternoon, only) is that Trudeau wins a minority in 2019 and both Scheer and Singh resign.
> 
> ...



With identity politics the main discussion at this point I'm pretty sure the Conservatives will 18 wheeler it.  Is that tires screeching I hear?
http://www.metronews.ca/news/ottawa/2017/05/29/lgbt-conservatives-not-worried-scheer-wont-attend-pride.html

Of course events ...


----------



## FJAG (4 Jan 2018)

I see our illustrious provincial leader is now taking on a Tim Horton's franchisee (in fact the original one) who has taken steps to even out her raise in the minimum wage by cutting back on benefits they had previously given their employees voluntarily.

_*Ontario premier calls Tim Hortons heir 'a bully' over wage actions
Kathleen Wynne reacts to CBC story uncovering compensation changes at franchise after minimum wage hike*_

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/wynne-minimum-wage-1.4473156

Isn't that the pot calling the kettle black?

I'm not sure if she's just naive or thick as a post. We're already the province with the leading debt and she just keep piling on the cost of living for all of us in just another shameless ploy to get herself and her miserable party reelected.

Unlike Wynne who simply raises taxes or debt when she wants more money, business owners must either raise prices or take a cut in profits to meet rising wages. I wonder how long it will take her to change legislation so that the benefits this employer offered voluntarily become mandatory under our employment standards legislation? My guess: before the next election.

If she really wants "a province where everyone can get ahead" then she should just resign and take her moron party with her. :2c:

 :cheers:


----------



## Remius (4 Jan 2018)

I really do not want to see her or her party win.  But with all of these freebies she’s trying to Wynn the vote.  

Given that her current wage increase and free prescriptions affect mostly the younger demographic who traditionally have a lower voter turn out, I wonder if she’ll come up with something for the older demographic that might be feeling left out...


----------



## FJAG (4 Jan 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> I really do not want to see her or her party win.  But with all of these freebies she’s trying to Wynn the vote.
> 
> Given that her current wage increase and free prescriptions affect mostly the younger demographic who traditionally have a lower voter turn out, I wonder if she’ll come up with something for the older demographic that might be feeling left out...



The key, as usual, is Toronto and area (plus Ottawa) where all her strength is centred and which usually tosses the election to the Liberals. I also expect the public service unions will come out hard for her again because they just get one freebie after another.

I fear that as long as she keeps doling out the cash, she'll be unstoppable because those constituents don't care what the future debt burden will be.

 :cheers:


----------



## Altair (4 Jan 2018)

From what I hear, the free prescriptions are not covering much.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (5 Jan 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> I see our illustrious provincial leader is now taking on a Tim Horton's franchisee (in fact the original one) who has taken steps to even out her raise in the minimum wage by cutting back on benefits they had previously given their employees voluntarily.
> 
> _*Ontario premier calls Tim Hortons heir 'a bully' over wage actions
> Kathleen Wynne reacts to CBC story uncovering compensation changes at franchise after minimum wage hike*_
> ...



Or *we* could all pay 10 cents more for a cup of truly crappy coffee.......seeing as the *collective we* voted to raise the minimum wage.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (5 Jan 2018)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> Or *we* could all pay 10 cents more for a cup of truly crappy coffee.......seeing as the *collective we* voted to raise the minimum wage.



Are you proposing a government department to control coffee pricing, too?


----------



## FJAG (5 Jan 2018)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> Or *we* could all pay 10 cents more for a cup of truly crappy coffee.......seeing as the *collective we* voted to raise the minimum wage.



The "collective we" didn't vote for this. For those who voted Liberal, the Liberal platform in 2014 was to raise the minimum wage to $11.00 and then tie it to inflation.

http://strategycorp.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Ontario-Liberal-2014-Platform.pdf

Since the 2014 election the increases took it to $11.40 for 2017 and then jumped to $14.00 this January. That's a 22.8% increase and greatly exceeds the rate of inflation. It's an election ploy, plain and simple.

By the way they also pledged to balance the budget by 2017/18 but only did that through a one-time Hydro One asset sale worth CA$3 Billion. The picture is bleak for the future.

http://torontosun.com/2017/06/01/ontarios-budget-a-house-of-cards/wcm/3f3290f7-4cdc-4c4a-8621-d19974b94f9d

Agree with you as to quality of coffee - - but I truly love the apple fritters.

 :cheers:


----------



## mariomike (5 Jan 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> From what I hear, the free prescriptions are not covering much.



I'm not a pharmacist, but this may help,

What medications are covered

OHIP+ completely covers the cost of more than 4,400 drug products that are currently available through the Ontario Drug Benefit program, including:
•antibiotics to treat infections
•inhalers for asthma
•various insulins, oral diabetic medications and diabetes test strips
•epinephrine auto-injectors (e.g. EPIPENs®)
•drugs to treat arthritis, epilepsy and other chronic conditions
•medications to treat mental health conditions (e.g. antidepressants)
•attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) drugs
•drugs to treat some childhood cancers and other rare conditions

Check medication coverage
Find out if your medication is covered through the Ontario Drug Benefit program, including OHIP+.
Type a medication name, ingredient or DIN
https://www.ontario.ca/page/check-medication-coverage/



			
				FJAG said:
			
		

> The key, as usual, is Toronto and area (plus Ottawa) where all her strength is centred and which usually tosses the election to the Liberals.



The provincial Legislature passed the City of Toronto Act in 2006 in a 58-20 vote, with Liberals and New Democrats supporting it and Progressive Conservatives opposing it. 

Prior to 2006, the mayor had to go to Queen's Park to ask for permission to install a speed bump.

Voters remember the party that opposed it at election time. Those who do not remember are reminded.

Province of Toronto? Where's the door!?  



			
				FJAG said:
			
		

> I also expect the public service unions will come out hard for her again because they just get one freebie after another.



Our union has always supported the politicians we believe will improve our lives and livelihoods. 

I expect most people vote the same way. 

"they just get one freebie after another" reminds me of the "I pay your salary" types we used to run into on jobs.


----------



## Remius (5 Jan 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> "they just get one freebie after another" reminds me of the "I pay your salary" types we used to run into on jobs.



Under any other government I might agree with you.  Wynne has bought the unions though this time around for the election.  Even the unions acknowledge it.  7.5% increase and no conditions.  That's a freebie.


----------



## mariomike (5 Jan 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> Wynne has bought the unions though this time around for the election.



I retired nine years ago, but our union respected its members’ right to vote for whomever they chose. 

Members were only asked to respect the union's right to endorse candidates, regardless of party, who demonstrated their support for our members and the emergency services.

After that, our union believed that every member had an absolute right to vote for the candidate that he or she feels best represented and embraced that individual’s views and political philosophy. No one, including our union, had a right to tell you how to vote.


----------



## Remius (5 Jan 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> I retired nine years ago, but our union respected its members’ right to vote for whomever they chose.
> 
> Members were only asked to respect the union's right to endorse candidates, regardless of party, who demonstrated their support for our members and the emergency services.
> 
> After that, our union believed that every member had an absolute right to vote for the candidate that he or she feels best represented and embraced that individual’s views and political philosophy. No one, including our union, had a right to tell you how to vote.



Ok, I'll rephrase.  She gave the unions a freebie in an attempt to buy their vote.   I'm not questioning how the membership chooses to vote or even if the unions tell its membership how to vote.  I am however stating that Wynne is handing out freebies to win votes.


----------



## Rifleman62 (5 Jan 2018)

I believe the term is extracting your money to purchase votes.


----------



## ModlrMike (5 Jan 2018)

Nothing more than class warfare. Do you think it's any accident that a Joyce owned franchise was singled out for condemnation?


----------



## FJAG (5 Jan 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> I retired nine years ago, but our union respected its members’ right to vote for whomever they chose.
> 
> Members were only asked to respect the union's right to endorse candidates, regardless of party, who demonstrated their support for our members and the emergency services.
> 
> After that, our union believed that every member had an absolute right to vote for the candidate that he or she feels best represented and embraced that individual’s views and political philosophy. No one, including our union, had a right to tell you how to vote.



That's only because the union can't go into the voting booth with you to supervise how you vote. Take a look, however, at the ad campaigns that nurses and teachers and others run at the time of the elections. They are massively against the Conservative Party and usually much more negative than the Liberals' own advertising.

 :cheers:


----------



## ballz (5 Jan 2018)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> Or *we* could all pay 10 cents more for a cup of truly crappy coffee.......seeing as the *collective we* voted to raise the minimum wage.



Oh, we will.... and a proportionate amount on every other thing we purchase.

On one hand, gov'ts tell consumers they have too much debt and not enough savings... on the other hand they continue to cause massive inflation to make their own soaring debt cheaper... those who have net savings lose the value of their savings in exchange. This minimum wage increase is really just a clever tax.


----------



## Rifleman62 (5 Jan 2018)

> really just a clever tax


 Cue National Carbon Tax.


----------



## mariomike (5 Jan 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> Take a look, however, at the ad campaigns that nurses and teachers and others run at the time of the elections. They are massively against the Conservative Party and usually much more negative than the Liberals' own advertising.



This is shows what it took to get PTSD presumptive / cumulative legislation passed in 2016. 
It won't help my generation, but it will help present and future members,

QUOTE

"When first responders seek a response, they don’t give up until the government gives in."
https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2016/02/18/how-firefighters-beat-politicians-at-their-own-game-cohn.html

On Thursday ( 2016 ), Queen’s Park will move forward on legislation recognizing post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) as a “presumptive” hazard for firefighters and other first-responders (including police and paramedics).

The OPFFA’s ( Ontario Professional Firefighters Association ) campaign to win the hearts and minds of Liberal politicians turned heads in the 2007 election, when union members donned yellow T-shirts emblazoned with the slogan, “Firefighters for McGuinty” — flanking the premier protectively at campaign stops.

Fanning out across the province, they served as photogenic backdrops at photo-ops — and helpfully blocked the shots of photographers when an anti-tax mascot dubbed “Fibber” stalked the premier. Again in the 2011 election, they deployed a yellow RV painted with a “Firefighters for McGuinty” banner, hitting more than 60 campaign stops and drowning out protesters when needed.

Belatedly, the opposition Progressive Conservatives and NDP are trying to crash the firefighters’ longstanding love affair with the Liberals. 

END QUOTE


----------



## FJAG (5 Jan 2018)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> Or *we* could all pay 10 cents more for a cup of truly crappy coffee . . .



Not to belabour the point but it seems the reason that franchisees are cutting benefits is because Tim Horton's parent organization, RBI, isn't allowing them to raise prices meaning that all the new labour costs have to either come out of the franchisee's profit margin or be on the backs of the employees one way or another. 



> The Great White North Franchisee Association, which says it speaks for a number of Canadian Tim Hortons franchise owners, has said it is facing a massive increase in labour costs and says it has cut costs because their parent company, RBI, has refused to raise prices.



http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/tims-timhortons-minimumwage-wynne-liberals-ontario-1.4474836

 :cheers:


----------



## ModlrMike (5 Jan 2018)

All this attention paid to Tim Hortons is a red herring. The real issue is that small business has been hit with a 20% increase in labour costs. That can only translate in to cost saving initiatives such as reducing benefits, reducing the number of employees or not hiring new employees as planned, cutting hours etc, etc. Many small businesses provide for a comfortable, but not lavish life for the owners. To characterize all small business owners as robber barons is the same tactic the federal Liberals used to paint doctors as thieves. A tactic that backfired the last time it was used, I should point out.


----------



## McG (6 Jan 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> ... RBI isn't allowing [franchisees] to raise prices meaning that all the new labour costs have to either come out of the franchisee's profit margin or be on the backs of the employees one way or another.


Those are not mutually exclusive options. It is possible that store owners and employees both take a hits to increase the wages.


----------



## dapaterson (6 Jan 2018)

To my mind, there's a strong undercurrent of pettiness.  The incremental cost of a cup of coffee is negligible, yet the owners are now stating "you can't take a cup as you leave (in your own cup) any more".  While other measures may include genuine attempts to save money (making all breaks unpaid, charging for uniforms etc), taking away a departure double-double seems just a petty way for owners to lord over employees.


----------



## Good2Golf (6 Jan 2018)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> To my mind, there's a strong undercurrent of pettiness.  The incremental cost of a cup of coffee is negligible, yet the owners are now stating "you can't take a cup as you leave (in your own cup) any more".  While other measures may include genuine attempts to save money (making all breaks unpaid, charging for uniforms etc), taking away a departure double-double seems just a petty way for owners to lord over employees.



Possibly, or perhaps there was in fact a cost analysis conducted (at the franchise level?) that resulted in a previously acceptable (within total revenue/expenses framework) 'perk' to employees now being less acceptable because the Ontario Minimum Wage now eats a much greater share of revenue than it did previously.  As well, would not the Federal Government's recent take on taxable benefits also mean that the employees would have to claim as income (or be deducted at source by the employer) the value of the coffee provided to an employee at the end of a shift?  You know, helping the middle class live a better quality of life than they did under the previous Fed/Ont Govt mix?

 ???

Regards
G2G


----------



## Jed (6 Jan 2018)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> To my mind, there's a strong undercurrent of pettiness.  The incremental cost of a cup of coffee is negligible, yet the owners are now stating "you can't take a cup as you leave (in your own cup) any more".  While other measures may include genuine attempts to save money (making all breaks unpaid, charging for uniforms etc), taking away a departure double-double seems just a petty way for owners to lord over employees.


So pettiness only works one way?  The government / unions are not being petty?


----------



## Kirkhill (6 Jan 2018)

Funny - Did Tim's labour costs go up in New Brunswick or Alberta?  Tim's is running a national organization.  Its customers expect the experience, including prices, to be broadly similar - if not the same - all across Canada.


----------



## ModlrMike (6 Jan 2018)

Chris Pook said:
			
		

> Funny - Did Tim's labour costs go up in New Brunswick or Alberta?  Tim's is running a national organization.  Its customers expect the experience, including prices, to be broadly similar - if not the same - all across Canada.



Only the corporate part of Tims is a national venture. The franchises are independently owned and operated (only 29 outlets were owned by the corporation as of 31 Dec 16). The corporation governs the sales prices, so the 20% still has to come out of the owners' hides.


----------



## YZT580 (6 Jan 2018)

Petty, not really.. Using round numbers, price on a large double double is 2.00.  Profit would be approximately forty cents.  Forty cents is equivalent to a nickle an hour for an 8 hour shift.  It is a small re-capture but not insignificant.  Paid breaks means that the employer has to cover all the costs of staffing one extra body in order to ensure breaks.  For two breaks that is another dollar an hour cost to the employer that he has been paying to this point.  Since he can't raise prices and he can't afford to run a charitable programme, where else is he going to cover a 20% increase?  Wynn needs to take a basic management course!


----------



## Altair (6 Jan 2018)

Chris Pook said:
			
		

> Funny - Did Tim's labour costs go up in New Brunswick or Alberta?  Tim's is running a national organization.  Its customers expect the experience, including prices, to be broadly similar - if not the same - all across Canada.


Yeah, funny that.

Alberta and NB both raised the minimum wage and you didn't hear these stories.

Ontario does it in a election year and suddenly it's an issue.


----------



## ballz (6 Jan 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> Yeah, funny that.
> 
> Alberta and NB both raised the minimum wage and you didn't hear these stories.
> 
> Ontario does it in a election year and suddenly it's an issue.



There was and still is plenty of opposition to it in Alberta (I live here now). I also lived and worked in Alberta when it had close to the lowest minimum wage in the country ($7 at the time, ~2005-07) and yet Burger King was paying $15/hr for a part-time 16 year old to flip burgers. Everyone from places with shitty economies like Nfld would ask me "what's minimum wage" because they thought minimum wage was standard of living indicator, and I'd tell them, "I don't know, it's never been mentioned." Imagine that, an actual strong economy was the best cure for low wages....

New Brunswickers are barely capable of governing themselves (I lived there from May 2012 - Aug 2017), you only know the provincial government is doing something good there if the voting public is complaining about it. I am from Newfoundland which I would say the same thing about.

Minimum wage has to be one of the most frustratingly stupid issues. Long-term, it literally does nothing good or bad for anyone.... except inflation, which is good for the government and bad for anyone with positive net worth.


----------



## Remius (6 Jan 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> Yeah, funny that.
> 
> Alberta and NB both raised the minimum wage and you didn't hear these stories.
> 
> Ontario does it in a election year and suddenly it's an issue.




It’s also the size of the increase and the short time frame.  Add to that new employment rules, crippling hydro rates and taxes and you have a recipe for putting small to medium businesses out of business.


----------



## dimsum (6 Jan 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> Yeah, funny that.
> 
> Alberta and NB both raised the minimum wage and you didn't hear these stories.
> 
> Ontario does it in a election year and suddenly it's an issue.



Let's be serious - if ON does pretty much anything, no matter how small, the national news will make it an issue.  It has almost 40% of the country's population, and most of it centred around the GTA.


----------



## mariomike (6 Jan 2018)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> It has almost 40% of the country's population, and most of it centred around the GTA.



"Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver — are now home to more than one-third of all Canadians with a combined population of 12.5 million, with almost one half living in Toronto and its suburban neighbours."
http://www.metronews.ca/news/canada/2017/02/08/census-2016-canada-s-big-cities-home-to-big-share-of-35-million-canadians.html


----------



## observor 69 (6 Jan 2018)

Some more info on the context of this story:

"Even before the latest minimum-wage meltdown, Tim Hortons was a brand in crisis"

https://www.thestar.com/business/opinion/2018/01/06/even-before-the-latest-minimum-wage-meltdown-tim-hortons-was-a-brand-in-crisis.html


----------



## Kirkhill (6 Jan 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> "Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver — are now home to more than one-third of all Canadians with a combined population of 12.5 million, with almost one half living in Toronto and its suburban neighbours."
> http://www.metronews.ca/news/canada/2017/02/08/census-2016-canada-s-big-cities-home-to-big-share-of-35-million-canadians.html



Indeed.  Time for Toronto to have its own seat at the United Nations where its brilliance can be truly appreciated.


----------



## mariomike (6 Jan 2018)

Chris Pook said:
			
		

> Indeed.  Time for Toronto to have its own seat at the United Nations where its brilliance can be truly appreciated.



No. But, in my opinion, time for an urban secession to split the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) from the province of Ontario into a new Canadian province.


----------



## FJAG (6 Jan 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> No. But, in my opinion, time for an urban secession to split the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) from the province of Ontario into a new Canadian province.


I only want a split if they take the Ontario debt with them.  ;D

 :cheers:


----------



## Jarnhamar (6 Jan 2018)

Kathleen 'Ontario Hydro' Wynne calling Tim Hortons bullies, that's rich.


----------



## jollyjacktar (6 Jan 2018)

Chris Pook said:
			
		

> Indeed.  Time for Toronto to have its own seat at the United Nations where its brilliance can be truly appreciated.



 :rofl:


----------



## dapaterson (6 Jan 2018)

Chris Pook said:
			
		

> Indeed.  Time for Toronto to have its own seat at the United Nations where its brilliance can be truly appreciated.



Alphabetically, somewhere between North Korea and Zimbabwe.


----------



## mariomike (6 Jan 2018)

Secession of the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) from the province of Ontario would be good enough for me.  

#GTAexit


----------



## Altair (7 Jan 2018)

That would make for a dangerous precedent. 

Montreal would ask for the same treatment, and imagine Quebec without the urban multicultural cosmopolitan of Montreal in it.


----------



## Jarnhamar (7 Jan 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Secession of the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) from the province of Ontario would be good enough for me.
> 
> #GTAexit


Why?  What's to gain?


----------



## Kat Stevens (7 Jan 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Why?  What's to gain?



Transfer payments.


----------



## Edward Campbell (7 Jan 2018)

ballz said:
			
		

> There was and still is plenty of opposition to it in Alberta (I live here now). I also lived and worked in Alberta when it had close to the lowest minimum wage in the country ($7 at the time, ~2005-07) and yet Burger King was paying $15/hr for a part-time 16 year old to flip burgers. Everyone from places with shitty economies like Nfld would ask me "what's minimum wage" because they thought minimum wage was standard of living indicator, and I'd tell them, "I don't know, it's never been mentioned." Imagine that, an actual strong economy was the best cure for low wages....
> 
> New Brunswickers are barely capable of governing themselves (I lived there from May 2012 - Aug 2017), you only know the provincial government is doing something good there if the voting public is complaining about it. I am from Newfoundland which I would say the same thing about.
> 
> *Minimum wage has to be one of the most frustratingly stupid issues. Long-term, it literally does nothing good or bad for anyone.... except inflation, which is good for the government and bad for anyone with positive net worth.*



+300 'cause you're exactly right!


----------



## Rifleman62 (7 Jan 2018)

> No. But, in my opinion, time for an urban secession to split the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) from the province of Ontario into a new Canadian province.



Do us a favor and become your own country. ON and Canada will appreciated the the loss of Liberal votes.


----------



## mariomike (7 Jan 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Why?  What's to gain?



That the government of the GTA would belong to and be responsible to the local citizens who elected it, not the provincial government.

eg: City Hall not having to get permission from Queen's Park to install a speed bump.



			
				Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> Do us a favor and become your own country. ON and Canada will appreciated the the loss of Liberal votes.



Make Canada a one-party ( ie: Conservative ) state?

That would put us in the same category as: China, North Korea, Cuba...


----------



## SeaKingTacco (7 Jan 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Make Canada a one-party ( ie: Conservative ) state?
> 
> That would put us in the same category as: China, North Korea, Cuba...



 :facepalm:

You win the Internet today for stupid hyperbole, MM....


----------



## mariomike (7 Jan 2018)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> :facepalm:
> 
> You win the Internet today for stupid hyperbole, MM....



Sorry you feel that way. 



			
				Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> Do us a favor and become your own country. ON and Canada will appreciated the the loss of Liberal votes.



Sounds like a one-party ( Conservative ) state to me.

Current one-party states
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-party_state#Current_one-party_states


----------



## Jarnhamar (7 Jan 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> That the government of the GTA would belong to and be responsible to the local citizens who elected it, not the provincial government.
> 
> eg: City Hall not having to get permission from Queen's Park to install a speed bump.



EHealth scandal
Gas plants scandal
Ornge scandal

I think I can see why Toronto leadership needs to ask permission to spend money on a speed bump


----------



## Rifleman62 (7 Jan 2018)

mariomike: 





> Sounds like a one-party ( Conservative ) state to me.



Do you really think that? You think no one in the ROC would cast a vote for the LPC? Lots of people in the ROC love his hair and selfies.


----------



## Remius (7 Jan 2018)

So I saw some of the effects of the minimum wage increase. I go to the same place for breakfast/brunch with the wife every Sunday.  I noticed the new menus and new pricing.  Everything went up 1 to 3 dollars.  The owner didn’t want to lay off or cut back any hours so raised his prices.  Says he’ll see how that works in the coming months.  

Now his prices have been the same for the last three years and they are already low so not too much a hit on my wallet but it makes me think twice if I consider ordering something more expensive from time to time. 

My wife however commented on how maybe we should just have brunch at home more often and maybe limit our brunch there to every two weeks.  She is much more frugal than me.  

I guess it all depends on what people are willing to accept.  Increased prices or lower service.


----------



## Brad Sallows (8 Jan 2018)

Relax.  The same process will repeat that has repeated before: min wage goes up, prices and wages adjust (recalibrate) accordingly.  A new equilibrium will be reached, at which the new min wage will have about as much purchasing power relative to the new price/wage structure as the old min wage had relative to the old price/wage structure.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (8 Jan 2018)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> Relax.  The same process will repeat that has repeated before: min wage goes up, prices and wages adjust (recalibrate) accordingly.  A new equilibrium will be reached, at which the new min wage will have about as much purchasing power relative to the new price/wage structure as the old min wage had relative to the old price/wage structure.


What! You mean politicians cannot legislate supply and demand?


----------



## ModlrMike (8 Jan 2018)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> Relax.  The same process will repeat that has repeated before: min wage goes up, prices and wages adjust (recalibrate) accordingly.  A new equilibrium will be reached, at which the new min wage will have about as much purchasing power relative to the new price/wage structure as the old min wage had relative to the old price/wage structure.



You forgot ...and everyone else who didn't get a 20% raise will see their purchasing power decrease.


----------



## PuckChaser (8 Jan 2018)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> You forgot ...and everyone else who didn't get a 20% raise will see their purchasing power decrease.


Now we can all be just as poor as those trying to live off minimum wage. Wealth distribution, Comrade.


----------



## Remius (8 Jan 2018)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> Relax.  The same process will repeat that has repeated before: min wage goes up, prices and wages adjust (recalibrate) accordingly.  A new equilibrium will be reached, at which the new min wage will have about as much purchasing power relative to the new price/wage structure as the old min wage had relative to the old price/wage structure.



Maybe.  But the amount raised in such a short time is what is different plus add in all the other employment rules like vacation leave, guaranteed hours or pay for shift cancellations is what is a bit different.


----------



## mariomike (8 Jan 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> I think I can see why Toronto leadership needs to ask permission to spend money on a speed bump



To paraphrase Mayor LaGuardia, there is no Liberal or Conservative way of fixing a sewer.  

Having spent my career as municipal employee, I was/am thankful that these party politcs "discussions" began at the provincial level. 



			
				Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> Do us a favor and become your own country.



Likewise.



			
				Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> ON and Canada will appreciated the the loss of Liberal votes.



Sounds very close to a one-party state to me. Where Liberals can always run, but Conservatives will always win.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (8 Jan 2018)

I am sorry to have to say so: That is one of the least thought through argument I have seen in along time.

How on earth could Toronto becoming it's own province make Canada a single party country ?????????

They would still have federal ridings ... and very likely the same number of ridings. So how the hell would that change Canada !!!!

As for the remaining Ontario province, if it is so "conservative", I am willing to bet that, after being "freed" from them Libs, they would fracture into the "very conservatives" vs "less conservatives", etc. etc.

One of the consequences of having a real Parliamentary democracy is that it always creates a two party system at the least.


----------



## mariomike (8 Jan 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> How on earth could Toronto becoming it's own province make Canada a single party country ?????????
> 
> They would still have federal ridings ... and very likely the same number of ridings. So how the hell would that change Canada !!!!



My reply was to this,



			
				Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> Do us a favor and become your own country. ON and Canada will appreciated the the loss of Liberal votes.


----------



## Journeyman (8 Jan 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> That is one of the least thought through argument I have seen in along time.


True, but it's a welcome break from his turning every discussion into a collection of ambulance stories.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (8 Jan 2018)

OK, fair on the "country" thing. But it still doesn't work in making Canada into a single party state:

Take the 7 millions souls of the GTA out of the Canadian equation and Quebec's importance in the new mix becomes 30% and BC becomes 17%. Neither of these two provinces are exactly conservative lands. Add the maritime provinces, which are pretty Liberal, and you can still have a good alternation of the two major parties (with Quebec dictating which way it goes in most cases, thus acquiring an even greater influence on federal affairs and causing more alienation of the prairies provinces).


----------



## mariomike (8 Jan 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> OK, fair on the "country" thing.



Thank-you. That is what I was replying to,

"Do us a favor and become your own country. ON and Canada will appreciated the the loss of Liberal votes."



			
				Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> But it still doesn't work in making Canada into a single party state:



I said,

"Sounds very close to a one-party state to me. Where Liberals can always run, but Conservatives will always win."


----------



## PuckChaser (8 Jan 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> "Sounds very close to a one-party state to me. Where Liberals can always run, but Conservatives will always win."



Just remember which party leader has "an admiration for the basic dictatorship in China". It's not the Tories/Tory supporters who want a one-party state.


----------



## MilEME09 (8 Jan 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Just remember which party leader has "an admiration for the basic dictatorship in China". It's not the Tories/Tory supporters who want a one-party state.



Thus electoral reform never went through, to much to loose for the libs


----------



## mariomike (8 Jan 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> It's not the Tories/Tory supporters who want a one-party state.





			
				mariomike said:
			
		

> Secession of the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) from the province of Ontario would be good enough for me.
> 
> #GTAexit





			
				Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> Do us a favor and become your own country. ON and Canada will appreciated the the loss of Liberal votes.



My reply,

"Sounds very close to a one-party state to me. Where Liberals can always run, but Conservatives will always win."

Or, as someone else put it,



			
				Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> I am willing to bet that, after being "freed" from them Libs, they would fracture into the "very conservatives" vs "less conservatives", etc. etc.



"Secession of the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) from the province of Ontario."


----------



## PuckChaser (8 Jan 2018)

MilEME09 said:
			
		

> Thus electoral reform never went through, to much to loose for the libs



It didn't go through because the media finally caught on that electoral reform was a thinly veiled attempt to restore the natural ruling party to Canada. The Liberals favoured any ranked system that would get them consistently elected as no Tory supporter would rank NDP 2nd, or vice versa.


----------



## MilEME09 (8 Jan 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> It didn't go through because the media finally caught on that electoral reform was a thinly veiled attempt to restore the natural ruling party to Canada. The Liberals favoured any ranked system that would get them consistently elected as no Tory supporter would rank NDP 2nd, or vice versa.



Ah right, I almost forgot about that, considering most Canadians and the opposition favored proportional rep


----------



## Furniture (8 Jan 2018)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> You forgot ...and everyone else who didn't get a 20% raise will see their purchasing power decrease.



This is the part I am surprised more people aren't upset by. The rest of us have essentially taken a pay cut so that the Liberals can buy votes in the upcoming election. This posting can end any day now, I'll gladly sail every month to leave this province...


----------



## Brad Sallows (8 Jan 2018)

Electoral reform is elusive because:
1. The Liberals, as the "centre" party, favour a transferable vote.
2. The NDP, as a not-centre party without enough support to win a majority under FPTP, favour proportional rep.
3. The CPC, as a not-centre party with enough support to win a majority under FPTP, favour FPTP.


----------



## Bird_Gunner45 (8 Jan 2018)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> You forgot ...and everyone else who didn't get a 20% raise will see their purchasing power decrease.



And that's the real issue. The reality is the middle class are the ones squeezed by raises in the minimum wage.

Thsee are just attempts at making equality of outcome vice equality of opportunity. But... it's cheaper than properly funding schools


----------



## Bird_Gunner45 (8 Jan 2018)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> Electoral reform is elusive because:
> 1. The Liberals, as the "centre" party, favour a transferable vote.
> 2. The NDP, as a not-centre party without enough support to win a majority under FPTP, favour proportional rep.
> 3. The CPC, as a not-centre party with enough support to win a majority under FPTP, favour FPTP.



Indeed. The last poll I can find indicates that 48% of Canadians want electoral reform while only 35% don't, with the remainder in the unsure category. So, the majority would presumably be weighted in favour of change from the FPTP system, which is in line with the 63% of Canadians who voted for parties who wanted electoral reform. One point though- I would argue that the CPC is in fact a centre party, though centre-right. Canadians are very heavily centrist (77% support either liberal or CPC at the moment) with the, in reality, slight differences between conservatives and liberals making the difference between the two. 

Personally, I believe in one person one vote and making an actual choice vice the ranked ballot system which essentially allows one to have their cake and eat it too. The best way to get representation then, to me, is the FPTP as though in principle the proportional representation model is the most fair in that each vote counts no matter the location, it kills any sort of party accountability to the voters. It also effectively creates a permanent minority government, which isn't beneficial. I would have preferred that there be an elected senate like in the US to allow for effective breaking of the current "elected dictatorship" that exists in a majority government.

http://poll.forumresearch.com/post/2606/one-half-see-need-for-electoral-reform/



			
				PuckChaser said:
			
		

> It didn't go through because the media finally caught on that electoral reform was a thinly veiled attempt to restore the natural ruling party to Canada. The Liberals favoured any ranked system that would get them consistently elected as no Tory supporter would rank NDP 2nd, or vice versa.



Disagree with this though. I think that the real issue was that 65% of Canadians polled wanted a referendum on any electoral reform system, and the Liberals weren't interested in going down that road. In reality, with a majority the Liberals could have simply passed an electoral reform bill but acquiesced. I would suggest then that the likely requirement for a referendum created a "juice not worth the squeeze" sort of scenario. Naturally each party will do what is best for their party- that's why the CPC supports FPTP so heavily as they wouldn't have a chance of a majority in a ranked ballot and would be in a permanent minority situation in proportional.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (8 Jan 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Just remember which party leader has "an admiration for the basic dictatorship in China". It's not the Tories/Tory supporters who want a one-party state.



Oh, oh...I know this one.

Is it Donald Trump?


----------



## ballz (8 Jan 2018)

Bird_Gunner45 said:
			
		

> that's why the CPC supports FPTP so heavily as they wouldn't have a chance of a majority in a ranked ballot and would be in a permanent minority situation in proportional.



That really depends on how the ranked ballot is set up. 

I kind of think a ranked ballot is the best representation of a population's sentiment. However, we recently saw a ranked ballot experiment in Canada which failed, in my opinion, to represent it's constituents and it made me think twice of daring to play with electoral reform.

I'm talking about the CPC leadership election. Now, full disclosure, I was and am 100% behind Maxime Bernier. I don't think the thoughts I've had on this are centred around sour grapes but to deny that sour grapes could affect my ability to be objective would just be dishonest with myself; it's certainly possible.

However, the CPC leadership election used a rank ballot, and what I thought was really poorly thought out and really resulted in a leader who I think does not have the support of the party from the get go, was the fact that a 12th place vote, in the end, was valued the same as a 1st place vote. This really doesn't make sense, since a 1st place vote means you at least, more than anyone, represented the voter's views. A 12th place vote means the voter clearly did not connect very well with you, doesn't have much support for your views, and didn't think you very worthy of their vote... yet, in the CPC election, that 12th place vote was valued the same as a 1st place vote. I can't believe anyone actually even filled out their ballot all the way to 13 candidates to be honest.... they clearly didn't think very highly of that candidate.

*Thought Experiment*
In the federal system, there are only a few parties that really have a platform at all to connect with voters (changing more and more with social media). A third or fourth place vote being worth the same as a 1st place vote, we might as well just put them on a roulette wheel. But I could see something like 2nd place votes being worth 33.3% of a first place vote.... If you can get 39% of first place votes, and 37% of second place votes, I can see how you have the support to govern with majority power. However, if you have 38% of first place votes, but no second place votes.... you'd have to govern with a minority because clearly the other 62% of the population don't have much support for you.

This way, we kind of get the benefit of FPTP in which majorities are attainable and we give the government the leash it needs to do it's job.... but we also ensure a party that is despised by half the population doesn't get that same length of leash.
[/Thinking out loud]

But like I said, after the CPC election, I'd hesitate to dare playing with electoral reform...


----------



## Bird_Gunner45 (8 Jan 2018)

ballz said:
			
		

> That really depends on how the ranked ballot is set up.
> 
> I kind of think a ranked ballot is the best representation of a population's sentiment. However, we recently saw a ranked ballot experiment in Canada which failed, in my opinion, to represent it's constituents and it made me think twice of daring to play with electoral reform.
> 
> ...



In the proposed system, each first place vote would be counted as such and if a majority of constituents voted for one candidate he or she woukd be the winner regardless of subsequent votes. Only if less than 50% of people voted for one candidate woukd a run off occur where the number of second ranked ballots woukd be counted to see if a majority occurred, and so on. In the CPC election example noted, this would have led to a more equitable result.

Tbh, I don't all out disagree with proportional.  My support for FPTP or proportional is rooted in a belief that people need to make choices. Liberal or NDP? CPC or Liberal? Proportional kind of allows a cake and eat it too situation to me, but with potentially interesting results- for example, I think more liberal voters would see CPC rather than liberal as the better second choice and many NDP would see green, not liberal as a second choice. To many left and right voters there isn't a big difference between CPC and Liberals. 

Edit to add- Under the proportional system many believe that the predicted outcome based on voting trends would have seen a closer election result as follows:

- Liberals at 135 seats
- CPC at 108 seats
- NDP at 67 seats
- BQ 16
- Green 12

Under the preferential ballot, the 308 site predicted the following:

- Liberals at 224
- CPC at 61
- NDP at 50
- BQ at 2
- Green at 1


----------



## PuckChaser (8 Jan 2018)

2 of 3 ethics investigations for the Finance Minister have cleared him. The investigation into C-27 sponsorship is still ongoing, however it will be with the new appointee Mario Dion.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/ethics-czar-clears-morneau-over-sale-of-shares-1.3750558


----------



## Bird_Gunner45 (8 Jan 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> It's not the Tories/Tory supporters who want a one-party state.



You're wrong here- all partisans, left or right, want a one party state and can be seeing their various rantings. For each "libtard" there's a "redneck". The right is as guilty as the left.


----------



## ModlrMike (8 Jan 2018)

The whole electoral reform movement misses the basic fact that we don't have one election, rather we have 338 individual elections. FPTP in each riding is the most direct representation of voter intent we have. The fact that the aggregate number of ridings accruing to one party or another allows them to form the government is completely secondary.


----------



## ballz (8 Jan 2018)

Bird_Gunner45 said:
			
		

> In the proposed system, each first place vote would be counted as such and if a majority of constituents voted for one candidate he or she woukd be the winner regardless of subsequent votes. Only if less than 50% of people voted for one candidate woukd a run off occur where the number of second ranked ballots woukd be counted to see if a majority occurred, and so on. In the CPC election example noted, this would have led to a more equitable result.



I'm not sure I follow... if you are saying what I think you are saying, that *is* what happened in the CPC election... and it led to, I believe, a result that does not represent the true sentiment of the voters.



			
				ModlrMike said:
			
		

> The whole electoral reform movement misses the basic fact that we don't have one election, rather we have 330 individual elections. FPTP in each riding is the most direct representation of voter intent we have. The fact that the aggregate number of ridings accruing to one party or another allows them to form the government is completely secondary.



I like the idea of a representation by population (FPTP) in the HoC for all 338* ridings, however, legislators are not able to be very independent 
 and actually represent their constituents in our system.


----------



## Bird_Gunner45 (8 Jan 2018)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> The whole electoral reform movement misses the basic fact that we don't have one election, rather we have 330 individual elections. FPTP in each riding is the most direct representation of voter intent we have. The fact that the aggregate number of ridings accruing to one party or another allows them to form the government is completely secondary.



I don't believe it misses this point in 2 of 3. In ranked ballots it's still at a riding level and the rankings only matter if there isn't a majority on the first ballot itself. This system only changes the specifics of how riding ballots are counted, not the system per set,  since it's really still FPTP for a majority


----------



## mariomike (8 Jan 2018)

Bird_Gunner45 said:
			
		

> You're wrong here- all partisans, left or right, want a one party state and can be seeing their various rantings.





			
				Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> Do us a favor and become your own country. ON and Canada will appreciated the the loss of Liberal votes.


----------



## Furniture (9 Jan 2018)

ballz said:
			
		

> I like the idea of a representation by population (FPTP) in the HoC for all 338* ridings, however, legislators are not able to be very independent
> and actually represent their constituents in our system.



Changing how we elect our MPs won't make them any more or less tightly controlled by their party masters. It's the nature of the party beast that we will see our MPs forced to follow party policy or be forced out of the party.

My concern with changing from FPTP is that the more complications we add to the system the more people are likely to be confused by it and not trust the results. People that don't trust their electoral system don't trust their governments, and  that results in foolishness like #notmypresident.


----------



## larry Strong (9 Jan 2018)

WeatherdoG said:
			
		

> Changing how we elect our MPs won't make them any more or less tightly controlled by their party masters. It's the nature of the party beast that we will see our MPs forced to follow party policy or be forced out of the party.
> 
> My concern with changing from FPTP is that the more complications we add to the system the more people are likely to be confused by it and not trust the results. People that don't trust their electoral system don't trust their governments, and  that results in foolishness like #notmypresident.




Or we end up like Germany........months after the election and still no government........


Cheers
Larry


----------



## Kirkhill (9 Jan 2018)

Larry Strong said:
			
		

> Or we end up like Germany........months after the election and still no government........
> 
> 
> Cheers
> Larry



Or Belgium (589 days with no elected government: What happened in Belgium) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2013/10/01/589-days-with-no-elected-government-what-happened-in-belgium/?utm_term=.f215a935f247

Or Italy (Why is it so hard to form a government in Italy?) https://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2013/04/economist-explains-8

Or Ireland (Ireland still without government after third failure to pick taoiseach) https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/apr/14/ireland-government-taoiseach-kenny-martin

Governments are ephemeral but the bureaucrats go on forever.

Another problem the EU has with the UK - They have a bureaucrat (Barnier) negotiating with politicians (Davis & May).  Bureaucrats expect clarity.  Politicians thrive on obscurity.


----------



## dapaterson (9 Jan 2018)

It's interesting that all the discussions seem to focus on the House of Commons; with a bicameral legislature, is there room to leverage the existence of a second house to provide a different form of representation?

(Yes, that's the sound of me rolling "Senate Reform" into "Electoral Reform").


----------



## ModlrMike (9 Jan 2018)

I think it's because the provinces feel the Senate is their purview. We saw how well the invitation for provinces to hold senate elections went.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (9 Jan 2018)

And the Supreme Court ruled that any change to the senate requires a constitutional amendment. At that point, everything goes backing the table for negotiation...


----------



## Altair (9 Jan 2018)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> It's interesting that all the discussions seem to focus on the House of Commons; with a bicameral legislature, is there room to leverage the existence of a second house to provide a different form of representation?
> 
> (Yes, that's the sound of me rolling "Senate Reform" into "Electoral Reform").


anyone willing to reopen the constitution to do this? Anyone?


----------



## MilEME09 (9 Jan 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> anyone willing to reopen the constitution to do this? Anyone?



Doing that would take strong political leadership, courage, and a bit of luck, haven't seen that in politics in my life time. Especially after watching the ethics committee meeting today, blows my mind to think that the liberals think that question period is good enough for the PM to answer other parliamentarians over his 4 breaches of the conflict of interest act. Question period is a joke, no one gives answer, no wonder faith in our system is low.


----------



## Journeyman (9 Jan 2018)

MilEME09 said:
			
		

> ....blows my mind to think that the liberals think that question period is good enough for the PM to answer other parliamentarians ....


Well, according to CBC, PMJT is going on a "listening tour" to hear Canadians' views.... but he only wants to talk about economics (which, to be fair, Canada is doing OK notwithstanding the Timmies/wage crisis).  In other words he wants to hear Canadians say nice things, to try and get his narrative back on track.


----------



## Altair (9 Jan 2018)

MilEME09 said:
			
		

> Doing that would take strong political leadership, courage, and a bit of luck, haven't seen that in politics in my life time. Especially after watching the ethics committee meeting today, blows my mind to think that the liberals think that question period is good enough for the PM to answer other parliamentarians over his 4 breaches of the conflict of interest act. Question period is a joke, no one gives answer, no wonder faith in our system is low.


That was my main gripe against the Harper conservatives as well, where nobody would answer questions in question period, and things have not improved in that regard.

The fact is, question period remains political theater to score partisan points and not about the opposition holding the government to account and the government being forthright and honest about what it is doing.

As for the constitution, nobody is touching that again, it's a lose lose for everyone.


----------



## larry Strong (9 Jan 2018)

Chris Pook said:
			
		

> Or Belgium (589 days with no elected government: What happened in Belgium) https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2013/10/01/589-days-with-no-elected-government-what-happened-in-belgium/?utm_term=.f215a935f247
> 
> Or Italy (Why is it so hard to form a government in Italy?) https://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2013/04/economist-explains-8
> 
> ...



Thanks for that, was not aware of a couple of those stats.....IIRC Italy has been to the polls on average every 18 months since 1946.....seeings how the different regions of this country seem to get along so well together, I'm sure we would not see that if we went beyond FPTP 

Yeah, bureaucrats can keep they day to day going, however how does any new legislation get past when there is no government.......


Cheers
Larry


----------



## Kirkhill (9 Jan 2018)

Some could argue that the introduction of cameras into the House has merely enhanced the theater and reduced the utility - exactly as the opponents of televising the House predicted.


----------



## Altair (9 Jan 2018)

Chris Pook said:
			
		

> Some could argue that the introduction of cameras into the House has merely enhanced the theater and reduced the utility - exactly as the opponents of televising the House predicted.


yeah, i would take them out.

Who sits around and watches question period anyways? That and every politician is looking for the best 10 second clip to make the evening news


----------



## dapaterson (9 Jan 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> yeah, i would take them out.
> 
> Who sits around and watches question period anyways? That and every politician is looking for the best 10 second clip to make the evening news



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lMOHiQtuSuo


----------



## PuckChaser (9 Jan 2018)

The Speaker needs either more power or better rules to enforce proper questions that aren't thinly veiled insults and answers that actually answer the question instead of sounding like a campaign leaflet/blame the last government.


----------



## ballz (10 Jan 2018)

WeatherdoG said:
			
		

> Changing how we elect our MPs won't make them any more or less tightly controlled by their party masters. It's the nature of the party beast that we will see our MPs forced to follow party policy or be forced out of the party.



Our electoral system greatly affects whether party discipline is strong or not? Proportional representation has the least amount of individual accountability... the system the US has / the rules in place really makes party discipline quite ineffective.

If you mean whether or not it's a ranked ballot, then sure, in isolation, that won't affect party discipline, but there are a whole bunch of other things between rules / procedures within parliament and the electoral system that can.



			
				PuckChaser said:
			
		

> The Speaker needs either more power or better rules to enforce proper questions that aren't thinly veiled insults and answers that actually answer the question instead of sounding like a campaign leaflet/blame the last government.



Agreed... I appreciate the UK tradition in which the speaker quits his party for the duration of his appointment... even if it is just a symbolic gesture.

The speaker asked someone to leave for heckling several weeks ago, it was the first time that's happened in 15 years... I'm not sure what other real sanctions the Speaker has at his disposal. It's also a dangerous game to give him too much control because he is, at the end of the day, a partisan politician.


----------



## Furniture (10 Jan 2018)

ballz said:
			
		

> Our electoral system greatly affects whether party discipline is strong or not? Proportional representation has the least amount of individual accountability... the system the US has / the rules in place really makes party discipline quite ineffective.
> 
> If you mean whether or not it's a ranked ballot, then sure, in isolation, that won't affect party discipline, but there are a whole bunch of other things between rules / procedures within parliament and the electoral system that can.



I think we are arguing the same point. 

My point is that in Canada the political parties control how their people vote in the commons. As it stands now they should always represent the best interests and views of their constituents, but often times have to vote along party lines or be kicked out of the party whether their constituents agree with the party or not. We pretend we elect individuals, but in reality elect parties.


----------



## Underway (10 Jan 2018)

WeatherdoG said:
			
		

> I think we are arguing the same point.
> 
> My point is that in Canada the political parties control how their people vote in the commons. As it stands now they should always represent the best interests and views of their constituents, but often times have to vote along party lines or be kicked out of the party whether their constituents agree with the party or not. We pretend we elect individuals, but in reality elect parties.



The only way to do that is to separate the party leadership from the MP's.  If the Party Leader didn't have control over who was a member then it might be harder to enforce voting a certain way.  That would be dangerous in Canada IMHO.  With no solidified national culture and large amounts of regional intrests it would be difficult to create any form of consensus.

In the US system you only have to declare yourself a member of a party to be one.  There is no formalized county spanning organization that creates, tracks or issues memberships.  The result is that American political parties have weak central organizations and thus a consensus based ideology.  You can change parties just by stating this out loud.  Most Canadians (and Americans it seems) forget this.  The US could literally be a single party state if all the Democrats in the Senate and Congress suddenly declared themselves Republicans tomorrow.

There is one more thing I'd like to add here that people seem to be missing regarding our voting system.  Canadians DO NOT elect a government.  We elect a parlament to represent us who then choose the government.  Tradition is for the largest party to form the government but if parlament wanted they could have any combination of parliamentarians form the government.  Hence coalitions and minority governments.  It's important to remember this when discussing changes to voting.


----------



## dimsum (10 Jan 2018)

Underway said:
			
		

> The only way to do that is to separate the party leadership from the MP's.  If the Party Leader didn't have control over who was a member then it might be harder to enforce voting a certain way.  That would be dangerous in Canada IMHO.  With no solidified national culture and large amounts of regional intrests it would be difficult to create any form of consensus.
> 
> In the US system you only have to declare yourself a member of a party to be one.  There is no formalized county spanning organization that creates, tracks or issues memberships.  The result is that American political parties have weak central organizations and thus a consensus based ideology.  You can change parties just by stating this out loud.  Most Canadians (and Americans it seems) forget this.  The US could literally be a single party state if all the Democrats in the Senate and Congress suddenly declared themselves Republicans tomorrow.
> 
> There is one more thing I'd like to add here that people seem to be missing regarding our voting system.  Canadians DO NOT elect a government.  We elect a parlament to represent us who then choose the government.  Tradition is for the largest party to form the government but if parlament wanted they could have any combination of parliamentarians form the government.  Hence coalitions and minority governments.  It's important to remember this when discussing changes to voting.



:goodpost:

I might end up sharing that on a subreddit or three.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (10 Jan 2018)

I don't exactly agree with Underway here.

First thing, in the US, the party's are electoral machines primarily, and political philosophy straight-jackets a far second. Their purpose is to get you on the bulletin and then, raise funds for the campaign to get you elected. That's why  the party don't have a platform applicable to all "per se".

In Canada, we let the party's bureaucrats take over the process of naming the candidates, and we let the party leaders take over the parties from the base (as counter intuitively as it may seem) when we adopted the American practice of leadership conventions that took away from the elected MP the power to appoint _*or remove*_ the party leader.

In a true British parliamentarian system, it is not the leader of the party with the most seat (though it usually ends up being the one) who becomes PM, it is the person - any person - asked to put a government together by the Monarch and who happens to be able to obtain, and retain, the support of the majority of elected MPs. That is why the caucus of a given party used to be the one appointing their party leader, a situation where it is for the leader to obtain the support of his/her caucus and maintain it at all time. In such system, the leader needs to get that support from the real elected representatives: the MPs.

By having the appointment of leaders, and their removal, moved to the members of the party at large, either by conventions or vote at large in the party, it reverses the whole system and now, it is the future MP's who now owe their standing to the leader who is imposed on them, with the leader holding power over their heads instead of the other way around.

Our current system may give the illusion of democracy since the "PM" is "elected" by  larger number of people (the party faithfuls) than just his caucus, but in practice, it does the reverse and basically puts in place a temporary dictatorship of four to five years by someone (the PM) that, in the end, few people had a hand in selecting. At least, even if the number was smaller when the leaders were selected by their caucus, the MP's made their choice as an expression of the will of their (the MP's) electorate - and in the end actually represented a much larger portion of the population.


----------



## Jarnhamar (11 Jan 2018)

This is American but I thought it was relevant to the conversation we were having about raising minimum wage in Canada.




> The economy under President Donald Trump and the Republican-controlled Congress is firing on all cylinders. Immediately following the passing of the GOP tax plan in the House, numerous businesses announced plans to grow their companies and compensate their employees with bonuses and higher wages due to the newly freed-up cash.



https://www.dailywire.com/news/25725/trumponomics-walmart-hikes-wages-shells-out-amanda-prestigiacomo?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_content=062316-news&utm_campaign=benshapiro


Could we not have done something similar?


----------



## FJAG (11 Jan 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> This is American but I thought it was relevant to the conversation we were having about raising minimum wage in Canada.
> 
> 
> https://www.dailywire.com/news/25725/trumponomics-walmart-hikes-wages-shells-out-amanda-prestigiacomo?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_content=062316-news&utm_campaign=benshapiro
> ...



Liberals? Cut Taxes?   :rofl:

 :cheers:


----------



## Altair (11 Jan 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> This is American but I thought it was relevant to the conversation we were having about raising minimum wage in Canada.
> 
> 
> https://www.dailywire.com/news/25725/trumponomics-walmart-hikes-wages-shells-out-amanda-prestigiacomo?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_content=062316-news&utm_campaign=benshapiro
> ...


http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-gop-tax-reform-bill-impact-economy-business-debt-income-2017-12



> The "static" score of the bill — the amount of projected debt added when economic growth is not factored in — shows that the deficit would grow by about $1.5 trillion in the decade after the bill is implemented.
> 
> Republicans argue that the new economic growth from the bill will in turn generate more revenue, since larger incomes mean more taxes to collect.
> 
> ...


I thought people hated adding on more debt.


----------



## Jarnhamar (11 Jan 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-gop-tax-reform-bill-impact-economy-business-debt-income-2017-12
> I thought people hated adding on more debt.



Not this guy.

But all that to say if we gave a tac credit orowered income taxes we'd be billions more in debt? We should be more careful where we spend money I guess.


----------



## YZT580 (11 Jan 2018)

448 billion over 10 years.  Didn't Obama do that in less than 1 year?  Just asking.


----------



## larry Strong (11 Jan 2018)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> 448 billion over 10 years.  Didn't Obama do that in less than 1 year?  Just asking.




https://army.ca/forums/threads/127136/post-1515883.html#new


Cheers
Larry


----------



## PPCLI Guy (11 Jan 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> This is American but I thought it was relevant to the conversation we were having about raising minimum wage in Canada.
> 
> 
> https://www.dailywire.com/news/25725/trumponomics-walmart-hikes-wages-shells-out-amanda-prestigiacomo?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_content=062316-news&utm_campaign=benshapiro
> ...



http://www.businessinsider.com/walmart-suddenly-closes-sams-club-stores-2018-1

What?  Close 63 stores and lay off thousands of workers?  Then cover that up by announcing a raise that was likely coming anyway due to over-employment in the US?


----------



## Jarnhamar (11 Jan 2018)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> http://www.businessinsider.com/walmart-suddenly-closes-sams-club-stores-2018-1
> 
> What?  Close 63 stores and lay off thousands of workers?  Then cover that up by announcing a raise that was likely coming anyway due to over-employment in the US?



Nope! Definitely wasnt going for that angle. I was even going to say I'm surprised considering Walmart's past behavior but I guess we know why.  Easy to imagine Walmart's pay increase and benefits come from those other sub stores closing. 



> After a thorough review, it became clear we had built clubs in some locations that impacted other clubs, and where population had not grown as anticipated," Furner said in the email. "We will be closing some clubs, and we notified them today. We'll convert some of them into eCommerce fulfillment centers - to better serve the growing number of members shopping with us online and continue scaling the SamsClub.com business."


Maybe a bit like our target and sears stores. 

Still couldn't we have lowered income tax for low income people instead?


----------



## PPCLI Guy (11 Jan 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Still couldn't we have lowered income tax for low income people instead?



I would be all for that - even if it meant raising taxes for me, or reducing "tax expenditures" elsewhere.  I would not however suggest going full hog into deficit spending like the Americans have (even though I think that our national fetish for balanced budgets does more harm than good).


----------



## Altair (11 Jan 2018)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> 448 billion over 10 years.  Didn't Obama do that in less than 1 year?  Just asking.


he definitely did.

However, this is taken just by itself. Whatever the regular budget deficit would be over 10 years, tack that on to it.

With all the heat the LPC gets for deficit spending I doubt they would be making many friends by cutting taxes and making the budget deficit even bigger.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (12 Jan 2018)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> I would be all for that - even if it meant raising taxes for me, or reducing "tax expenditures" elsewhere.  I would not however suggest going full hog into deficit spending like the Americans have (even though I think that our national fetish for balanced budgets does more harm than good).



National fetish for balanced budgets?

In what jurisdiction? near as I can tell, only BC has a budget surplus and that is looking pretty shaky.

A what point does the combined borrowing of all but one province, plus the federal government begin to threaten Canada's future?


----------



## Altair (12 Jan 2018)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> National fetish for balanced budgets?
> 
> In what jurisdiction? near as I can tell, only BC has a budget surplus and that is looking pretty shaky.
> 
> A what point does the combined borrowing of all but one province, plus the federal government begin to threaten Canada's future?


you forgot Quebec.

They have had one for a three years now I think. A liberal government too, go figure.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (12 Jan 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> you forgot Quebec.
> 
> They have had one for a three years now I think. A liberal government too, go figure.



I did not forget Quebec. When you get 11 billion per year in equalization from the federal government, unless your surplus is greater than that, you are not really running a surplus....

Realizing how nasty that sounds, I hasten to add- good on them for improving dramatically their fiscal situation from how it used to be.


----------



## a_majoor (12 Jan 2018)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> A what point does the combined borrowing of all but one province, plus the federal government begin to threaten Canada's future?



A long time ago, actually. We also have $500 billion+ in unfunded liabilities (pensions and benefits, mostly), so Canada is well over a trillion dollars in the hole. The problem is multifold, either we are no longer able to cover our debt obligations and stiff bondholders and pensioners, or continue to paper over the issue and risk inflation, or see the debt overhang drag us back into a 2008 style economic crash (the biggest one before that happened in 1929....). The remarkable thing is we can even see some or all of these things happen together (remember "Stagflation" in the late 1970's, or Japan's lost decade of the 1990's?). So as Instapundit often says, things only continue until they no longer can. 

Some combination of market shock, political event or black swan (i.e a west coast earthquake)might be the trigger, or simply the growing realization that, hey, you're never going to get that pension, your benefits will be gone and your prospects of getting ahead in the wage and job market reaches a tipping point.

Now the government may be forced to take action prior to a meltdown (Paul Martin did this with some pretty ruthless spending cuts in the 1990's when Canada's dollar was being mocked as the Northern Peso), or we may be lifted with someone elses rising tide (Canada's unexpectedly robust job figures recently are no surprise when you remember that 70%+ of our exports go to the United States, and _their_ economy is now rapidly gathering steam), which gives us more time _if we actively take advantage of these events_. 

Looking at things like Ontario's spiking minimum wages, or the Federal governments commitment to strangle the energy industry, or raising taxes and regulations counter to the Americans makes me believe that, like Von Moltke's "Industrious and Stupid" officer, we are spinning our wheels for the foreseeable future rather than actively taking advantage of the events.


----------



## pbi (24 Jan 2018)

The discussion above about the perceived or real evils of political parties, and of the various systems for getting them into office, reminded me of George Washington's prescient words in his 1796 Farewell Address (below). Much of what he had to say is (IMHO) applicable in both the US and Canada today. I've highlighted a couple of phrases which seem very relevant today:

_I have already intimated to you the danger of parties in the State, with particular reference to the founding of them on geographical discriminations. Let me now take a more comprehensive view, and warn you in the most solemn manner against the baneful effects of the spirit of party generally.

This spirit, unfortunately, is inseparable from our nature, having its root in the strongest passions of the human mind. It exists under different shapes in all governments, more or less stifled, controlled, or repressed; but, in those of the popular form, it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy.

The alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension, which in different ages and countries has perpetrated the most horrid enormities, is itself a frightful despotism. But this leads at length to a more formal and permanent despotism. *The disorders and miseries which result gradually incline the minds of men to seek security and repose in the absolute power of an individual; and sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation, on the ruins of public liberty.*

Without looking forward to an extremity of this kind (which nevertheless ought not to be entirely out of sight), the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it.

It serves always to distract the public councils and enfeeble the public administration. It agitates the community with ill-founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasionally riot and insurrection. *It opens the door to foreign influence and corruption, which finds a facilitated access to the government itself through the channels of party passions. Thus the policy and the will of one country are subjected to the policy and will of another.
*
There is an opinion that parties in free countries are useful checks upon the administration of the government and serve to keep alive the spirit of liberty. This within certain limits is probably true; and in governments of a monarchical cast, patriotism may look with indulgence, if not with favor, upon the spirit of party. But in those of the popular character, in governments purely elective, it is a spirit not to be encouraged. From their natural tendency, it is certain there will always be enough of that spirit for every salutary purpose. And there being constant danger of excess, the effort ought to be by force of public opinion, to mitigate and assuage it. A fire not to be quenched, it demands a uniform vigilance to prevent its bursting into a flame, lest, instead of warming, it should consume._

While I understand that running a country without parties might not be practical (or at least be more difficult than it is now), I wonder when and how politicians are able to strike a balance between party advantage and dogma, and the good of the nation.


----------



## dapaterson (24 Jan 2018)

Kathleen Wynne's hidden acts of ritual human sacrifice have apparently paid off.  (I can't think of any other explanation...)


Head of Ontario PC Party accused of sexual misconduct.  The PC Campaign manager, Brown's chief of staff, and deputy campaign manager (Strategy) have all quit.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/patrick-brown-denies-sexual-misconduct-allegations-from-two-women-1.3774686#_gus&_gucid=&_gup=twitter&_gsc=q3hAGjQ


----------



## suffolkowner (24 Jan 2018)

not a surprise


----------



## Old Sweat (24 Jan 2018)

suffolkowner said:
			
		

> not a surprise



Why, please, with documentation? Not questioning your integrity, but asking for information.


----------



## suffolkowner (24 Jan 2018)

I shouldn't say for assault or even harassment as everything I'm aware of would be consensual but its always been an open secret that his behaviour wasn't very "family values". I think in Canada the parties must not internally vet their candidates that well. I would expect this to only be the beginning to be honest now that it is out there, and have been waiting for it to break since he was elected leader, always thought that photos would be published with two weeks to go in the election. It's disappointing if this turns out the way I think that the Ontario PC's will have shot themselves in the foot 3 times running, I always preferred another at least partially for this reason. 

Having said all that two peoples interpretations of events can be widely different and maybe both valid so i'm a little leery of the #metoo  movement turning into this huge witch hunt without any due process.

Even with what I've heard alleged I'm not sure it should disqualify one as a MP,MPP, PM, Premier.
How much of a private life is one entitled too in politics? 
How much of a bearing does your relationship choices have on your ability to govern? 
I guess in the end that is up to each individual voter. To be honest I've always been impressed when I've heard Patrick Brown speak but he was a bad choice from the beginning and I do expect this to snowball


----------



## ModlrMike (24 Jan 2018)

This is the only really important part of the article:



> None of the allegations have been proven in court.



That being said, he's probably undetectable now. The accusation is as powerful as a conviction.


----------



## jollyjacktar (24 Jan 2018)

Ontario isn't the only province with a PC leader going down in flames today.  Jamie Baillie thundered in earlier today as leader of the NS PCs.

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/nova-scotia/jamie-baillie-resigns-inappropriate-behaviour-1.4501742


----------



## FJAG (25 Jan 2018)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> This is the only really important part of the article:
> 
> That being said, he's probably undetectable unelectable now. The accusation is as powerful as a conviction.



FTFY  ;D

 :cheers:


----------



## PuckChaser (25 Jan 2018)

10 years later, story provided directly to media and not police, sure smells like a smear campaign. Not surprising considering Wynne's 16% approval rating and double digit polling deficit.


----------



## Altair (25 Jan 2018)

Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.


----------



## Altair (25 Jan 2018)

https://www.ontariopc.ca/statement_from_ontario_pc_leader_patrick_brown

And he's done. 



> These allegations are false and have been difficult to hear.
> 
> “However, defeating Kathleen Wynne in 2018 is more important than one individual.
> 
> “For this reason, after consulting with caucus, friends and family I have decided to step down as Leader of the Ontario PC Party. I will remain on as a MPP while I definitively clear my name from these false allegations.


  
#metoo strikes again.


----------



## ModlrMike (25 Jan 2018)

Caroline Mulroney's time has come?


----------



## Scott (25 Jan 2018)

Jamie Baillie in Nova Scotia done as well.

https://haligonia.ca/jamie-baillie-leader-of-the-nova-scotia-pc-party-asked-to-resign-over-allegations-of-inappropriate-behaviour-227700/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=haligonia


----------



## pbi (25 Jan 2018)

I'm of two minds over this.

I watched Brown's agonized resignation speech early this morning, and I felt genuinely sorry for him. I don't know exactly what he is alleged to have done, or the seriousness of the alleged acts,  (beyond what is in the public domain), but I didn't really feel like gloating.

Obviously, his campaign team and the Ontario Caucus were pretty convinced that something bad had taken place, because they cut the anchor lines before the media had even woken up to the story. So, attempts to blame this one particular case on #metoo or the media are, in my opinion, misdirected. That said,  I think there are grounds for serious concern over a certain feeding frenzy effect that appears to be developing in general, much beyond this one case.

On the one hand, I have a wife, a daughter and many other female relatives. They should all be able to lead their lives as best they can, free of fear from idiots who can't keep their hands  (or other parts) to themselves. They should never have to chose between a job, a promotion or anything else and having to let somebody grope them.  I don't ever want to find out that some POS has treated them in that way.

On the other hand, sexual assault is a serious crime. Sexual harassment is perhaps less serious in terms of the scale of punishment, but it is equally ruinous. As it should be, if the accused is truly guilty. And that is my point: *if they are truly guilty.*

Years ago, I was a member of a group of individuals in a unit who were maliciously and falsely accused of sexual harassment. The process to deal with it was lengthy and complex, and quite frightening as it was clearly tinged with a presumption of guilt. It took at least two years before it was over. Fortunately there were no NDA or CCC charges laid, but I would never want to go through that again. And, more importantly, I don't wish it on anybody.

If we generally adhere to the idea of innocence until proven guilty beyond any reasonable doubt for other crimes, why does it seem to me that an accusation of sexual harassment  carries an immediate penalty of guilt by association?  One that you will probably never, ever shake off no matter what the real outcome is?

I see two very bad results arising from this. First, people who may not be guilty at all, or not guilty of an offence of the magnitude accused, will be ruined, with no legitimate chance to fight back or to restore their name. Justice will not be served by this. "Justice", as opposed to "vengeance" which IMHO is too often the meaning assigned to the word "justice".

Second, like all excessive public behaviours and practices, it risks provoking a backlash. This backlash, (no doubt exploited by the usual gang of suspects who want women barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen) will call into question all these sorts of cases and undermine those people who are truly struggling to deal with the actions of real abusers. Sort of a "cry wolf" situation, or similar to those low-lifes who fake PTSD symptoms for their own gain, thus undercutting real sufferers. Another terrible outcome.


----------



## mariomike (25 Jan 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> While I understand that running a country without parties might not be practical (or at least be more difficult than it is now), I wonder when and how politicians are able to strike a balance between party advantage and dogma, and the good of the nation.



I wonder the same thing.


----------



## Edward Campbell (25 Jan 2018)

And Kent Hehr, former Veterans' Affairs Minister, has been accused of something similar ~ back when he was an Alberta MLA.

As John Ibbiton says, in the *Globe and Mail*, "*Too often, movements of social protest force themselves on public consciousness, own the moment for a time, then fade from what used to be called the front page. Occupy. Idle No More. Even Black Lives Matter. But not #MeToo, which is transforming our society literally overnight.*"

Well, maybe, I'll suggest that the jury is still out in the case of #MeToo and that we may see repeats of the "fake attack on Muslim for for wearing hijab" story which may bring #MeToo into disrepute.

But, for now: Oh, how the mighty have fallen.


----------



## YZT580 (25 Jan 2018)

Quite frankly, I am deathly afraid.  This £metoo movement has the capability of totally subverting justice.  If the allegations levelled are true than definitely action is required but the entire system is being subverted on rumour and that is a very bad thing.  We are permitting rumour to be accepted as fact and taking action as if it were fact and thus we are potentially subverting democracy on nothing more than salacious gossip.  Innocent until proven guilty is a good concept but the legal system moves too slowly to protect an individual from slander.  Even should Brown be totally innocent the damage has been done and it cannot be undone.  We have entered a stage whereby the very whisper  of potential sexual misconduct is sufficient to damn a person beyond all hope of restoration.  Regardless of the outcome of a trial Brown will always be the X leader  of the Ontario Conservatives.  How do we balance the true right of the accuser to come forward without fear of repercussion with the right of the accused to remain innocent until proven guilty?  Innocent means just that.  The individuals name and reputation must remain unsoiled until proven otherwise.  Without that we have a scenario where the party that produces the best rumour against the other is the winner and that is not democracy.


----------



## Altair (25 Jan 2018)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> Quite frankly, I am deathly afraid.  This £metoo movement has the capability of totally subverting justice.  If the allegations levelled are true than definitely action is required but the entire system is being subverted on rumour and that is a very bad thing.  We are permitting rumour to be accepted as fact and taking action as if it were fact and thus we are potentially subverting democracy on nothing more than salacious gossip.  Innocent until proven guilty is a good concept but the legal system moves too slowly to protect an individual from slander.  Even should Brown be totally innocent the damage has been done and it cannot be undone.  We have entered a stage whereby the very whisper  of potential sexual misconduct is sufficient to damn a person beyond all hope of restoration.  Regardless of the outcome of a trial Brown will always be the X leader  of the Ontario Conservatives.  How do we balance the true right of the accuser to come forward without fear of repercussion with the right of the accused to remain innocent until proven guilty?  Innocent means just that.  The individuals name and reputation must remain unsoiled until proven otherwise.  Without that we have a scenario where the party that produces the best rumour against the other is the winner and that is not democracy.


This is just the over correction happening. 

For years women struggled to get justice for sexual assaults and sexual harassment in the court system,  with the conviction rates for such offenses being incredibly low.  When two people are in private and it its a he said,  she said,  its hard to convict without reasonable doubt. 

Now with the #metoo women don't need to meet the burden of proof,  they can just ruin people with the accusation, and while it is a overreach and honestly mob justice, don't forget that it stems from years of women feeling that the court system will never get them justice for the abuse they have suffered. 

Bill Cosby and Harvey weinstein have never been convicted of sexual assault or rape,  but who here honestly believes that they have never done it?


----------



## Blackadder1916 (25 Jan 2018)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> Quite frankly, I am deathly afraid.  This £metoo movement has the capability of totally subverting justice.  If the *allegations* levelled are true than definitely action is required  . . . is being subverted on *rumour* . . .   . . . permitting *rumour* . . . nothing more than salacious *gossip*.  . . . best *rumour*  . . . .



While I understand (or at least I think I do) what you were trying to convey, I do take exception to your continued suggestion that "rumours" are at the heart of the difficulties facing these public (political) figures. Though neither are proven, there is a big difference between a rumour (gossip of third parties) and an accusation by an involved party (even when that involved party is not yet publically named).  In the case of Mr. Brown, apparently there may have been rumour before the allegations were brought forward by media.  Personally, I'm not afraid for democracy (or what passes for democracy these days).  Even without movements or causes de jours or social media (though that one does concern me WRT political process), this is nothing new for politicians, even in Canada.  They have always had to be concerned for their behaviour (good or bad, public or private) being reported.  Of course, the consequences of sexual peccadillos have not always been consistent;  the Munsinger Affair barely affected the political careers of the MPs involved while "leaving your Coates at Tiffany's" was essentially the end for the Minister.  It is just that the recent climate makes it easier for skeletons to come out of the closet.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (25 Jan 2018)

Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> Personally, I'm not afraid for democracy (or what passes for democracy these days).



You should be. I am just back from a quick shopping trip and on the radio news, was presented with Trudeau jr.'s statement to the press whereby he "fully supports" the women who came out against Mr. Brown and condemns him, but almost immediately after, waffles an "I have not had the chance to review that situation and can't comment" when a journalist just brought out the fact that exact similar accusations have now been levelled against one of his minister, the Minister for Sports Kent Herr.

In the words of Yoda, to someone claiming not to be afraid: "You will be!"  :nod:


----------



## Colin Parkinson (25 Jan 2018)

My advice to political parties for the time being is to select only female candidates to hopefully protect from the likelihood of a potential scandal.


----------



## Jarnhamar (25 Jan 2018)

Brian Banks.


> In the summer of 2002, Banks was arrested and charged after classmate Wanetta Gibson falsely accused him of dragging her into a stairway at Polytechnic High School (Poly) and raping her. *Faced with a possible 41 years to life sentence, he accepted a plea deal that included five years in prison, five years of probation, and registering as a sex offender.* Wanetta Gibson and her mother Wanda Rhodes sued the Long Beach Unified School District, claiming the Poly campus was not a safe environment, and won a $1.5 million settlement.[17][18] According to Banks, his lawyer told him that he stood no chance at trial because he would be tried by an all-white jury who would automatically assume that he was guilty because he was "a big, black teenager."[19]
> Confession of false accusation
> 
> In March 2011, *Gibson contacted Banks on Facebook, met with him, and admitted in the presence of an attorney that she had fabricated the story. Banks secretly recorded Gibson's confession, but she later refused to tell prosecutors that she had lied so she wouldn't have to return the money she and her family had won in court.*[18]


----------



## pbi (25 Jan 2018)

benitod said:
			
		

> It has been outstanding and conclusive precedent under the law that "a ten year delay in filing a criminal complaint for assault or sexual harassment renders it null and void on the basis of acquiescence and consent." Wynne has lots of illegitimate backers in the intelligence community like people who obtain their largesse from a hostile spy agency. Just look how communistic (not only socialist) her dole outs are. Empowered by the Communist Party of Canada. I represent myself as Intelligence Chief, Communist Party of Canada in the press. Nobody among its leaders are belying this instead they regale on this representations. But of course, my loyalty goes to Canadian Forces.



I'm sorry??? Could you verify any (or even just one...) of the things you posted?  Surely as Int Chief for the Communist Party of Canada you must have some good sources?


----------



## Blackadder1916 (25 Jan 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> You should be. I am just back from a quick shopping trip and on the radio news, was presented with Trudeau jr.'s statement to the press whereby he "fully supports" the women who came out against Mr. Brown and condemns him, but almost immediately after, waffles an "I have not had the chance to review that situation and can't comment" when a journalist just brought out the fact that exact similar accusations have now been levelled against one of his minister, the Minister for Sports Kent Herr.
> 
> In the words of Yoda, to someone claiming not to be afraid: "You will be!"  :nod:



The antics of the Prime Minister is not "democracy" but "politics".  Eventually, the population will tire of him and another idiot will take his place (frankly, I have little respect for any politician, of any stripe or party).  Time, that is the secret sauce of democracy; sooner or later, the electorate decides it's time for someone else.  In the case of Mr. Brown, it is likely that he has run his course; whether it is fair or not matters not in politics.  In the case of Mr. Hehr, that may still to be decided but it will likely be that he too is done, though playing the disability card may lessen the impact.  After all, while he is accused of crude behaviour, so far I've not seen anything similar to one of the accusations against Mr. Brown in which it is alleged that one of his accusers performed oral sex and perhaps not entirely consensually.


----------



## Jarnhamar (25 Jan 2018)

benitod said:
			
		

> It has been outstanding and conclusive precedent under the law that "a ten year delay in filing a criminal complaint for assault or sexual harassment renders it null and void on the basis of acquiescence and consent." Wynne has lots of illegitimate backers in the intelligence community like people who obtain their largesse from a hostile spy agency. Just look how communistic (not only socialist) her dole outs are. Empowered by the Communist Party of Canada. I represent myself as Intelligence Chief, Communist Party of Canada in the press. Nobody among its leaders are belying this instead they regale on this representations. But of course, my loyalty goes to Canadian Forces.



Have you seen my new umbrella, comrade?


----------



## pbi (25 Jan 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> This is just the over correction happening.
> 
> For years women struggled to get justice for sexual assaults and sexual harassment in the court system,  with the conviction rates for such offenses being incredibly low.  When two people are in private and it its a he said,  she said,  its hard to convict without reasonable doubt.
> 
> Now with the #metoo women don't need to meet the burden of proof,  they can just ruin people with the accusation, and while it is a overreach and honestly mob justice, don't forget that it stems from years of women feeling that the court system will never get them justice for the abuse they have suffered.



My earlier reservations aside, there is a good bit of truth to this, as my female relatives are quick to remind me.  There was a time in this country (now thankfully gone) when men could do just about anything they wanted to their wives, daughters or female employees/subordinates and nothing would ever have been done about it. Kind of like Russian society still today. This reaction we see in #metoo, etc. is another example of backlash against excessive and bad behaviour, with all the blind damage and anger that goes along with backlashes.


----------



## pbi (25 Jan 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> I wonder the same thing.



And, for the views of another great General (and Prime Minister), here is the Duke of Wellington on party politics:

"..._I never felt any inclination to dive deeply in party Politics; I may be wrong but the conviction in my mind is that all the misfortunes of the present reign, the loss of America, the success of the French revolution etc, etc., are to be attributed in a great degree to the Spirit of Party in England;& the feeling I have for a decided party politician is rather that of contempt than any other. I am very certain that his wishes & efforts for his party very frequently prevent him from doing that which is best for the Country; & induce him to take up the cause of foreign powers against Britain, because the cause of Britain is managed by his party opponents..."_

Both Washington and Wellington were great commanders and leaders of their nations. Were they right? Would democracy be better off if members voted solely for their conscience, or the wishes of their constituents, and not for the platform of a party?


----------



## jollyjacktar (25 Jan 2018)

Welcome to the new McCarthy era of the 20 teens.  Everything old is new again.  Men will be running scared for some time to come.


----------



## Jarnhamar (25 Jan 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Welcome to the new McCarthy era of the 20 teens.  Everything old is new again.  Men will be running scared for some time to come.



I seem to recall the CAF in the late 90's early 2000's was a bit like this.

Our Prime Minister virtue signalling, again, isn't helping. Again he should wait for a bit of clarity before getting involved. ie Boyle ie hijab cutting hoax.


----------



## mariomike (25 Jan 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> And, for the views of another great General (and Prime Minister), here is the Duke of Wellington on party politics:
> 
> "..._I never felt any inclination to dive deeply in party Politics; I may be wrong but the conviction in my mind is that all the misfortunes of the present reign, the loss of America, the success of the French revolution etc, etc., are to be attributed in a great degree to the Spirit of Party in England;& the feeling I have for a decided party politician is rather that of contempt than any other. I am very certain that his wishes & efforts for his party very frequently prevent him from doing that which is best for the Country; & induce him to take up the cause of foreign powers against Britain, because the cause of Britain is managed by his party opponents..."_
> 
> Both Washington and Wellington were great commanders and leaders of their nations. Were they right? Would democracy be better off if members voted solely for their conscience, or the wishes of their constituents, and not for the platform of a party?



Or, to paraphrase LaGuardia, there is no Liberal or Conservative way of fixing a sewer.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (25 Jan 2018)

benitod said:
			
		

> I for one was accepting some of their largesse with no criminal intent. I give them to charity. One hostile spy agency course their "payments" through los cubanos. It gets deposited in a bank. We tempt DGSE to steal them. Then CSIS steals them from DGSE. They all go to charity. But I cannot name names! Do you want me to die? Moderator, the question was answered candidly. I have no way going about not answering the question. Before I forget, sir, there is an administrative case against me for insubordination in CSIS. Why? "Stoop down to our level, DV. You can disguise yourself as a transgender like me"- "rank and file" of the Communist Party of Canada.



Has someone stopped their meds against medical advice?


----------



## dapaterson (25 Jan 2018)

Kent Hehr has resigned from cabinet.


----------



## jollyjacktar (25 Jan 2018)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Kent Hehr has resigned from cabinet.



Ah well, he didn't have a leg to stand on.


----------



## larry Strong (25 Jan 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.




Weell, maybe not...





> Out of an awful situation, the party has an opening to equip itself with a stronger, more likable candidate


....

http://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/patrick-brown-resignation-1.4503051

Time will tell after all, I believe someone up thread mentioned Caroline Mulroney......

Interesting times indeed....


Cheers
Larry


----------



## Rifleman62 (26 Jan 2018)

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/trudeau-defends-ambassador-under-fire-for-china-trade-comments/article37741264/

*Trudeau defends ambassador under fire for China trade comments* 23 Jan 18

Extract: 1. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is defending his envoy to Beijing who says Canada now has more in common with China's authoritarian regime than with the United States under President Donald Trump."In some important policy areas such as the environment, global warming, free trade, globalization, the policies of the government of Canada are closer to the policies of the government of China than they are to U.S. policies," Mr. McCallum said Sunday during a visit by Quebec Premier Philippe Couillard.

             2. Conservative foreign-affairs critic Erin O'Toole called the Canadian ambassador's comments rash, saying they risk straining relations with the U.S. government during a difficult renegotiation of the North American free-trade agreement. "To suggest we have more in common with China than the United States at a time when we are trying to remind the U.S. of the special relationship is reckless," Mr. O'Toole said.

             3. NDP MP Nathan Cullen described Mr. McCallum's comments as facile, saying the average Canadian might be taken aback to hear a government representative saying this country is more in line with "Communist China than our American cousins." The political direction and policies across 50 American states are far closer to Canada's than China's, he argued. "We can't go from best buds because Obama is in office to the U.S. is worse than China because Trump takes over. ... America is a lot more than Donald Trump," Mr. Cullen said.



Meanwhile, as POTUS is seeking new business for the USA at Davos, our PM is up to his usual boring shtick. At least he wore a jacket occasionally instead of rolled sleeves, loose tie.

https://www.thestar.com/business/opinion/2018/01/23/how-justin-trudeau-missed-his-moment-at-davos.html
*
How Justin Trudeau missed his moment at Davos* - 23 Jan 18

Extract: 1. While the prime minister opened his remarks with trade, and offered a nod toward “progressive values in the context of globalization,” he then veered into a montage of greatest hits on gender parity, diversity, the imbalance of corporate boards, single mothers, the Canada child benefit, future women’s summits, the need for women in STEM, the urgency to create more well-paying middle class jobs. And much more.


----------



## Altair (26 Jan 2018)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/trudeau-defends-ambassador-under-fire-for-china-trade-comments/article37741264/
> 
> *Trudeau defends ambassador under fire for China trade comments* 23 Jan 18
> 
> ...


Lets break it down


> In some important policy areas


Some policy areas, not government type





> such as the environment


China is in the Paris accord, USA is not, fair enough





> , global warming


 China accepts that it's happening, current US administration not so much





> , free trade


 China is looking to expand their trade deals, as is Canada, the USA walked away from TPP, started the whole NAFTA re negotiations, and they will be the ones to walk away from the current deal, fair point





> globalization


 Not buying that one, that's a miss





> , the policies of the government of Canada are closer to the policies of the government of China than they are to U.S. policies


Seems like they are, policy wise.

Still not the smartest thing to say while NAFTA talks are going on, but on the other hand, when the president is tweeting that the deal is the worst ever and he will probably tear it up all the while imposing duties on softwood, airplanes, newsprint and the like and pretty much engaging in a trade war before the deal is even dead, I really don't think anything the ambassador to china says really moves the needle all that much.

As for the PM in Davos versus trump, I'll look at it this way. Trump is there looking for new business for the USA, Canada is set to sign a deal that will give Canadian business access to 500 million people, shortly after signing another deal that gave Canadian business access to a additional 500 million people. Actions speak louder than words.


----------



## pbi (26 Jan 2018)

I agree somewhat with Altair here. While we definitely need to be wise and careful in our dealings with the US on free trade ( a vital national interest for us, IMHO), we are a sovereign nation and we should act like one. We have known for decades that we would do well to diversify our trade away from total dependency on the US: now with a fickle and apparently ill-informed President in office, that makes even more sense.

Dealing happily with questionable regimes is realpolitik and pragmatism: the US is and has often been one of the world's greatest practitioners of this. Instead of silly moralizing finger-wagging at tge Chinese(who don't really GAF what we think anyway) we should be figuring out to engineer the best possible deal for  Canada.


----------



## Rifleman62 (26 Jan 2018)

A sovereign nation protects it's self and does not rely on another sovereign nation for protection.


----------



## pbi (26 Jan 2018)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> A sovereign nation protects it's self and does not rely on another sovereign nation for protection.


And "protecting" ourselves economically is how we can pay for protecting ourselves militarily. The economy is the engine of everything.


----------



## Rifleman62 (26 Jan 2018)

It's the economy stupid. Realize that. Look at the economy of occupied Europe in the Second World War. Who did that benefit? No free country; no free economy.

A sovereign nation protects it's self and does not rely on another sovereign nation for protection.


----------



## YZT580 (26 Jan 2018)

From Trading Economics. Com  Canada's trade deficit increased to CAD 2.5 billion in November of 2017, widening from CAD 1.6 billion in the previous month and above market expectations of a CAD 1.2 billion deficit. Imports went up 5.8 percent month-over-month and exports rose 3.7 percent, both due largely to increased activity in the automotive industry. Balance of Trade in Canada averaged 1387.84 CAD Million from 1971 until 2017, reaching an all time high of 8524.80 CAD Million in January of 2001 and a record low of -4127.40 CAD Million in September of 2016.  

What is the good of having a free trade agreement when it is all one way?  If we keep losing manufacturing jobs the only thing that we will have left to trade is intellectual property and that will only last until off-shore enterprises finish their catch-up.  Notice I said finish, they have already started.


----------



## Altair (26 Jan 2018)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> It,s the economy stupid. Realize that. Look at the economy of occupied Europe in the Second World War. Who did that benefit. No free country; no free economy.
> 
> A sovereign nation protects it's self and does not rely on another sovereign nation for protection.


funny how few trully sovereign nations there are in the world  ;D


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (26 Jan 2018)

Canoe News service has just reported that Bombardier has won before the US Commerce tribunal by a unanimous decision against Boeing and that it has cancelled completely the approx. 300% tariff that was imposed by the lower authority.


Does this mean we'll see those pesky Super-Hornets soon ?   ;D


----------



## Retired AF Guy (26 Jan 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Canoe News service has just reported that Bombardier has won before the US Commerce tribunal by a unanimous decision against Boeing and that it has cancelled completely the approx. 300% tariff that was imposed by the lower authority.
> 
> 
> Does this mean we'll see those pesky Super-Hornets soon ?   ;D



From the Canadian Press:



> Bombardier wins resounding victory against Boeing over C Series jet
> 
> By Ross Marowits — Jan 26 2018
> 
> ...



 Article Link


----------



## mariomike (26 Jan 2018)

Retired AF Guy:

"Lengthy posts and fully quoted articles are posted here."
https://milnet.ca/forums/threads/127284.0.html


----------



## pbi (26 Jan 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Canoe News service has just reported that Bombardier has won before the US Commerce tribunal by a unanimous decision against Boeing and that it has cancelled completely the approx. 300% tariff that was imposed by the lower authority.
> 
> 
> Does this mean we'll see those pesky Super-Hornets soon ?   ;D


This is great news, if very surprising. I assume Trump will soon be tweeting threats against the US International Trade Commission over this.


----------



## pbi (26 Jan 2018)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> It's the economy stupid. Realize that. Look at the economy of occupied Europe in the Second World War. Who did that benefit? No free country; no free economy.
> 
> A sovereign nation protects it's self and does not rely on another sovereign nation for protection.


Yes it certainly is the economy (I don't know who the "stupid" is you're talking to...). It's the economy that pays for everything. If I was the Liberal Govt right now, I would immediately slash corporate taxes below US levels, even if we suck up some initial and temporary fiscal pain. Then, I would do everything I could to encourage the  growth of business both large and small, while still providing reasonable protection for workers and the environment. I am NOT talking about turning the clock backwards.

If we want to provide more opportunities for women, aboriginals and new Canadians (all excellent goals IMHO) then we have to have a vibrant economy to allow that to happen. No economy, no opportunities.

Canada is an excellent place to live, and it can be a very good place to do business, if the Govt of the day keeps its eye on the economic ball first, and social goals later.


----------



## Rifleman62 (26 Jan 2018)

And, the Carbon Tax??????

PBI: 





> (I don't know who the "stupid" is you're talking to...).



It's the expression. For sure not aimed at you .


> "It's the economy, stupid" is a slight variation of the phrase "The economy, stupid", which James Carville had coined as a campaign strategist of Bill Clinton's successful 1992 presidential campaign against sitting president George H. W. Bush.


----------



## pbi (26 Jan 2018)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> And, the Carbon Tax??????
> 
> PBI:
> It's the expression. For sure not aimed at you .


 :facepalm: :facepalm: OK, now I remember. Too many aluminum messtins, I guess.


----------



## Good2Golf (27 Jan 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> This is great news, if very surprising. I assume Trump will soon be tweeting threats against the US International Trade Commission over this.



Perhaps surprising if one didn't consider the influence of a number of key state leaders, including Kay Ivey (R-AL).  :nod:

Regards,
G2G


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (28 Jan 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> As for the PM in Davos versus trump, I'll look at it this way. Trump is there looking for new business for the USA, Canada is set to sign a deal that will give Canadian business access to 500 million people, shortly after signing another deal that gave Canadian business access to a additional 500 million people. Actions speak louder than words.



Great....we now expect our businesses to compete against slave labour on a free trade even plane?


----------



## Altair (28 Jan 2018)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> Great....we now expect our businesses to compete against slave labour on a free trade even plane?


we do it now with Mexico. Canada has done fine.


----------



## jollyjacktar (28 Jan 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> we do it now with Mexico. Canada has done fine.


Sure we have.  Just ask all those workers at Caterpillar etc whose jobs went down to Mexico.

 :sarcasm:


----------



## pbi (28 Jan 2018)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> Great....we now expect our businesses to compete against slave labour on a free trade even plane?


My concern also, although in general I'm in favour of Free Trade because we need to be able to sell our products as widely as we can. I have some family members who work in manufacturing in Ontario and I wonder what is going to happen to them.  I live in Eastern Ontario, which is a region that has suffered a serious loss of manufacturing in the last few decades. Trenton, Brockville, Kingston, Smith Falls, Napanee, Prescott and Cornwall all come to mind. Around here you can see what happens when a plant shuts down and goes to West Virginia or Arkansas or Mexico.

I don't think we can compete against the low-end industrial jobs where low-skilled foreign workers making peanuts (by our standards) are cranking stuff out. Canadian (and American) workers aren't prepared to live on those wages, nor should they be. But, at the same time, are  we prepared to pay 100 bucks more for an item in order to keep our fellow Canadians in industrial jobs? Or would we all rather go to Walmart or shop cross border and get it at half the price? There is lots of blame to go around.

Our target (I think) has to be more like the Germans: quality over quantity. This will require some investments in education and training but I don't see too many other options.


----------



## Piece of Cake (28 Jan 2018)

The current Canadian unemployment rate is 5.7%.  We have not seen a rate this low in almost 45 years. With all the jobs we have lost to developing and under-developed nations (lower paying jobs), we have gained in higher paying jobs.  It is sad that hard working Canadians and their families suffer when factories close and move, however there are provincial and federal programs to assist with re-training and income subsidization. These programs help those who have been affected to re-enter the labour force at a higher wage.


----------



## pbi (28 Jan 2018)

Piece of Cake said:
			
		

> The current Canadian unemployment rate is 5.7%.  We have not seen a rate this low in almost 45 years. With all the jobs we have lost to developing and underdeveloped nations (lower paying jobs), we have gained in higher paying jobs.  It is sad that hard working Canadians and their families suffer when factories close and move, however there are provincial and federal programs to assist with retraining and income subsidization. These programs help those who have been affected to reenter the labour force at a higher wage.



Well that sounds good but I think the statistics might be somewhat blunt instruments.  First, I might ask, what sort of jobs? Jobs that can keep towns and cities alive and vibrant, with people buying homes and cars and stuff? Next, I might say "Higher paying jobs for whom?" The people who lost it all when the mill shut down? Or a select group in larger centres?
Then, I wouldn't say that it's "sad" that "..hard working Canadians and their families suffer when factories close and move..." I'd say it's a tragedy that has far reaching consequences from declining municipal tax bases to increased social problems to soaring rates of substance abuse, and not forgetting the political alienation of a whole class of otherwise solid people (the US equivalent of which which boosted Trump into power)

Finally, it is well to speak of helping these people through various government programs (and I do support them in principle) but all that great government largess has to be paid for by something. In my limited (and admittedly unschooled...) understanding, that thing is a solid, diverse economy which includes all Canadians, not just a few.


----------



## Rifleman62 (28 Jan 2018)

pbi:





> But, at the same time, are  we prepared to pay 100 bucks more for an item in order to keep our fellow Canadians in industrial jobs?



Not exactly industrial jobs, but think of all dairy and poultry products, Canadians already pay the extra.


----------



## Piece of Cake (28 Jan 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> Well that sounds good but I think the statistics might be somewhat blunt instruments.  First, I might ask, what sort of jobs? Jobs that can keep towns and cities alive and vibrant, with people buying homes and cars and stuff? Next, I might say "Higher paying jobs for whom?" The people who lost it all when the mill shut down? Or a select group in larger centres?
> Then, I wouldn't say that it's "sad" that "..hard working Canadians and their families suffer when factories close and move..." I'd say it's a tragedy that has far reaching consequences from declining municipal tax bases to increased social problems to soaring rates of substance abuse, and not forgetting the political alienation of a whole class of otherwise solid people (the US equivalent of which which boosted Trump into power)
> 
> Finally, it is well to speak of helping these people through various government programs (and I do support them in principle) but all that great government largess has to be paid for by something. In my limited (and admittedly unschooled...) understanding, that thing is a solid, diverse economy which includes all Canadians, not just a few.



PBI you raise some interesting points.  I would like to point out that the majority of Canadians are better off now than 10, 20 or even 50 years ago.  I mentioned the unemployment rate in my last post.  I would also like to point out that home ownership has increased from 60.3 to 69.0 from 1971 until 2011. http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs-enm/2011/as-sa/99-014-x/2011002/c-g/c-g01-eng.cfm   Do we as a society have issues that we need to address? Sure.  Are we addressing such issues.  Yes. Will Canadian society continue to get better? Yes.  In fact, I would argue that there is a positive relationship between economic growth and social wellness.


----------



## jollyjacktar (28 Jan 2018)

I think your home ownership is going to take a serious nosedive.  The new rules and outrageous home prices in numerous markets are going to close out many a new home buyer.  My co-workers whom are from Esquimalt have been discussing the present state there.  It doesn't look good.  And to add insult to injury, the vacancy rate is pretty well zero.  Even if you could afford the rent.


----------



## AbdullahD (28 Jan 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> I think your home ownership is going to take a serious nosedive.  The new rules and outrageous home prices in numerous markets are going to close out many a new home buyer.  My co-workers whom are from Esquimalt have been discussing the present state there.  It doesn't look good.  And to add insult to injury, the vacancy rate is pretty well zero.  Even if you could afford the rent.



With Toronto and the lower mainland real estate sales easing, potentially rising interest rates that could bankrupt a lot of over leveraged home owners.. I would not be surprised to see a nose dive in home ownership too and possibly a ripple effect to a pull back in the TSX due to less new construction, reits potentially under water, bankruptcies etc...


----------



## ballz (28 Jan 2018)

The same arguments about free trade ruing our standard of living are the same arguments used to assert that automation / technology are going to ruin our standard of living.

Both raise our standard of living.

The problem is, while it's easy to quantify the jobs lost due to free trade or automation, and they catch your eye and pull at your heartstrings, it's much harder to quantify the jobs gained from heightened consumer spending power and competitive industries who benefit from the lower cost of doing business now that they can get inputs for cheaper. This is because the numbers of job gains are spread out across various industries and occur over time as an adaptation to the new prevailing conditions.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (28 Jan 2018)

Yup.....McJobs


----------



## PPCLI Guy (28 Jan 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> But, at the same time, are  we prepared to pay 100 bucks more for an item in order to keep our fellow Canadians in industrial jobs? Or would we all rather go to Walmart or shop cross border and get it at half the price? There is lots of blame to go around.



For the win.  Much easier to blame "the government" or "free trade" than to own any of it ourselves.  How many union workers take Uber instead of a cab?  How any people "scoop" music, videos etc off the internet rather than pay the full price.  How many will pay contractors off the books to save some money?  How many industrial workers by finished products at Walmart? 

It is, essentially, a closed system....and the system now reaches from Cornwall to China, from Trenton to India.


----------



## ballz (28 Jan 2018)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> Yup.....McJobs



What, is everybody entitled to be a doctor now too? You're assertion is probably incorrect although I haven't seen any solid/convincing empirical data one way or another.

Anything Canada is competitive in, it is never on costs. Someone losing their job at Caterpillar is still a skilled person and those industries that remain competitive and are now more competitive require skilled labour and require more in order to take advantage of the new conditions. There will always be low-paying jobs, because we will always want low-skilled labour to cook us hamburgers. We'll have more of those too in an economy that is efficient, which is also a good thing.

I wish someone would have tracked those 3000 workers at Caterpillar and could report in 10 years "where they are now." I'd be wiling to be it's not McDonald's.

But you're probably right, I don't know why we don't just close up our borders completely and go at it alone, supply manage all commodities, the whole nine yards. I'm sure that would be great for our standard of living. I already love paying 300% of the market price for dairy and eggs.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (28 Jan 2018)

I would argue the change in homeownership rates is more directly caused by the slacking off of the Mortgage requirements than anything else. Many people are barely affording their houses because of the lessened requirements and the large debt economy we now have (also why as mentioned they are tightening up the standards again). All it takes is the interest rate to go up one or two percent and many will be unable to afford their houses.


----------



## Altair (28 Jan 2018)

ballz said:
			
		

> What, is everybody entitled to be a doctor now too? You're assertion is probably incorrect although I haven't seen any solid/convincing empirical data one way or another.
> 
> Anything Canada is competitive in, it is never on costs. Someone losing their job at Caterpillar is still a skilled person and those industries that remain competitive and are now more competitive require skilled labour and require more in order to take advantage of the new conditions. There will always be low-paying jobs, because we will always want low-skilled labour to cook us hamburgers. We'll have more of those too in an economy that is efficient, which is also a good thing.
> 
> ...


Some people like taking a dump over new developments.

I'm sure these were the same arguments made when NAFTA came into effect and I think most can agree we are better off with NAFTA than without it.


----------



## a_majoor (28 Jan 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> I think your home ownership is going to take a serious nosedive.  The new rules and outrageous home prices in numerous markets are going to close out many a new home buyer.  My co-workers whom are from Esquimalt have been discussing the present state there.  It doesn't look good.  And to add insult to injury, the vacancy rate is pretty well zero.  Even if you could afford the rent.



Part of the problem is induced by interference in the markets by government. I sat in a London City council meeting where they referenced the Ontario Government's plan of "up and in" (paraphrase, but the Ontario Liberals have operated for several years encouraging cities to build high rises in the core rather than suburbs). This was actually in reference to an issue involving a shared water treatment resource, several councillors were indignant that the small centre outside London might build another 200 units and attract buyers looking for houses rather than living in the city. And development permits are being squeezed since the amount of subdivisions being allowed has drastically declined. Fewer houses artificially increases demand and prices of the remaining ones.

Sadly, this situation might continue for decades until the Boomers die off and the number of new buyers is lower than the number of existing houses and units.


----------



## FJAG (28 Jan 2018)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> Part of the problem is induced by interference in the markets by government. I sat in a London City council meeting where they referenced the Ontario Government's plan of "up and in" (paraphrase, but the Ontario Liberals have operated for several years encouraging cities to build high rises in the core rather than suburbs). This was actually in reference to an issue involving a shared water treatment resource, several councillors were indignant that the small centre outside London might build another 200 units and attract buyers looking for houses rather than living in the city. And development permits are being squeezed since the amount of subdivisions being allowed has drastically declined. Fewer houses artificially increases demand and prices of the remaining ones.
> 
> Sadly, this situation might continue for decades until the Boomers die off and the number of new buyers is lower than the number of existing houses and units.



Just when you figure out what's going on they change the rules on you.

"City taking bloom off highrise boom?"

http://www.lfpress.com/2018/01/26/city-taking-bloom-off-highrise-boom

 :cheers:


----------



## mariomike (28 Jan 2018)

Piece of Cake said:
			
		

> The current Canadian unemployment rate is 5.7%.  We have not seen a rate this low in almost 45 years.



I saw this,

"Employment gains were concentrated in part-time work"
https://tradingeconomics.com/canada/unemployment-rate
Canada Unemployment Rate  1966-2018 

I do not know the statistics - so, I could be wrong - but it seemed to me it was more common 45 years ago to join an employer full-time immediately after graduation. And stay there for your whole career.


----------



## Piece of Cake (29 Jan 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> I saw this,
> 
> "Employment gains were concentrated in part-time work"
> https://tradingeconomics.com/canada/unemployment-rate
> ...


For full disclosure here is the whole article.

The unemployment rate in Canada fell to 5.7 percent in December of 2017 from 5.9 percent in November and well below market consensus of 6 percent. It is the lowest jobless rate since comparable data became available in January 1976, as the economy added 79,000 jobs. Employment gains were concentrated in part-time work (54.9 thousand) while 23.7 thousand full-time jobs were added. Unemployment Rate in Canada averaged 7.68 percent from 1966 until 2017, reaching an all time high of 13.10 percent in December of 1982 and a record low of 2.90 percent in June of 1966.


----------



## a_majoor (29 Jan 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> Just when you figure out what's going on they change the rules on you.
> 
> "City taking bloom off highrise boom?"
> 
> ...



This city council is giving us whiplash. I can only hope for the best when voters go to the polls this fall, but am expecting the worst.....


----------



## pbi (29 Jan 2018)

There are so many good points posted above that if I did "Quotes" it would be three pages long.  Some of them certainly made me think about my own position. So I have tried to rationalize my thoughts:

-I'm not a Luddite. I benefit from technology as much as any other middle class Canadian. I get it that technology marches on and that industry and business are driven primarily by the profit motive,. Roger so far;

-I also understand that there is evidence that in some cases robotics can increase  the number of people who have jobs at that particular company. I have a person in my family circle who has been directly involved in such a case;

-what I worry about is the impact on tens if not hundreds of thousands of working Canadians who must, for a number of reasons, make their living and feed their families doing what we may dismiss as "Mcjobs", or service jobs. These are the people whose jobs are the low-hanging fruit for robotic or digital replacement and who are, I think, least equipped to adapt. Given the likely pace of any change that is driven by maximization of profit, what happens to them?; and

-is anybody thinking seriously about the impacts on real people and the communities they live in? Or is it just "All Hail Technology"? (Ok now I do sound like a Luddite)


----------



## mariomike (29 Jan 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Ontario isn't the only province with a PC leader going down in flames today.



Saw this on CPtwenty-Ford at noon.

Doug ( Ford Nation ) to the rescue.
https://twitter.com/CP24/status/958023955041931264

January 28, 2018 

Ontario PC Party president Rick Dykstra resigns after sexual assault accusation
http://www.macleans.ca/news/canada/ontario-pc-party-president-rick-dykstra-resigns-after-sexual-assault-accusation/


----------



## SeaKingTacco (29 Jan 2018)

This is a train wreck.

Wynne has got to be the luckiest politician in Canada.

She and the OLP can run Ontario intothe dirt and she will still get re-elected.


----------



## Altair (29 Jan 2018)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> This is a train wreck.
> 
> Wynne has got to be the luckiest politician in Canada.
> 
> She and the OLP can run Ontario intothe dirt and she will still get re-elected.


that says more about the Ontario PCs and NDP than it does about the liberals. 

I still think mulrooney beats wynne though. Whether mulrooney can win the leadership is another question


----------



## jollyjacktar (29 Jan 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> that says more about the Ontario PCs and NDP than it does about the liberals.
> 
> I still think mulrooney beats wynne though. Whether mulrooney can win the leadership is another question



Then perhaps she could move over Federally and take out Trudeau once Scheer thunders in like a lawn dart.


----------



## brihard (29 Jan 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Then perhaps she could move over Federally and take out Trudeau once Scheer thunders in like a lawn dart.



She could emerge as a player. My money is still on McKay reappearing.

And Ford for Ontario PC? Ugh, no. The PCs bloody well better be able to do better than that.


----------



## mariomike (29 Jan 2018)

Brihard said:
			
		

> And Ford for Ontario PC?



A rich man's son slamming the elites to announce a Conservative leadership run from Mom’s basement.

Last week he was running for Mayor of Toronto ( again ). This week he wants to be Premier.


----------



## Underway (29 Jan 2018)

There are rumblings in the Ontario PC party to just let Wynn win the election.  This is because of a belief in a turn in economic fortunes (between housing increases, NAFTA issues, US tax reductions etc...), and thus it might be better to be the party to come in a clean up the mess then inherit the mess and pay the piper for someone else's mistakes.  Wish I could find the article I read that in.... sorry no ref.


----------



## pbi (29 Jan 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> QUOTE
> 
> A rich man's son slamming the elites to announce a Conservative leadership run from Mom’s basement.
> 
> Last week he was running for Mayor of Toronto ( again ). This week he wants to be Premier.



My sentiments exactly. I don't know why principled, rational conservatism has this terrible tendency to drift into the swamp of bumper-sticker populism instead of holding some kind of high ground. It should not be hard to defeat the Liberals without pitch fork waving and acting like a 19 year old at a tailgate party.


----------



## dapaterson (29 Jan 2018)

On the plus side, with legalization looming, at least with Doug Ford at the helm we could be reasonably certain that the LCBO will turn a profit on weed...


----------



## Jarnhamar (1 Feb 2018)

Speaking of the LCBO, I'm starting to dig the Liberals style.

http://nationalpost.com/news/politics/400-bottles-of-wine-on-the-plane-federal-politicians-have-access-to-limitless-alcohol-on-government-flights



> During Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s week-long official trip to China last December, more than $2,200 worth of alcohol — 121 bottles of wine and 241 cans of beer — was consumed on flights. That amount translates to about two bottles of wine and four cans of beer for each of the roughly 56 passengers for the flights to and from China.



If they carried whiskey I'd consider signing up.


----------



## Good2Golf (1 Feb 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Speaking of the LCBO, I'm starting to dig the Liberals style.
> 
> http://nationalpost.com/news/politics/400-bottles-of-wine-on-the-plane-federal-politicians-have-access-to-limitless-alcohol-on-government-flights
> 
> If they carried whisk*e*y I'd consider signing up.



TFTFY....


----------



## Rifleman62 (1 Feb 2018)

I believe the accompanying media was responsible for most of the consumption considering the haze that envelops most of their reporting of the PM and socks. Either a cunning plan by the LPC or the media living up to it's reputation.


----------



## ModlrMike (1 Feb 2018)

Looks like my prediction is partially correct... Caroline Mulroney and Christine Elliott have announced their intentions to run for leadership of the Ontario PCs. I have to admit that if I were forced to choose I wouldn't know which way to turn. I might give the edge to Ms Elliott, given her experience. So, as of now we have:

Christine Elliott
Caroline Mulroney
Doug Ford


----------



## ModlrMike (1 Feb 2018)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> I believe the accompanying media was responsible for most of the consumption considering the haze that envelops most of their reporting of the PM and socks. Either a cunning plan by the LPC or the media living up to it's reputation.



Both groups need to be careful. I'm not convinced there's a sufficient amount of surplus brain cells in either one.


----------



## Cloud Cover (1 Feb 2018)

Well this looks interesting  op:: 
NDP MP Erin Weir fears harassment allegation against him 'politically motivated'
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/ndp-mp-erin-weir-fears-harassment-allegation-against-him-politically-motivated-1.3785396

Of course it's politically motivated, sheesh!


----------



## Jarnhamar (2 Feb 2018)

https://www.spencerfernando.com/2018/02/02/sickening-trudeau-says-veterans-asking-able-give-right-now/



> Trudeau Says Veterans Are “Asking For More Than We Are Able To Give Right Now”



Yup. Liberals have screamed fiscal conservatism since they took power.


----------



## FJAG (2 Feb 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> https://www.spencerfernando.com/2018/02/02/sickening-trudeau-says-veterans-asking-able-give-right-now/
> 
> Yup. Liberals have screamed fiscal conservatism since they took power.



Guess you run out of money fast when you give $10 million to terrorists.  :tsktsk:

 [cheers]


----------



## Altair (2 Feb 2018)

No credit for the PM walking into BC and tell them that the pipeline is getting built?


----------



## PuckChaser (2 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> No credit for the PM walking into BC and tell them that the pipeline is getting built?


How's that going to work, another Oka? Cutting transfer payments? Legal challenges to take a decade and millions of dollars?


----------



## Altair (3 Feb 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> How's that going to work, another Oka? Cutting transfer payments? Legal challenges to take a decade and millions of dollars?


simply declare the Trans Mountain pipeline a work for the general advantage of Canada under the Constitution Act


----------



## SeaKingTacco (3 Feb 2018)

Ok- lets see that then.


----------



## Kirkhill (3 Feb 2018)

> ...what was promised in the party’s 2015 election platform.
> 
> ... the campaigning Liberals implied that local communities have a veto over such projects, in addition to maintaining that the public needs to trust the regulators that review them.
> 
> “While governments grant permits for resource development, only communities can grant permission,” the platform stated.



http://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/federal-governments-social-licence-for-pipelines-permission-cuts-out-communities


----------



## jollyjacktar (3 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> simply declare the Trans Mountain pipeline a work for the general advantage of Canada under the Constitution Act



 :rofl:


----------



## Altair (3 Feb 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> :rofl:


Well,  the man did go into hostile territory and told a hostile audience that it was getting built,  too bad,  so I don't see why the idea is so far fetched.


----------



## jollyjacktar (3 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> Well,  the man did go into hostime territory and told a hostile audience that it was getting built,  too bad,  so I don't see why the idea is so far fetched.



Because you make it sound like he only needs to utter phrases and the waters will part as they did for Moses and it will lead everyone of us, willingly, to the promised land.  It's like a fairy tale ending whenever he speaks, eh?


----------



## Altair (3 Feb 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Because you make it sound like he only needs to utter phrases and the waters will part as they did for Moses and it will lead everyone of us, willingly, to the promised land.  It's like a fairy tale ending whenever he speaks, eh?


BC pulled this nonsense last week,  maybe it will be a good idea to give the federal government some time to

A)  talk BC down,  letting them know this approach isn't going to work

B) Consult the experts in how best to assert federal authority in the matter.  Nothing worst than rushing to do something only to have done it poorly and having to back down. 

He also needs to do this in a way that won't result in BC becoming a new Alberta for the liberal party.  You know,  a place devoid of any liberal supporters for a generation. 

There really is no rush,  BCs move only limits the amount of oil that can be transported by pipeline,  not the building of the pipeline itself,  so there really is no rush to do anything until the pipeline is built.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (3 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> BC pulled this nonsense last week,  maybe it will be a good idea to give the federal government some time to
> 
> A)  talk BC down,  letting them know this approach isn't going to work
> 
> ...



Why would you want to remove from the list of available remedies the federal Liberal party's Standing Operating Procedure?

 ;D


----------



## Loachman (3 Feb 2018)

When caught between two difficult choices, generally with varying degrees of his own creation, his reaction seems to be dither, misdirect, and/or pull an artificial emergency out of his lowest orifice that requires an expensive solution as in the continuing F35 farce or the Khadr payout.

In this case, he has to break a promise to either Alberta or British Columbia. Where will he lose the most votes?


----------



## Loachman (3 Feb 2018)

http://business.financialpost.com/opinion/lawrence-solomon-canadians-want-a-kinder-gentler-trump-step-forward-andrew-scheer

"With a federal election in Canada coming in less than two years, the fundamentals look good for Scheer. Despite Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s celebrity and Scheer’s obscurity, the Liberals are barely three per cent ahead of the Conservatives - 37 per cent to 33.8 per cent - according to the latest Nanos poll, just above the margin of error. As important, while the U.S. electorate is split between two dominant parties, Canada’s electorate has a major third party, the NDP, that has the potential to bleed votes away from the Liberals, particularly as Trudeau’s star has waned with many of the millennials and lefties that put him in power. In a three-way race, Scheer may not need many more voters than his base to win the next election. But he may get them, as Canadian voters reflect on the boons their counterparts received south of the border.

"Trump won big in the U.S. against all odds. Now that Trump has shown the way, the soft-spoken Scheer has the odds in his favour - a wind at his back thanks to Trump’s proven policies, and without the liability of Trump’s braggadocio."


----------



## Jarnhamar (3 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> *Well,  the man did go into hostile territory and told a hostile audience that it was getting built*,  too bad,  so I don't see why the idea is so far fetched.



Yup that's true. And looking a wounded war vet in the face and saying vets are asking for more than the government is willing able to give while dishing out money for isis reintegration  was ballsy too.


Trudeau's Canadian tour of duty reminds me of a platoon/company commanders hour when they're hit with a barage of serious issues and complaints and they close their notebook and just start nodding their head looking at their watch.


----------



## Journeyman (3 Feb 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Because you make it sound like he only needs to utter phrases and the waters will part as they did for Moses and it will lead everyone of us, willingly, to the promised land.


Not speaking _specifically_  about ANY politician or political party, in any country, but......

People who believe religious dogma as...well, gospel.... seem very similar to people who believe unquestioningly (unthinkingly) in various political dogma. 

    op:


Again, maybe read stuff you don't believe in..... then think about it.


----------



## Kirkhill (3 Feb 2018)

Thou shalt not believe in God.

(Like that, you mean?)  ;D


----------



## AbdullahD (3 Feb 2018)

Oh what I wouldn't do for a conservative PM again. I think a large minority conservative government would be best for Canada due to needing to work with the NDP and Liberals on different issues.. but then again the inability to make snap decisions is not good.. 

I didn't like Harper but this new chap seems promising.. or well at least better then trudeau imo but that's a low bar. Trudeau is far to "multicultural" even if it puts Canadians at risk.. something I can't stomach. 

Abdullah


----------



## Altair (3 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> When caught between two difficult choices, generally with varying degrees of his own creation, his reaction seems to be dither, misdirect, and/or pull an artificial emergency out of his lowest orifice that requires an expensive solution as in the continuing F35 farce or the Khadr payout.
> 
> In this case, he has to break a promise to either Alberta or British Columbia. Where will he lose the most votes?


He has never made a promise to not build pipelines,  thus he has no promise to break with BC.


----------



## Altair (3 Feb 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Yup that's true. And looking a wounded war vet in the face and saying vets are asking for more than the government is willing able to give while dishing out money for isis reintegration  was ballsy too.
> 
> 
> Trudeau's Canadian tour of duty reminds me of a platoon/company commanders hour when they're hit with a barage of serious issues and complaints and they close their notebook and just start nodding their head looking at their watch.


That was Trudeaus excuse,  what was Harpers? 

If I remember correctly,  both leaders have had a jolly ole time screwing wounded vets.


----------



## FSTO (3 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> That was Trudeaus excuse,  what was Harpers?
> 
> If I remember correctly,  both leaders have had a jolly ole time screwing wounded vets.



Fantino was a very poor choice as VA minister but there was improvement starting under O'Toole. 
The Liberals have the ball now and the PM's response at the town hall was pretty cold blooded for a man who is cries at the drop of the hat at every perceived injustice. 

I've said this many a time, the mandarins at VA want you to come back from a deployment one of two ways; not a scratch on you in mind, body and soul or atomized on the battlefield or lost at sea so that they don't have to even pay to get your carcass back to Canada.


----------



## Altair (3 Feb 2018)

FSTO said:
			
		

> Fantino was a very poor choice as VA minister but there was improvement starting under O'Toole.
> The Liberals have the ball now and the PM's response at the town hall was pretty cold blooded for a man who is cries at the drop of the hat at every perceived injustice.


 Harper,  Trudeau,  Fantino O'Toole,  Herr, O'Regan,  all have been battling vets in courts over lifetime benefits.  One can focus on Trudeaus response all they want,  both parties are guilty of penny pinching here. 





> I've said this many a time, the mandarins at VA want you to come back from a deployment one of two ways; not a scratch on you in mind, body and soul or atomized on the battlefield or lost at sea so that they don't have to even pay to get your carcass back to Canada.


I imagine they hope for the former but the latter is rather more efficient from their standpoint.


----------



## FSTO (3 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> Harper,  Trudeau,  Fantino O'Toole,  Herr, O'Regan,  all have been battling vets in courts over lifetime benefits.  One can focus on Trudeaus response all they want,  both parties are guilty of penny pinching here.



The ball is in the current governments court. The PM's response does not give me much hope things will improve under this government either.


----------



## jollyjacktar (3 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> One can focus on Trudeaus response all they want,  both parties are guilty of penny pinching here.



But only one party and leader made promises to get elected that he has no intention of honouring. I suppose, because he has none himself.  And it isn't Harper.

Too bad he doesn't have the same time for us as he does for the Khadr's, Boyle's and returning terrorists.  As long as they're taken care of and paid off...


----------



## Altair (3 Feb 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> But only one party and leader made promises to get elected that he has no intention of honouring. I suppose, because he has none himself.  And it isn't Harper.
> 
> Too bad he doesn't have the same time for us as he does for the Khadr's, Boyle's and returning terrorists.  As long as they're taken care of and paid off...


I remain hopeful the courts side with vets at the end of the day and force the government to do the right thing. 

But at the end of the day,  he has to own it, his broken promise.  At the same time,  he isn't the only one here guilty of screwing over vets.  Its largely a team effort. 

CPC and LPC both support the new legislation  to bring in the new rules. 

CPC starts the fight with the vets fighting for a return to lifelong pentions

LPC continues to fight vets once they take power. 

Doesn't really matter who is in power,  vets are getting the shit end of the stick either way.


----------



## Loachman (3 Feb 2018)

Piece of Cake said:
			
		

> I would like to point out that the majority of Canadians are better off now than 10, 20 or even 50 years ago.



I'd say, as one who can remember "even 50 years ago", that it is not so. My father had a decent but not-unusually-well-paid job. We owned a house (the first was a modest standard row house in England until we moved in 1965; two on that street are on the market for the equivalent of $1.22 million right now) in Stratford in a new subdivision, lacked nothing, and my mother did not have to work. She later took a part-time job because she wanted to buy her own car. My father also had a decent company pension. How many can say the same thing today?

"Better off" may be illusory and fragile:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/economy/canadas-household-debt-to-income-ratio-hits-record-high/article37324237/

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/24/canadas-household-debt-levels-higher-than-any-other-country-report-says.html

www.huffingtonpost.ca/2017/12/14/canadian-household-debt-hits-record-high-as-net-worth-declines_a_23307418/

http://business.financialpost.com/business/canadas-economic-growth-has-come-at-a-price-its-debt-level-is-now-highest-in-the-developed-world

Our current underwhelming prime minister (cbuh) is racking up debt like mad. What happens when interest spikes as it did in the late eighties? I bought my first house in Chalk River in 1989 with an 11.75% mortgage. Fortunately, I only paid $54000.00 for it. I bought my next house in Newmarket for $158000 three years later. Similar houses in the same neighbourhood have recently sold for around $750000.

Paul Martin raided RCMP, PS, and CF pension funds to reduce the federal deficit not so long ago. But nobody would ever do that again when the consequences of his wild spending hit, would he?


----------



## Jarnhamar (3 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> That was Trudeaus excuse,  what was Harpers?
> 
> If I remember correctly,  both leaders have had a jolly ole time screwing wounded vets.



Butwhataboutharper

Harper doesn't need an excuse, he's not in office right now. Nor is he paying 35 million dollars for rapists and murders to get poetry lessons and back rubs. Nor being found guilty ethics breaches.


----------



## Altair (3 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> I'd say, as one who can remember "even 50 years ago", that it is not so. My father had a decent but not-unusually-well-paid job. We owned a house (the first was a modest standard row house in England until we moved in 1965; two on that street are on the market for the equivalent of $1.22 million right now) in Stratford in a new subdivision, lacked nothing, and my mother did not have to work. She later took a part-time job because she wanted to buy her own car. My father also had a decent company pension. How many can say the same thing today?
> 
> "Better off" may be illusory and fragile:
> 
> ...


https://www.google.ca/amp/www.macleans.ca/economy/economicanalysis/we-are-not-heading-to-fiscal-crisis/amp/



> The ultimate measure of the sustainability of fiscal policy is the debt-to-GDP ratio. This ratio compares the size of the debt to our collective ability to pay for it. When this ratio rises, we can get into a spiral where interest costs drive the debt higher, which then leads to more interest costs and we end up in a crisis. Back in 1995, Canada was very close to such a crisis. We had annual deficits around five per cent of GDP, which drove the debt-to-GDP ratio over 65 per cent. With the yield on long-term government bonds then exceeding eight per cent, debt servicing cost grew to a very large six per cent of GDP. The infamous 1995 budget turned the corner by chopping billions from federal spending and raising taxes until budget balance was reached in 1997.
> 
> The current scenario is very different. The 2016 budget projects a deficit of 1.5 per cent of GDP, which will push our debt to GDP ratio up to 32.5 per cent. With today’s long bonds yielding less than two per cent, public debt charges are only 1.3 per cent of GDP. If the Liberal government is able to hold to their plan, the deficit will fall to 0.6 per cent of GDP by 2021 and the debt to GDP ratio will recede to 30.9 per cent. As Stephen Gordon points out, that’s a big “if.” Meeting these Budget 2016 targets will require the Liberal government to have a steely spine and keep tight control of spending.


----------



## Altair (3 Feb 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Butwhataboutharper
> 
> Harper doesn't need an excuse, he's not in office right now. Nor is he paying 35 million dollars for rapists and murders to get poetry lessons and back rubs. Nor being found guilty ethics breaches.


True,  this whole fighting vets in court started the second Trudeau was elected,  how silly of me.


----------



## Rifleman62 (3 Feb 2018)

Altair: 





> ....how silly of me.



You said it.


----------



## Jarnhamar (3 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> True,  this whole fighting vets in court started the second Trudeau was elected,  how silly of me.



Exactly.


----------



## jollyjacktar (3 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> True,  this whole fighting vets in court started the second Trudeau was elected,  how silly of me.


His breaking election promises started the minute he was.  Yes, very silly of you to such a fanboy apologist.


----------



## Loachman (3 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> He has never made a promise to not build pipelines,  thus he has no promise to break with BC.



Perhaps not, technically, but others don't seem to see it quite as technically:

https://globalnews.ca/news/3097871/fact-check-justin-trudeau-break-promise-approving-pipelines/

"Throughout last year’s election campaign and his government’s first year in office, Trudeau has championed the environment, promised to work with First Nations communities and revamp the review process for energy projects.

"He reneged on some of those."

"But in the same breath, Trudeau approved two other projects: Enbridge’s Line 3 (carrying oil from Alberta to Wisconsin) and Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain line (carrying bitumen from Alberta to the B.C. coast).

"Those approvals provoked cries of betrayal, dishonesty and political pandering from environmental groups across the country and opposition MPs in Ottawa, given some promises he’s made."

"Federal NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair said Trudeau “betrayed” British Columbians, many of whom fiercely protested oil conduits running through their province and onto their shores."

"During the election campaign, Trudeau said he would overhaul the National Energy Board and change the process for reviewing energy proposals. He also pledged to work with and consult indigenous communities. He painted himself as a defender of the environment. And he frequently said to voters it’s the communities that grant *permission* - the government can only grant *permits**.

"It’s those promises that have the critics up in arms."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-pipelines-campaign-promises-1.3874933

"New Democrat Leader Tom Mulcair says Trudeau broke a "solemn promise" to Canadians that no pipeline would be approved under the National Energy Board review system put in place by the previous Conservative government."

* Permit http://www.dictionary.com/browse/permit?s=t

noun

8. an authoritative or official certificate of *permission*; license: a fishing permit.
9. a written order granting special *permission* to do something. 
10. *permission*.

- He therefore contradicts himself. Nice hair, though.


----------



## Altair (3 Feb 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> His breaking election promises started the minute he was.  Yes, very silly of you to such a fanboy apologist.


Politicians break promises. I have yet to find one who doesn't. Have you? 

Maybe I just temper my expectations. 

Or maybe I'm a realist and realized that no matter who we elect the vets are getting screwed on this issue.

I'm not particularly happy about it,  but c'est la vie.


----------



## Altair (3 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> Perhaps not, technically, but others don't seem to see it quite as technically:
> 
> https://globalnews.ca/news/3097871/fact-check-justin-trudeau-break-promise-approving-pipelines/
> 
> ...


odd to see you siding with mulcair. 

Regardless, he has for years said that no country with billions of dollars of natural resources in the ground would leave them there. 

He has for years said that that oil will continue to be extracted,  pipeline or not,  and that transporting oil via pipeline is safer and better for the environment than transporting it via rail. 

Anyone who though he wouldn't approve some pipelines wasn't listening to him speak. 

https://www.nationalobserver.com/2016/04/21/news/trudeau-boxes-and-talks-pipelines-new-york-city-video



> At New York University, Trudeau also spoke about how Canada's energy resources shouldn't be demonized, about how transporting oil by rail is much more dangerous than by pipeline, and how it's important to include First Nations' input when it comes to energy projects.


----------



## Loachman (3 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> https://www.google.ca/amp/www.macleans.ca/economy/economicanalysis/we-are-not-heading-to-fiscal-crisis/amp/



That's nice 'n' all, until interests climb to the point where servicing that debt eats up too much to be able to afford. I've lived through a time where that was a huge concern.

https://www.macdonaldlaurier.ca/history-wars-was-trudeau-a-disaster-david-frum-and-lawrence-martin-debate/

"Canada today is a very successful country. It has suffered less from the  global economic crisis than any other major economy. So Canadians may be tempted to be philosophical about disasters in their own past. Hasn't it all come out  right in the end?

"But I want to stress: Canada's achievement overcoming Pierre Trudeau's legacy  should not inure Canadians to how disastrous that legacy was.

"Three subsequent important prime ministers - Brian Mulroney, Jean Chrétien  and Stephen Harper - invested their energies cleaning up the wreckage left by  Pierre Trudeau. The work has taken almost 30 years. Finally, and at long last,  nobody speculates anymore about Canada defaulting on its debt, or splitting  apart, or being isolated from all its major allies.

"Yet through most of the adult lives of most people reading this, people in  Canada and outside Canada did worry about those things. And as you enjoy the  peace, stability and comparative prosperity of Canada in the 2010s, just  consider - this is how Canadians felt in the middle 1960s. Now imagine a  political leader coming along and out of ignorance and arrogance despoiling all  this success. Not because the leader faced some overwhelming crisis where it was  hard to see the right answer. But utterly unnecessarily. Out of a clear blue  sky.

"Pierre Trudeau took office at a moment when commodity prices were rising  worldwide. Good policy-makers recognize that commodity prices fall as well as  rise. Yet between 1969 and 1979 - through two majority governments and one  minority - Trudeau tripled federal spending.

"In 1981-'82, Canada plunged into recession, the worst since the Second World  War. Trudeau's already big deficits exploded to a point that Canada's lenders  worried about default. Trudeau's Conservative successor, Brian Mulroney,  balanced Canada's operating budget after 1984. But to squeeze out Trudeau-era  inflation, the Bank of Canada had raised real interest rates very high. Mulroney  could not keep up with the debt payments. The debt compounded, the deficits  grew, the Bank hiked rates again - and Canada toppled into an even worse  recession in 1992. Trudeau's next successors, Liberals this time, squeezed even  tighter, raising taxes, and leaving Canadians through the 1990s working harder and harder with no real increase in their standard of living. Do Canadians understand how many of their difficulties of the 1990s originated in the 1970s?  They should. To repay Trudeau's debt, federal governments reduced transfers to  provinces. Provinces restrained spending. And these restraints had real  consequences for real people: more months in pain for heart patients, more  months of immobility for patients awaiting hip replacements."

Y'all really, really do not want a rerun of that.

Anyway, the initial point was the claim that people have it better now than fifty years ago, which I dispute. National debt is one problem, or quickly _*could be*_ again; personal/household debt is another. Even a slight increase in interest rates could tip more than a few people over a financial cliff.

And that would be the start of an avalanche.


----------



## Loachman (3 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> odd to see you siding with mulcair.



Since when does quoting somebody equate to siding with them, either in general or just on the topic of the quote?

I just quoted _you_ - don't feel too flattered by that.[/quote]

As for the rest, it is irrelevant to my original post.

Whatever he does, pipeline-wise, he pisses somebody off, either Alberta or BC, along with natives and assorted envirotwits.

He will side, as I said, with whichever faction costs him the fewest votes.

And avoiding more vote losses is the best that he can hope for, these days. His support level can only continue to slide as he annoys more and more people.


----------



## Altair (3 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> That's nice 'n' all, until interests climb to the point where servicing that debt eats up too much to be able to afford. I've lived through a time where that was a huge concern.
> 
> https://www.macdonaldlaurier.ca/history-wars-was-trudeau-a-disaster-david-frum-and-lawrence-martin-debate/
> 
> ...


100 percent agree,  Canadians on a whole are cutting it too close financially. Interest rates rising is going to hurt a lot of budgets. 

I simply don't buy that the feds are spending out of their minds. Current defecits are nowhere close in scale to the 90


----------



## Altair (3 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> Since when does quoting somebody equate to siding with them, either in general or just on the topic of the quote?
> 
> I just quoted _you_ - don't feel too flattered by that.
> 
> ...


Correct me if I'm wrong,  but don't most governments sag in support at the middle point of their term?


----------



## Loachman (3 Feb 2018)

I'm not sure about most, but it's certainly not unheard of. I tired of both federal Conservative governments (during my time) well before their ends - and all Liberal governments before they even began.

Sunny Ways seems to be annoying more and more people than even I expected lately, though, as they wake up. He'll be down to the last diehard Kardashian-groupie-types soon.

He may get a second term. I'd not bet either way right now. He'll not last as long as Trudeau I, though


----------



## YZT580 (3 Feb 2018)

The ultimate test of sustainability is NOT debt to GDP or any other of those fancy financial twists.  It is simply whether a citizen has cash in his pocket on the day before payday.  Because it is that citizen who pays the bills in one way or another and in the last year the cash left in my pocket has dwindled alarmingly.  So this government is a bust. It is overspending on things that we don't need and didn't ask for (gifts to foreign nationals) and bringing in immigrants at a faster rate than our economy can absorb.  Meanwhile his cohort here in Ontario has made it so there are no low end starting jobs for all these misplaced persons so we pay again.  Say what you like about Harper but he built a solid financial foundation. (full stop)  And yes, Trudeau has out and out lied to the vets.  As for the pipeline, if he had come out and told BC that their conditions were unacceptable I would have had more hope but Kinder Morgan is not about to build a pipeline that they can't pump gas through.


----------



## Loachman (3 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> Further to my previous post: "The debt compounded, the deficits grew, the Bank hiked rates again - and Canada toppled into an even worse  recession in 1992.



I actually benefited from that. I bought my house in Newmarket at the absolute rock-bottom of the market. The vendor was one of many who lost a lot of money during that time. Interest rates had dropped in the three years since I bought my previous house, in Chalk River, which made it barely affordable (it cost three times as much as my Chalk River house), and, fortunately, continued to drop through the duration of my mortgage as the value of my house went back up and beyond.

I also made a bit of money on my Chalk River house, too, when I sold it, because the move of 1 RCR from London to Pet had been announced.

One cannot rely on continued good fortune forever, though.


----------



## Loachman (4 Feb 2018)

A two-year-old article that adds some perspective: http://www.macleans.ca/economy/economicanalysis/the-lessons-for-justin-trudeau-in-his-fathers-first-budget/

And some First Nations viewpoint:

https://walkingeaglenews.com/2018/01/19/trudeau-shocked-to-learn-about-living-conditions-in-northern-ont-first-nation/

https://walkingeaglenews.com/2017/11/22/trudeau-not-my-real-great-white-father-bellegarde/

https://walkingeaglenews.com/2017/12/21/health-canada-issues-massive-recall-of-liberal-tears/


----------



## Altair (4 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> A two-year-old article that adds some perspective: http://www.macleans.ca/economy/economicanalysis/the-lessons-for-justin-trudeau-in-his-fathers-first-budget/
> 
> And some First Nations viewpoint:
> 
> ...


interesting tidbit in there about how the decline in the percentage of working age Canadians is going to be a drag on growth now,  yet people here claim that canada is absorbing more immigrants than the economy can handle. 

I say bring in more immigrants,  I have 1 kid,  I don't want any more.


----------



## Piece of Cake (4 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> Anyway, the initial point was the claim that people have it better now than fifty years ago, which I dispute. National debt is one problem, or quickly _*could be*_ again; personal/household debt is another. Even a slight increase in interest rates could tip more than a few people over a financial cliff.
> 
> And that would be the start of an avalanche.



Fear vs economic indicators.  According to the CIA World Fact Book, Canada has a Gross National Saving rate of 19.9%. 

Source: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ca.html

In fact, the government of the day has tried to decrease the savings rate by lowering the ceiling on yearly TFSA contribution room. The probability of a financial 'avalanche' under current market conditions is close to zero.  In fact, guess what happens when real and nominal interest rates rise? The saving rate rises as well! 

As for being better off now than 50 years ago.  There are countless indicators that proves Canadian society is better off today than in the past.  For example, I could compare the number of cars, radios, TVs, disposable income. non-working hours per week, ect a household has today than 50, 40, 30, 20 years ago.  All would show a positive linear correlation with comparison to time.


----------



## Loachman (4 Feb 2018)

Piece of Cake said:
			
		

> Fear vs economic indicators.



Past experience vs experts, who are _never_ wrong - especially where politicians play a major factor.



			
				Piece of Cake said:
			
		

> In fact, the government of the day has tried to decrease the savings rate by lowering the ceiling on yearly TFSA contribution room.



Really? Not because it wants to rip more tax out of honest citizens? Silly me. A lot more people saved in the 1960s and 1970s. Banks actually paid interest into savings accounts, too.

People are highly indebted, now. Few have enough money to save, unless there is tax incentive to do so.



			
				Piece of Cake said:
			
		

> In fact, guess what happens when real and nominal interest rates rise? The saving rate rises as well!



Not when people's mortgage and car payment and maxed-out credit card interest rates rise, they don't.



			
				Piece of Cake said:
			
		

> I could compare the number of cars, radios, TVs, disposable income. non-working hours per week, ect a household has today than 50, 40, 30, 20 years ago.  All would show a positive linear correlation with comparison to time.



Largely paid for via the matching linear-correlated household debt and the need for both parents (when there are two parents, today) to work. I never heard anybody express concern about household debt in the sixties and seventies, but I don't know anybody who had credit cards then, either, so living beyond one's means was not quite as convenient. My parents, and I, once old enough, paid for everything with cash.

Non-working hours per week? My father worked no overtime. My mother did not have to work. Life had a slower, more relaxed pace.

One car per family was adequate, as only one parent had to work. Families only need two cars todsay because both parents have to work, with the exceptions of the wealthy and women who work because of choice.

One television per family was adequate, then, too. There didn't "have" to be one in every room of the house. Families watched together, rather than in each member's own room.

Simple _possession_ of "things" (as opposed to _ownership_ when a growing collection of credit-bought things will never be truly paid off) is not the best indicator of happiness or quality of life.

Nobody had to rush to drop their kids off at daycare before going in. Shops closed between 1700 and 1800. Few people had to work evenings, and almost all businesses were closed on Sundays.

Perhaps your experiences fifty years ago differed from mine.


----------



## Journeyman (4 Feb 2018)

OK, this thread has once again devolved into another session of  :argue:



			
				Loachman said:
			
		

> https://walkingeaglenews.com/2017/12/21/health-canada-issues-massive-recall-of-liberal-tears


...but _that's_  funny.    :rofl:


----------



## jollyjacktar (4 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> A two-year-old article that adds some perspective: http://www.macleans.ca/economy/economicanalysis/the-lessons-for-justin-trudeau-in-his-fathers-first-budget/
> 
> And some First Nations viewpoint:
> 
> ...



How did l miss these gems last night.   :facepalm:  I'm with JM  :rofl:


----------



## mariomike (4 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> My sentiments exactly. I don't know why principled, rational conservatism has this terrible tendency to drift into the swamp of bumper-sticker populism instead of holding some kind of high ground. It should not be hard to defeat the Liberals without pitch fork waving and acting like a 19 year old at a tailgate party.



"Stop the gravy train!"  

"The elites are trying to keep you down! Ford Nation must rise again!"

11 hours ago:

"In order to vote for me as your next Ontario PC leader in March, you must purchase a $10 Ontario PC party membership now."
https://twitter.com/fordnation/status/959991211854512128

Reminds me of when Doug was handing out twentys to voters. 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ckIcOiJyH4

And, his unsuccessful mayoral campaign in 2014.

If he loses the PC leadership race in March, he can still run for mayor. The campaign period for mayor doesn’t open until May. 

Jan. 17, 2018
He had already been warned by the city about breaking the rules of campaigning early, before the official election period had begun.
https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2018/01/17/doug-ford-to-ignore-city-clerks-warning-about-premature-campaigning.html

"Now he gets to start campaigning early, right away. He can spend money, launch advertisements, hold rallies, fire up his organization, make speeches, mount a full-scale campaign for two months." 

"Either he’s on the fast-track to the premier’s office, or he’s gotten a head start — legally! — on his bid for his brother’s old desk at city hall."

QUOTE 

Globe and Mail

Published May 25, 2013
Updated March 26, 2017

"The Ford family’s history with drug dealing"
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/globe-investigation-the-ford-familys-history-with-drug-dealing/article12153014/

END QUOTE


----------



## Loachman (4 Feb 2018)

Thank-you, Piece of Cake, for your most generous gift  of 25 Milpoints and support of the freedoms of thought and speech, both gifts to Site members by Mr Bobbitt and protected by our cherished Constitution.

This is also a nice addition to my growing Milpoint portfolio, which will be of great value during my eventual retirement, especially if a market crash wipes out my RRSP.

You claim to have "presented facts", whereas I merely "replied with opinion", and that doing so "is incorrect".

"Facts" are often based upon _interpretation_ as CIA assessments (never known to be 100% correct, by the way, or free of political or other bias either) are, and are open to challenge. "Facts" often change when new information becomes available.

I tend to stand by my opinions. There are many areas in which I hold none, as I have too little experience in or knowledge of those areas, or do not care enough. Most form over considerable time, based upon personal experience, observed experience of others, and material that I read or watch. I consult a variety of sources of many viewpoints, which began at a fairly early age and further developed during my time as Squadron Intelligence Officer (a secondary duty that I took quite seriously) at three Tac Hel Squadrons, one of which was in Germany with a real potential threat not far away.

I question almost everything, regardless of origin, especially if something deviates from learned pattern. My opinion may or may not change as a result; I have considerable confidence in my opinions, but maintain an open mind, even though I have to force myself to do so on occasion. I am well aware of the hazard of mental rigidity.

I learned to question aviation weather forecasts early on, and saved myself a lot of grief over many years. Canadian aviation forecasts in Lahr were frequently out-to-lunch, so, when in doubt, I consulted German forecasters, especially in Bremgarten to the south of us. They understood local effects due to terrain influences, whereas our guys had no such comprehension; local effects play a key role when one is flying over long stretches of varying terrain at 250 feet above ground in a country that had long stretches of marginal weather.

I learned to question intelligence assessments, which often made little sense for various reasons, so did my own research via whatever source materials I could find.

I continue this today, a few decades later. I read and watch material from conservative, liberal, socialist, "progressive" (a horribly inaccurate misnomer), civilian, military, transgender, historical, environut, and other points of view, including ones for which I have varying degrees of contempt - it's a "know thy enemy" thing. I piece bits together from multiple novel sources.

I remember things that have happened before, and their signs.

I certainly do not trust "experts" blindly. I can always find an "expert" who completely disagrees. Which makes the most sense? What agenda does each have? Which has the best track record for accuracy? What does a third, fourth, or fifth say? I often come across a non-expert who has an interesting interpretation of something, who often turns out right (like the guy who was tracking relative sales of anti-Clinton and anti-Trump merchandise during the last US election; anti-Clinton stuff was outselling anti-Trump stuff eight to one - not a solid indicator by itself, but one of many indicators that received no general publicity).

I have no immediate fear of impending serious or total economic collapse, even though I've seen many "experts" predict one or more just around the corner over many, many years. For everyone who trumpets "See? I was right", there is another staying quiet while hoping that nobody remembers his prediction tomorrow, next week, or almost ninety years later.

"Yale economist Irving Fisher was jubilant. “Stock prices have reached what looks like a permanently high plateau,” he rejoiced in the pages of the New York Times. That dry pronunciation would go on to be one of his most frequently quoted predictions - but only because history would record his declaration as one of the wrongest market readings of all time.

"At the time he said it, in early October, he had good reason to believe he was right. On Sept. 3, 1929, the Dow Jones Industrial Average swelled to a record high of 381.17, reaching the end of an eight-year growth period during which its value ballooned by a factor of six. That was before the bubble began to burst in a series of “black days”: Black Thursday, October 24, when the market dropped by 11 percent, followed four days later by Black Monday, when it fell another 13 percent; and the next day, Black Tuesday, when it lost 12 percent more.

"Fisher, consistently bullish, pronounced the slide only temporary.

"In his defense, he was not the only optimist on Wall Street. After witnessing nearly a decade of growth, most economists, investors, and captains of industry believed that the market’s natural direction was up. The beginning of the crash struck them not as a sign of financial doom, but as an opportunity for bargains. Following the first of the black days, the New York Times was full of positive predictions: “I have no fear of another comparable decline,” said the president of the Equitable Trust Company.

"Many of those optimists, including Fisher, went broke by mid-November, when the Dow had lost nearly half its pre-crash value. Fisher’s reputation likewise plummeted."

Poor Irving eventually redeemed himself, though.

"He went on to develop a new theory about what had triggered the crash: _overly liberal credit policies that encouraged Americans to take on too much debt_, as he himself had done in order to invest more heavily in stocks. By then, however, no one was listening. His theory didn’t gain traction until the 1950s, when, years after his death, Harvard economist Milton Friedman pronounced him "the greatest economist the United States has ever produced." *Fisher’s debt-deflation theory found its way into the spotlight again when overgenerous credit lines and huge debts prompted another U.S. market crash - this time in 2008*.

"Economic (and other) indicators" are often disputed.

Finally, I am intrigued that you state that expression of opinion - or perhaps just expression of opinion with which you disagree - here in this fine Site is somehow "incorrect". Is that not _also_ an opinion, and therefore also "incorrect"? Perhaps you misworded your true thought, or I misinterpreted what you wrote.

I _remember_ the 1960s and 1970s (and later periods, obviously) fairly well. I remember many of the concerns of the time - inflation, no more oil, severe global cooling - and many of the things that we enjoyed and took for granted. Today is better than yesterday in some ways, but not so much in others. Mostly, it is just different.


----------



## Old Sweat (4 Feb 2018)

Loachman, you just triggered a memory of the prevailing attitude in the late 60s and very early 70s. The smart folks were predicting that we were entering an era of marvellous prosperity where everyone would have lots of leisure time, job security, more than adequate income and a reduced need to toil at tiresome, wretched jobs.


----------



## Kirkhill (4 Feb 2018)

And Old Sweat 

You just triggered a memory - "Here Come the Seventies"  -  A must watch show for this 13 14 year old.

https://youtu.be/37z6eAp3D4A


----------



## Cloud Cover (4 Feb 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> How did l miss these gems last night.   :facepalm:  I'm with JM  :rofl:



The federal public service needs to stop training IFN, otherwise they will end up violating their own Charter rights: https://walkingeaglenews.com/2018/01/26/assembly-of-first-nations-mistakenly-signs-mou-with-self/


----------



## jollyjacktar (4 Feb 2018)

Chris Pook said:
			
		

> And Old Sweat
> 
> You just triggered a memory - "Here Come the Seventies"  -  A must watch show for this 13 14 year old.
> 
> https://youtu.be/37z6eAp3D4A



That takes me back.   :nod:


----------



## jollyjacktar (4 Feb 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> The federal public service needs to stop training IFN, otherwise they will end up violating their own Charter rights: https://walkingeaglenews.com/2018/01/26/assembly-of-first-nations-mistakenly-signs-mou-with-self/



Comedy gold.


----------



## Loachman (4 Feb 2018)

Chris Pook said:
			
		

> You just triggered a memory - "Here Come the Seventies"  -  A must watch show for this 13 14 year old.



It's a pity that there are no episodes on line. It would be a good time-killer. I don't think that I missed a single episode.


----------



## Loachman (4 Feb 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Comedy gold.



Yup. Brilliant. I spent a lot of time going through that after stumbling upon it.

http://www.cbc.ca/radio/unreserved/reclaiming-space-through-cooking-tattoos-and-satire-1.4435388/walking-eagle-news-satirical-news-with-an-indigenous-twist-1.4437564


----------



## Loachman (4 Feb 2018)

Dawn may be approaching: http://poll.forumresearch.com/post/2826?key=4DC34574813F4B7BBC6B5839D45F2231


----------



## Jarnhamar (5 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> Politicians break promises. I have yet to find one who doesn't. Have you?
> 
> Maybe I just temper my expectations.
> 
> ...



_C'est la vie_ but you won't turn down any benefits others manage to secure for us, right?


----------



## Colin Parkinson (5 Feb 2018)

Speaking of immigration, here is an Australian look at our rich immigrant policy, 100,000 Chinese millionaires to Vancouver over 2 decades .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZs2i3Bpxx4


----------



## Loachman (6 Feb 2018)

http://nationalpost.com/opinion/john-ivison-trudeau-in-a-fight-he-cant-win-with-veterans-and-his-frustration-shows

John Ivison: Trudeau is in a fight he can't win with veterans, and his frustration shows

Trudeau was elected on a platform that raised expectations to infinity. To Blaszczyk, even the Tories look good right now. ‘At least we weren’t given false promises’

John Ivison	

February 5, 2018 6:53 PM EST

You have to be pretty tone-deaf to tell a man who lost a leg in Afghanistan that the government is fighting veterans groups in courts “because they’re asking for more than we’re able to give right now.”

Yet that’s exactly what the prime minister did at a town-hall in Edmonton last Thursday - a gaffe that has gone viral on social media and infuriated veterans.


----------



## Jarnhamar (6 Feb 2018)

[quote author=Lachlan] 

You have to be pretty tone-deaf to tell a man who lost a leg in Afghanistan that the government is fighting veterans groups in courts “because they’re asking for more than we’re able to give right now.”

[/quote]

Yup. That was pretty epic.


----------



## Remius (6 Feb 2018)

Tone deaf isn't the word I would use to describe that particular gaffe.


----------



## ModlrMike (6 Feb 2018)

Waiting for the ABC Veterans commentary on the subject...


----------



## Colin Parkinson (6 Feb 2018)

The "anyone but Harper" crowd got their wish. Always be careful what you wish for.....


----------



## Remius (6 Feb 2018)

Colin P said:
			
		

> The "anyone but Harper" crowd got their wish. Always be careful what you wish for.....




Not sure that they got their wish but they did get more of the same with an extra helping of crap.


----------



## Jarnhamar (6 Feb 2018)

Not that I want to take any spotlight from the stupidity of the Prime Minister saying the above to a wounded Vet but this deserves some of it's own ridicule.




> Justin Trudeau interrupts woman to tell her to use 'peoplekind' instead of 'mankind' because 'it's more inclusive'
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5357037/Trudeau-mocked-telling-woman-say-peoplekind.html



What a real piece of work.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (6 Feb 2018)

Wait till he says "Peopletoba" while in Winnipeg. ....


----------



## jollyjacktar (6 Feb 2018)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> Wait till he says "Peopletoba" while in Winnipeg. ....



 :rofl:   he would be that stupid


----------



## kratz (6 Feb 2018)

According to the PM's wishes, we'll have a constitutional crisis as his government attempts to rename Manitoba,
to a more inclusive term.


----------



## Cloud Cover (6 Feb 2018)

Bruce Monkhouse said:
			
		

> Wait till he says "Peopletoba" while in Winnipeg. ....



How will they man-age, and will it be man-datory in this no-peoples land of biological neutrality.


----------



## Altair (6 Feb 2018)

> The name Manitoba is believed to be derived from the Cree, Ojibwe or Assiniboine languages. Thename derives from Cree manitou-wapow or Ojibwa manidoobaa, both meaning "straits of Manitou, the Great Spirit", a place referring to what are now called The Narrows in the centre of Lake Manitoba.


 https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manitoba&ved=0ahUKEwjlnI7V0JLZAhUq34MKHVuiCbwQFggeMAE&usg=AOvVaw2nUEQNVOn_ZJZgSssrEetr

I think Manitoba is good.


----------



## EpicBeardedMan (6 Feb 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> How will they *people*-age, and will it be *people*-datory in this no-peoples land of biological neutrality.



Fixed.


----------



## jollyjacktar (6 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manitoba&ved=0ahUKEwjlnI7V0JLZAhUq34MKHVuiCbwQFggeMAE&usg=AOvVaw2nUEQNVOn_ZJZgSssrEetr
> 
> I think Manitoba is good.



You just have to spoil our fun, don't you.

 :tsktsk:


----------



## Good2Golf (6 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manitoba&ved=0ahUKEwjlnI7V0JLZAhUq34MKHVuiCbwQFggeMAE&usg=AOvVaw2nUEQNVOn_ZJZgSssrEetr
> 
> I think Manitoba is good.



Neither Cree, Ojibwa nor Assiniboine used cursive Roman script, so "Man" is white-person's interpretation of the First Nations' name.  Apologies due to and restitution for them, and a replacement name!


----------



## Loachman (6 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> I think Manitoba is good.



The "Great Spirit" thing has got to offend _somebody's_ religion, or lack thereof, somewhere.

And would the name not be considered to be cultural appropriation in certain circles, due to its origin and the number of older, patriarchal, privileged, cis-gendered (whatever that means; "functional normal human being", I think), straight, Christian white men who live there now?


----------



## EpicBeardedMan (6 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> The "Great Spirit" thing has got to offend _somebody's_ religion, or lack thereof, somewhere.
> 
> And would the name not be considered to be cultural appropriation in certain circles, due to its origin and the number of older, patriarchal, privileged, cis-gendered (whatever that means; "functional normal human being", I think), straight, Christian white men who live there now?



I'm sure it does, MSM just hasn't picked up on it yet, give it till the end of the year...


----------



## Blackadder1916 (6 Feb 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> How will they man-age, and will it be man-datory in this no-peoples land of biological neutrality.



Since the "man" in both these English words does not derive from the same origin as "man, the male human", other than trying to be sarcastic, what is the point?  Man (the human male) origin is Germanic - mann.  The man root in the other words comes from the Latin, manus or hand.  So when we manage, it is handling (manipulating) or if a mandate it is something commanded (from the Latin mandatum which is derived earlier from manus and dare - to give).  Neither is referencing the male gender.


----------



## Loachman (6 Feb 2018)

No sense of humour? What next, "_*man*_darin" is not really sexist after all?

Hennyway, some commentary from around the world: https://www.spencerfernando.com/2018/02/06/woke-joke-trudeau-becomes-object-global-ridicule-peoplekind-virtue-signalling-backfires/


----------



## angus555 (6 Feb 2018)

The Prime Minister should apologize for offending those who identify as non-humans.

 ;D


----------



## Blackadder1916 (7 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> No sense of humour?



Of course I do, but it is the smug, self-ingratiating humour of the pedantic.


----------



## Piece of Cake (7 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> No sense of humour?





			
				Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> Of course I do, but it is the smug, self-ingratiating humour of the pedantic.



To parse;

To analyze (a sentence) in terms of grammatical constituents, identifying the parts of speech, syntactic relations, etc.

Source: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/parse


----------



## mariomike (7 Feb 2018)

A pun is the lowest form of humour - when you don't think of it first.


----------



## Altair (7 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> The "Great Spirit" thing has got to offend _somebody's_ religion, or lack thereof, somewhere.
> 
> And would the name not be considered to be cultural appropriation in certain circles, due to its origin and the number of older, patriarchal, privileged, cis-gendered (whatever that means; "functional normal human being", I think), straight, Christian white men who live there now?


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_place_names_in_Canada_of_Indigenous_origin



> Manitoba: Either derived from the Cree word manito-wapâw meaning "the strait of the spirit or manitobau" or the Assiniboine words mini and tobow meaning "Lake of the Prairie", referring to Lake Manitoba.Nunavut: "Our land" in Inuktitut.
> 
> Ontario: Derived from the Huron word onitariio meaning "beautiful lake", or kanadario meaning "sparkling" or "beautiful" water.
> 
> ...


 Well,  we better get started then.


----------



## Jarnhamar (7 Feb 2018)

Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> Of course I do, but it is the smug, self-ingratiating humour of the pedantic.



  :not-again:


----------



## Rifleman62 (7 Feb 2018)

> Justin Trudeau interrupts woman to tell her to use 'peoplekind' instead of 'mankind' because 'it's more inclusive'
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5357037/Trudeau-mocked-telling-woman-say-peoplekind.html



I am in the Phoenix. Even on the local Rock station they carried this item and it was not a feed. It is in the *media *in the US and the PM is being mocked.


----------



## Journeyman (7 Feb 2018)

The woman's actual line to the PM was "maternal love is the love that's going to change the future of mankind."  Why wasn't he offended that paternal love is demeaned and oppressed?


He's _still_  just not ready.


----------



## Altair (7 Feb 2018)

This is rather ridiculous and its weird that  its grown legs and taken off more than his response to our veterans(that's canada for you,  screw over vets, meh,   peoplekind as opposed to mankind, controversy) but has anyone watched the video in question? 

The woman is going on and on about religion and female equality in religion,  her church,  for over 3 minutes with people in the crowd starting to get agitated and a few starting to boo her before Trudeau makes the quip about peoplekind. 

Seems far more tongue in cheek to me in that context,  and the audience was happy he found a way to shut her up.


----------



## jollyjacktar (7 Feb 2018)

Well, he started the ball rolling with changing the words in the English version.  Reap what you sow.


----------



## Edward Campbell (7 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> This is rather ridiculous and its weird that  its grown legs and taken off ... Seems far more tongue in cheek to me in that context,  and the audience was happy he found a way to shut her up.



I'm inclined to agree with you as to the motive, what rattled a lot of people was the stupidity (fair word, I think) of the words he chose to "*shut her up.*" Now, "humankind" has been in pretty common use for at least decades ~ I grew up knowing it as a "neutral" term in the 1950s ~ but "people-kind" is just plain dumb ... it makes Justin Trudeau look like what _I think_ he is: a semi-literate man-child pretending to be prime minister of a G7 country and being amazed that no one has pulled him off the stage quite yet.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (7 Feb 2018)

I am in agreement with ERC on this one. And, BTW, according to the Gazette article this morning (thus probably in the National Post also), this has been mocked as far as the UK also.

I would only add that he wilfully decided to go on a national Town Hall tour. By definition, Town Halls are a political event in a democracy - they are not "celebrity" tours or stand-up comics show. When a politician offers himself (is that the proper pronoun for Trudeau?) to the public in an exercise in democracy, he has to accept that there will be point of views that will be expressed that will contradict his own views, or even will constitute personnel attacks. It doesn't give him the right to joke around or belittle any of these positions or people - if he truly believes that in democracy, everyone is allowed their own views and positions and to express them, no matter how awkwardly. He has to be "man" enough to take it and move on.

But then again, the Libs have always been bad at accepting that people could have views and opinions differing from theirs.


----------



## Jarnhamar (7 Feb 2018)

Interesting ctv article and quote  about the class action sexual assault case going on.



> Despite those efforts, the federal government argued in court filings that it * does not “owe a private law duty of care to individual members within the CAF to provide a safe and harassment-free work environment, or to create policies to prevent sexual harassment or sexual assault."*




https://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/politics/feds-trying-to-stop-sexual-misconduct-lawsuit-against-canadian-forces-1.3792725


----------



## jollyjacktar (7 Feb 2018)

> Trudeau writes off peoplekind quip as 'dumb joke'
> Canadian PM mocked for correcting a woman using 'mankind' during town hall in Edmonton
> 
> http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-peoplekind-bad-joke-1.4524233



my favorite bit from the story



> British TV broadcaster Piers Morgan called Trudeau a "Chief PC Plonker," accusing him of killing off mankind. Australian columnist Rita Panahi called him the "Kim Kardashian of political leaders; an all-style, no-substance himbo with all the depth of a puddle."


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (7 Feb 2018)

Well, Panahi seems to have him well pinned down.


----------



## Altair (7 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> This is rather ridiculous and its weird that  its grown legs and taken off more than his response to our veterans(that's canada for you,  screw over vets, meh,   peoplekind as opposed to mankind, controversy) but has anyone watched the video in question?
> 
> The woman is going on and on about religion and female equality in religion,  her church,  for over 3 minutes with people in the crowd starting to get agitated and a few starting to boo her before Trudeau makes the quip about peoplekind.
> 
> ...


hmm.


----------



## Jarnhamar (7 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> This is rather ridiculous and its weird that  its grown legs and taken off more than his response to our veterans(that's canada for you, * screw over vets, meh, *



_"C'est la vie"_


----------



## Altair (7 Feb 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> _C'est la vie_


malheureusement.


----------



## jollyjacktar (7 Feb 2018)

But totally self inflicted.  He has no one to blame but himself.


----------



## Loachman (7 Feb 2018)

http://nationalpost.com/opinion/jack-mintz-another-nep-fiasco-looms-as-westerners-suffer-for-trudeaus-energy-follies/wcm/a219f664-9715-4f0f-9ac6-67abfecf9b0e

Jack Mintz: Another NEP fiasco looms as Westerners suffer for Trudeau’s energy follies

Thanks to government policy and indecision, American consumers enjoying subsidies paid for by Western Canadians

"The prime minister calls the dispute between Alberta and British Columbia ... a "disagreement between provinces." That ignores the constitutional role the federal government has in interprovincial transportation and trade. Alberta’s Premier Rachel Notley is right: This is as much a fight between B.C. and the federal government as it is between Alberta and B.C."

"... perhaps the Trudeau government is quietly hoping the pipeline’s owner, Kinder Morgan, gives up in frustration, for “business reasons,” as other resource project proponents have done recently after enduring endless regulatory and political setbacks."

"The NEP, which hit the West just as commodity prices were falling, led to one of the largest income transfers in history, from the West to Central and Eastern Canada. Western energy producers were forced to pay an export tax to fund subsidies to make life cheaper for energy-guzzling consumers to the east. This time, the income isn’t being transferred from the West to Eastern Canada. It’s being transferred from Canada to the United States."


----------



## angus555 (7 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> http://nationalpost.com/opinion/jack-mintz-another-nep-fiasco-looms-as-westerners-suffer-for-trudeaus-energy-follies/wcm/a219f664-9715-4f0f-9ac6-67abfecf9b0e
> 
> Jack Mintz: Another NEP fiasco looms as Westerners suffer for Trudeau’s energy follies
> 
> ...



Funny the author put Norway in a positive light in an argument against NEP.

Its heavily taxed, regulated, and nationalized petroleum industry is responsible for the world's largest sovereign wealth fund.

The whole impetus for Petro-Canada and later the NEP was the fact the Canadian oil industry was geared towards benefiting the US.

It was economic nationalism in a country that was and still is dominated by provincial thinking.


----------



## Altair (7 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> http://nationalpost.com/opinion/jack-mintz-another-nep-fiasco-looms-as-westerners-suffer-for-trudeaus-energy-follies/wcm/a219f664-9715-4f0f-9ac6-67abfecf9b0e
> 
> Jack Mintz: Another NEP fiasco looms as Westerners suffer for Trudeau’s energy follies
> 
> ...


its also a perfect microcosm of the great divide that exists in the NDP. 

We have two NDP lead provinces,  one representing the labour wing,  the other the environmental wing,  and here they are in a full out trade war. 

It was interesting seeing Jagmeet Singh trying to walk on eggshells when talking about the issue


----------



## jollyjacktar (7 Feb 2018)

I remember all too well the NEP and what it was like in Alberta as a young man.  It sure as hell did SFA for us, except to boot fuck us.  Another reason l dislike the "T" family and all whom politic in her.


----------



## Loachman (7 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> We have two NDP lead provinces,  one representing the labour wing,  the other the environmental wing,  and here they are in a full out trade war.



I'd not thought of it that way, but it makes perfect sense.


----------



## angus555 (7 Feb 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> I remember all too well the NEP and what it was like in Alberta as a young man.  It sure as hell did SFA for us, except to boot frig us.  Another reason l dislike the "T" family and all whom politic in her.



Suck it up, cowboy.  ;D


----------



## Loachman (7 Feb 2018)

Plan B...?

http://business.financialpost.com/commodities/energy/first-nations-pipeline-has-a-plan-to-get-around-b-c-oil-tanker-ban-an-old-gold-rush-town-in-Alaska


----------



## larry Strong (7 Feb 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> I remember all too well the NEP and what it was like in Alberta as a young man.  It sure as hell did SFA for us, except to boot frig us.  Another reason l dislike the "T" family and all whom politic in her.



Yep, developed my hatred for the family then as well..went from working "balls to the wall" to loading my rig on trucks and sending it down to the Coots border crossing............


Cheers
Larry


----------



## Cloud Cover (7 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> Plan B...?
> 
> http://business.financialpost.com/commodities/energy/first-nations-pipeline-has-a-plan-to-get-around-b-c-oil-tanker-ban-an-old-gold-rush-town-in-Alaska



This is a good alternative, but of course the NGO’s will shift focus back to Alberta and use influence, courts etc preventing oil ever getting from the field to the pipeline. But, watch and see, I guess the key here is speed, how fast can and will they get it underway.


----------



## Altair (7 Feb 2018)

Trudeau government will insist on ultimate authority over fate of pipeline in B.C.-Alberta spat: source
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-trans-mountain-alberta-british-columbia-1.4524706




> As the governments of Alberta and British Columbia clash over oil and wine, federal officials are carrying a forceful message in their discussions with the two provinces.
> 
> "The key message [is] that we want to help bring the temperature down," a senior Liberal, speaking on condition of anonymity, told CBC News, "but ultimately the federal government will not allow any province to impinge on its jurisdiction over the national interest. Full stop."


  I don't expect him to get any credit in Alberta or by those on the right.


----------



## ballz (7 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> Trudeau government will insist on ultimate authority over fate of pipeline in B.C.-Alberta spat: source
> http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-trans-mountain-alberta-british-columbia-1.4524706
> 
> I don't expect him to get any credit in Alberta or by those on the right.



Big talk from a gov't that let a corrupt municipal mayor do exactly that. Maybe I'm biased but I thought the Energy East was the most important pipeline we had on the table.


----------



## angus555 (7 Feb 2018)

Trudeau has been publicly pro-pipeline since at least 2013. He even went down to Washington to lobby for Keystone XL long before he became PM.

Energy East was a tricky one, since they needed to build new lines in some strange lands before arriving in Irving land.

Northern Gateway was a farce.

Trans Mountain is of course a long established pipeline corridor, kind of a no brainer.


----------



## jollyjacktar (7 Feb 2018)

Just like Trudeau.


----------



## Altair (7 Feb 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Just like Trudeau.


really mature.


----------



## angus555 (7 Feb 2018)

I do hope Trudeau dials back the SJW lingo though.

I think even with all of his gaffes, next election he'll beat that altar boy with the dimples for sure. ;D


----------



## jollyjacktar (7 Feb 2018)

There's more than one way to take that, Altair. 

I think he plays you and those like minded like a violin, or Pavlov's dogs.  He got you all drinking the cool aid and barking on command at every turn.  

I don't believe for one minute that he's "pro pipeline".  

Or, as some believe he's the Kim Kardashian of politicians etc. As per the Australian comment on "peoplekind".

Take your pick.  I could care less.


----------



## angus555 (7 Feb 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> I don't believe for one minute that he's "pro pipeline".



You probably wouldn't believe it if it hit you in the face.


----------



## jollyjacktar (7 Feb 2018)

Til Valhall said:
			
		

> You probably wouldn't believe it if it hit you in the face.



The next time he impresses me will be the first.     But do carry on enjoying the Kool-aid


----------



## Altair (7 Feb 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> There's more than one way to take that, Altair.
> 
> I think he plays you and those like minded like a violin, or Pavlov's dogs.  He got you all drinking the cool aid and barking on command at every turn.
> 
> I don't believe for one minute that he's "pro pipeline".


yet 3 pipelines will be built under trudeau. 

That's not exactly anti pipeline. 

There are 3 parties in canada. One that would have approved every pipeline,  environmental be damned,  one that would have banned every pipeline,  economy be damned and one party that would try to balance out the two. 

Striking a balance doesn't seem like a bad idea to me,  and he's going to lose votes in BC standing up for a pipeline getting built, so no,  I don't think he's anti pipeline.


----------



## jollyjacktar (7 Feb 2018)

I don't think he'll do Alberta any favours.  I have no faith in the man whatsoever.  You love him now but the day will come you'll get tired of it all and kick him across the floor to the opposition or obscurity.  It happens to them all eventually.  We'll just differ on when we want to see that day come, Altair.


----------



## angus555 (7 Feb 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> The next time he impresses me will be the first.     But do carry on enjoying the Kool-aid



I don't think he's trying to impress you. Neither am I.

I don't even take sugar in my coffee let alone drink Kool-aid. But I have voted for CPC before, and probably will again at some point in time.


----------



## jollyjacktar (7 Feb 2018)

Til Valhall said:
			
		

> I don't think he's trying to impress you. Neither am I.



Phew, that's a load off, then.  As it isn't happening.


----------



## Loachman (8 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> yet 3 pipelines will be built under trudeau.



Will they? Maybe, maybe not.

If they _are_ built during his blighted reign, it will not be because of _him_. It will be because somebody in his government or party with more brains and spine than him forces his hand.

He will do as little as possible for as long as possible rather than do anything that will jeopardize the adoration of his fan club.

He is happier sitting at his desk in Parliament signing autographs and imperiously ignoring the proceedings that are too uncomfortable or too boring or beneath him while Bardish Jagger defends his poor ethics. I am all for equality of treatment and opportunity 'n' all, but I am still a traditionalist, and the sight of a "man" hiding behind the skirts of a woman does not sit well at all - and that is a polite understatement.


----------



## Altair (8 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> Will they? Maybe, maybe not.
> 
> If they _are_ built during his blighted reign, it will not be because of _him_. It will be because somebody in his government or party with more brains and spine than him forces his hand.
> 
> He will do as little as possible for as long as possible rather than do anything that will jeopardize the adoration of his fan club.


he's been talking about the need to build pipelines since he was named leader of the liberal party,  if you want to be irrational and think he's being "forced" to do it be my guest,  I'll simply focus on talking about reality,  not this fantasy world where every bad thing he does is on him and every good thing he does is because of someone else.


----------



## Loachman (8 Feb 2018)

I ended up leaving more in than I originally intended to snip, but thought that this was good insight:

http://www.hilltimes.com/2018/02/05/nanos-book-voter-rage-hitting-shelves-three-countries/133028

“Anti-establishment politics is very cost-effective. That’s probably one of the reasons why it’s so appealing to politicians, because if you can tap into how concerned people are about the future, how they’re having difficulty making ends meet, how they feel that the system is working against them. …You don’t have to give them pamphlets, you don’t have to remind them to vote, you don’t need to give them a drive to the polls. They’ll get out and they’ll vote, because those voters, it’s all about punishment. 

“Justin Trudeau is one. I’m not sure that everyone would agree with me, but the reality is that Justin Trudeau on paper should be the establishment candidate. Because after all, he is the son of a former prime minister, he had a very comfortable upbringing, his grandfather on his mother’s side was a Liberal cabinet minister. Although the Conservatives tried to portray him as a person of privilege and part of the Canadian elite, he very carefully tried to kind of fashion himself as the scrappy, almost, anti-politician. 

“The thing about Justin Trudeau is, people talk about people flocking to him, but the reality is, he was a vehicle to punish the Stephen Harper Conservatives, and to get them out of power. Canadians in the last election were looking for change, looking for something different from politics that they saw in the last decade. And Justin Trudeau was the vehicle, and they kind of rallied around him.”

“The interesting thing about the Harper Conservatives is that, for them, they considered themselves and positioned themselves as an outsider to the political elites. Which is why Stephen Harper would take on the courts, would take on the media, he’d take on the civil service. In their case, _*it was them against the establishment*_, as opposed to, when you’re looking at Donald Trump, _*he was talking about how Americans had suffered under the establishment*_. 

“We saw similar types of messaging in terms of the Harper government feeling that they were political victims, but they never really transitioned into giving voice to Canadians who were worried about the future. On the contrary, for Stephen Harper, he had a narrative related to Canada being an energy superpower. He had a narrative related to Canada being an exception in terms of the global recession in 2008. And his narrative was, the Conservatives are steady stewards of the economy, and everything is okay.”

“Right now, a lot of these anti-establishment candidates are not incumbent governments. So the trap is, how can you be anti-establishment when hypothetically you are the government, and are the establishment? That’s why incumbents in this age of voter rage are under siege.” 

“I think it’s going to be very difficult for them (Liberals) to run as an anti-establishment party, because they now have to defend a record and they now have to take responsibility for their government’s policies. The one thing that they could do in this very fragile environment is focus on the things they have done to make things a little better for Canadians.

“In the polling that we’ve done, _*50 per cent of Canadians think that the next generation will have a lower standard of living, only 15 per cent think that the standard of living will be higher for the next generation*_. That should be the one stat that should put fear in the hearts of Liberals, that _*Canadians are more pessimistic now than they were under Stephen Harper*_. 

“This is why for the Liberals, issues such as legalizing marijuana, issues related to democratic reform, gender equality: those are all important issues, many of those issues are supported by a majority of Canadians. _*But they don’t stack up against, ‘Will my son or daughter have a job?’*_ And I think that’s why for the Liberals, _*they have to be aware that they do not govern by distraction on issues that have a second level of importance, because they’ll get punished*_.”

“For any politician to have a positive frame around how they’re trying to connect with voters, they need to have positive policies. Many times the Conservatives like to run on being tough on criminals. They want to talk about controlling the number of refugees or immigrants that are coming into the country because they’re concerned about security threats to Canada. Those issues, yes they resonate with Canadians, but they do not align with having a positive demeanour. 

“If the Conservatives wanted to focus on opportunity, if the Conservatives wanted to focus on, ‘We need to create an environment where Canadians can work hard, and they can have a good standard of living, and their kids can go to college and university,’ that would be a positive frame. We haven’t been seeing that. We’ve seen from the Conservatives, kind of, effectively, taking a page from the previous administration, focusing on very narrow issues, that are very good at raising funds, but _*they don’t align with the brand that it looks like Andrew Scheer is trying to portray*_. My point is, sure you can be positive, but you need positive policies or aspirational policies. And I think it is possible for the Conservatives to have that, but they need to put them in the window so that the brand aligns with the substance.”

“I don’t even think that governments have to improve the day-to-day lives of Canadians. They have to create an environment where Canadians and citizens everywhere think that they have a chance to improve. Because right now for that small minority of people that feel disenfranchised, they feel the system is stacked against them, that they work hard but they can’t make ends meet, they’re worried about the future. 

“I don’t think that writing a cheque to everyone that is underemployed or unemployed is the solution. I think creating an environment that is more merit-based, where people feel if they work hard that they can have a middle-class existence, I think that’s actually the solution.”

“The whole twist on this is how very small swings in voters have a disproportionate impact on the outcome of the election. _*It doesn’t really take a lot of disenfranchised citizens who are anti-establishment-minded and looking to punish the establishment to reshape the outcome of the election.*_”


----------



## Loachman (8 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> he's been talking about the need to build pipelines since he was named leader of the liberal party



He also has a reputation for saying different things to different audiences.


----------



## jollyjacktar (8 Feb 2018)

And not delivering or backing off as he did with Veterans...Electoral Reform, for example.


----------



## Altair (8 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> He also has a reputation for saying different things to different audiences.


Fair enough. 

However,  off the top of my head,  when he became liberal leader,  he went to alberta and spoke about the need for pipelines. 

He went to new york and spoke to Americans about balancing the environmental and pipelines. 

He's gone on a recent cross country speaking tour and reiterated how kinder Morgan was going to be built. 

And to top it off,  there is word coming out how he won't allow BC to interfere with a federal project. 

So going off all of that,  I'm going to just give him the benifit of the doubt and say that he's not going back down or flip flop on the pipeline issue and that 3 pipelines will be built,  Line 3, Kinder Morgan,  and Keystone XL. 

I don't know how this isn't being viewed as a victory for the energy sector, Alberta,  and canada as a whole.


----------



## ModlrMike (8 Feb 2018)

Actions speak louder than words.


----------



## Altair (8 Feb 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> And not delivering or backing off as he did with Veterans...Electoral Reform, for example.


I'm beginning to believe that you would rather he did back off and kill the pipelines so you can be right about that than you would he dig in and get it done and you have go give him any credit.


----------



## Altair (8 Feb 2018)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Actions speak louder than words.


What actions do you realisticly expect the federal government to undertake right now? 

BC hasn't actually done anything yet.


----------



## Loachman (8 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> However,  off the top of my head,  when he became liberal leader,  he went to alberta and spoke about the need for pipelines.



Environmentalists and some native groups seem to have heard different messages.

Liberals don't get many votes in Alberta anyway...


----------



## Loachman (8 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> What actions do you realisticly expect the federal government to undertake right now?
> 
> BC hasn't actually done anything yet.



ModlrMike's comment can be applied to future likelihood as well.

I'll wait and see. I have no confidence in his ability to do the right thing, based upon his, and his party's, past performance.


----------



## ModlrMike (8 Feb 2018)

I'll rephrase that that then. 

Inactions speak louder than words.


(with apologies to the grammar police)


----------



## Altair (8 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> Environmentalists and some native groups seem to have heard different messages.
> 
> Liberals don't get many votes in Alberta anyway...


environmentalists heard about how canada needs to take a leading role regarding climate change,  and how the process regarding approving pipelines was broken and took this to mean that they could stall out energy companies until they gave up. 

Native groups heard how they needed to be consulted on a nation to nation basis regarding energy projects and took this to mean that every first nation group got a veto. 

 People hear what they want to hear.


----------



## Jarnhamar (8 Feb 2018)

Trudeau is a hot crying mess but it's going to be entertaining seeing all the campaign promises rolling out.

Maybe a little promise to veterans to bring back pensions for life?  

Maybe figure out whats going on to the Missing and murdered Indigenous women?

Some anti-trump fear mongering is definitely in store.


Did Canada ever send that $840 million to Syria?


----------



## Good2Golf (8 Feb 2018)

...and the World heard that "Canada is back" when it comes to peacekeeping...  :boring:


----------



## jollyjacktar (8 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> I'm beginning to believe that you would rather he did back off and kill the pipelines so you can be right about that than you would he dig in and get it done and you have go give him any credit.



I'd rather he went back to being a drama teacher.

At any rate, my examples are just two where he reneged on promises.  There will be more, l am sure.


----------



## Loachman (8 Feb 2018)

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> ...and the World heard that "Canada is back" when it comes to peacekeeping...



Well, "Canada is back" at stage centre on Comedy Central...


----------



## Jarnhamar (8 Feb 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> I'd rather he went back to being a drama teacher.



Did he never quit?


----------



## Altair (8 Feb 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> I'd rather he went back to being a drama teacher.
> 
> At any rate, my examples are just two where he reneged on promises.  There will be more, l am sure.


naturally.  He's a politician. 

The provinces and senate might throw a wrench in his marijuana plans so that its not legal by July 1st 2018 for one. 

But let's not pretend that because he's broken son promises that hes going to break all of them,  or that a broken promise on electoral reform has anything to do with pipeline politics.


----------



## jollyjacktar (8 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> naturally.  He's a politician.
> 
> The provinces and senate might throw a wrench in his marijuana plans so that its not legal by July 1st 2018 for one.
> 
> But let's not pretend that because he's broken son promises that hes going to break all of them,  or that a broken promise on electoral reform has anything to do with pipeline politics.



Sip, sip, sip on that Kool-aid


----------



## Altair (8 Feb 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Sip, sip, sip on that Kool-aid


pot,  meet kettle.


----------



## Jarnhamar (8 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> pot,  meet kettle.



What colour is a kettle?

Contrary to popular cliche kettle are not all, or even predominately black.
https://www.google.ca/search?biw=1366&bih=634&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=I9V8WtXfLa6AtgWW3bWoAw&q=kettle&oq=kettle&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0l10.428028.428652.0.428714.6.5.0.1.1.0.120.507.2j3.5.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..0.6.520...0i67k1.0.im3kS1zuYZg


----------



## Loachman (8 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> But let's not pretend that because he's broken son promises that hes going to break all of them,  or that a broken promise on electoral reform has anything to do with pipeline politics.



No, past performance is _never_ an indicator of future performance...


----------



## Altair (8 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> No, past performance is _never_ an indicator of future performance...


so by that same token,  what would you say if i said that trudeau will definitely keep all his promises because he's kept others in the past?

Things are far more nuanced than that,  things should be evaluated and judged on a case per case basis other than the extreme laziness I'm seeing here with"he's broken promises in the past so he will break this one as well". 

Again,  if you all hate him so much that you cannot even pretend to remain objective,  that's fine. I just find it sad.


----------



## jollyjacktar (8 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> pot,  meet kettle.



Altair, Altair, l know you're an uber fanboy,  it's only natural for you.  Whereas, I am not and never shall be, so it's only natural for me.  We shall remain at polar opposite.  C'est la guerre.


----------



## Altair (8 Feb 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Altair, Altair, l know you're an uber fanboy,  it's only natural for you.  Whereas, I am not and never shall be,  so it's only natural for me.  We shall remain at polar opposite.  C'est la guerre.


and I know that I do support the liberals.  Same as I know you're a diehard conservative supporter. 

What disappoints me is that it seems to be impossible to talk about our opposing viewpoints without tossing out things like drink the koolaid.  

Its disappointing that it seems like you would rather canada do poorly as long as its trudeau at the helm to take the heat than you would canada do well with him at the helm lest he get any credit.


----------



## Loachman (8 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> so by that same token,  what would you say if i said that trudeau will definitely keep all his promises because he's kept others in the past?



Had he kept all, or even most, promises (and I truly hope that he does not, and that he has no opportunity to do so after 2019), then I would also take that as an indicator that he is more likely to keep others. Past performance, you see.



			
				Altair said:
			
		

> "he's broken promises in the past so he will break this one as well".



Has anybody actually said "will break" in this context? I'm not bothering to go back and look. On the balance of probabilities, however, and given that letting pipelines proceed, or, especially, over-ruling BC, would cost him more votes than he would gain from Alberta, I doubt that he would - willingly and happily - force the issue. I expect him to delay and waffle until the company gives up in frustration.

You're the one saying 





			
				Altair said:
			
		

> 3 pipelines _*will*_ be built under trudeau.



I, and others, lack your confidence in that "will".

It _may_ happen. I won't say that it won't. He may become the Country's biggest pipeline enthusiast.

I'd not bet upon that, however, and neither should you.

It is hard to predict people with absolute accuracy.


----------



## jollyjacktar (8 Feb 2018)

Actually no, l am not a die hard Con.  They didn't get my vote last spin.  They probably won't next go either.

I'd rather see Canada do better, sadly l don't believe we are with the current sitting Parliament.

I'm ready to dislike the left and the right in equal measures if l think they rate it.  

What dismays me is the people whom are blindly taken in with the Trudeau show, all the nice hair, good looks, boo hoo tears on demand, etc.   It's like reality TV, the Kardashians.  All show and drama, no substance.  I'd rather they see past the fluff and take off the rose coloured glasses once in a while.

As was pointed out earlier by others.  The only reason he's in the chair is because the voters were tired of Harper and he was the silver bullet or wooden stake if you will.

We deserve better, someone who isn't out of his depth.  I truly believe this PM is in over his head in the water and like any drowning man he's going to pull us under with him.

I've said to you before.  I also really would love to be so very wrong about him.   As with anyone who is in that chair, I'd want each and every one of them to be THE best PM we've ever had.
I'm still waiting, unfortunately.


----------



## angus555 (8 Feb 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Actually no, l am not a die hard Con.  They didn't get my vote last spin.  They probably won't next go either.


I figured you voted for Mulcair. 



> What dismays me is the people whom are blindly taken in with the Trudeau show, all the nice hair, good looks, boo hoo tears on demand, etc.   It's like reality TV, the Kardashians.  All show and drama, no substance.


This is the second time you've mentioned the K word, I'm getting a sense you might have some hidden guilty pleasures. 

If reality TV style politics [and revolting behavior] was off limits for conservatives in North America, Hillary would be President. 



> I also really would love to be so very wrong about him.


Have you ever been wrong in your entire life?  ;D


----------



## jollyjacktar (8 Feb 2018)

Til Valhall said:
			
		

> I figured you voted for Mulcair.



Yeaaaaahhhhh.    :



			
				Til Valhall said:
			
		

> Have you ever been wrong in your entire life?  ;D



Yes, taking the time to respond to you here.


----------



## angus555 (8 Feb 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Yes, taking the time to respond to you here.



Likewise.


----------



## PuckChaser (8 Feb 2018)

Alright gents. If we can't be civil in the politics thread and refrain from personal attacks, I'll start handing timeouts. There's also no need for childish name-calling of politicians of any party affiliation. We're all adults here and as shown previously, we're capable of debating emotional topics without resorting to emotional responses.

- Milnet.ca staff


----------



## angus555 (9 Feb 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Alright gents. If we can't be civil in the politics thread and refrain from personal attacks, I'll start handing timeouts. There's also no need for childish name-calling of politicians of any party affiliation. We're all adults here and as shown previously, we're capable of debating emotional topics without resorting to emotional responses.
> 
> - Milnet.ca staff



Levity and humour>Internet pride and ego.


----------



## ModlrMike (9 Feb 2018)

One Liberal's response to "Peoplegate"

https://twitter.com/gmbutts/status/961573323112112129


----------



## Halifax Tar (9 Feb 2018)

Til Valhall said:
			
		

> If reality TV style politics [and revolting behavior] was off limits for conservatives in North America, Hillary would be President.



Can we please agree to not insert American political figures into Canadian debates ?  We have a US Politics thread.  Please don't sully ours with that tripe from south of the border.


----------



## jollyjacktar (9 Feb 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Alright gents. If we can't be civil in the politics thread and refrain from personal attacks, I'll start handing timeouts. There's also no need for childish name-calling of politicians of any party affiliation. We're all adults here and as shown previously, we're capable of debating emotional topics without resorting to emotional responses.
> 
> - Milnet.ca staff



Sorry for the discord.  Won't happen again.  :ignore: applied.


----------



## Jarnhamar (9 Feb 2018)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> One Liberal's response to "Peoplegate"
> 
> https://twitter.com/gmbutts/status/961573323112112129



Calling someone a Nazi is as bad or worse than racial slurs IMO. It's sad that it's both the adopted go to insult by so many and tolerated.


----------



## angus555 (9 Feb 2018)

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> Can we please agree to not insert American political figures into Canadian debates ?  We have a US Politics thread.  Please don't sully ours with that tripe from south of the border.



Yes, I didn't intend to trigger another discussion with the H word. :not-again:

But it was ironic that someone brought up US reality TV as a caricature of Liberal voters in the last election.

EDIT:

I do enjoy the commentary from Jordan Peterson when he talks about the delusions of young leftist political activists, which he's very familiar with. But it's hard to say how much that element contributed to the last election. Although, I agree Trudeau has an appeal to that segment of voters, the election was too complex.
Right now they're at his town halls screaming at him about pipelines.

 :2c:


----------



## Colin Parkinson (9 Feb 2018)

The Philippine government has told Canada to pound sand on the helicopter deal, I can see that coming back as "Liberals costing Canadian jobs".


----------



## YZT580 (9 Feb 2018)

Colin P said:
			
		

> The Philippine government has told Canada to pound sand on the helicopter deal, I can see that coming back as "Liberals costing Canadian jobs".



Aren't they?  How do you market a military helicopter and then try and tell the customer that they can't use it as a military helicopter?  Do they expect a country to purchase one set for humanitarian use and another fleet for counterinsurgency?


----------



## Loachman (9 Feb 2018)

Not that I'm disagreeing with you, but what's the difference between a military Bell 412 and a civilian Bell 412?


----------



## kratz (9 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> Not that I'm disagreeing with you, but what's the difference between a military Bell 412 and a civilian Bell 412?



IR paint?   ;D 

I know, rhetorical question.


----------



## Jarnhamar (9 Feb 2018)

$840 million in new foreign aid in Syria.
$678-million over six years to resettle 25,000 Syrian refugees.
Another $245-million set aside for the resettlement of an additional 10,000 government-assisted Syrian refugees over the next five years.
$200,000 spent on an unethical vacation (fined $100)
$100,000 to “somebody running a Minister’s Twitter account”
_$59.5M goes to Burkina Faso one day after Trudeau tells vets they ask for too much_ 

 :yellow:


----------



## Loachman (9 Feb 2018)

kratz said:
			
		

> IR paint?   ;D



Not necessarily IR, but paint scheme, yes.


----------



## Retired AF Guy (9 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> Not that I'm disagreeing with you, but what's the difference between a military Bell 412 and a civilian Bell 412?



From the August 2015 news release about the first eight Bell 412 EPs Canada sold to the Philippines:



> Five of eight Bell 412s will be assigned to the Philippine Air Force’s 205th Tactical Helicopter Wing for use in combat utility and human assistance disaster relief (HADR) operations. The remaining three, which are configured for VVIP transportation, will be assigned to the 250th Presidential Airlift Wing.
> 
> The Bell 412EP can also be configured for a wide range of missions such as law enforcement, special operations, homeland security, VIP transportation, oil and gas, and emergency medical service.
> 
> ...



Article Link


----------



## FJAG (9 Feb 2018)

Til Valhall said:
			
		

> . . .
> I do enjoy the commentary from Jordan Peterson when he talks about the delusions of young leftist political activists, which he's very familiar with. . . .



Speaking of Jordan Peterson here is a good article about him from the Daily Mail:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5374295/DOMINIC-SANDBROOK-Pilloried-speaking-sense.html

 :cheers:


----------



## Cloud Cover (9 Feb 2018)

Sigh... let the riots begin: 

Gerald Stanley found not guilty in death of Colten Boushie
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/gerald-stanley-colten-boushie-verdict-1.4526313

"  ...Outside the courthouse, Baptiste said to reporters the justice system has to change to serve First Nations people. "

really? Is the justice system now supposed to change to meet First Nations needs by depriving other races of their right to a fair trial. I hope not.


----------



## Cloud Cover (9 Feb 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> Speaking of Jordan Peterson here is a good article about him from the Daily Mail:
> 
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5374295/DOMINIC-SANDBROOK-Pilloried-speaking-sense.html
> 
> :cheers:



has anyone read 12 Rules? I just bought it today, weekend reading... so far, it is quite enjoyable to read.


----------



## Altair (9 Feb 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> Sigh... let the riots begin:
> 
> Gerald Stanley found not guilty in death of Colten Boushie
> http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/gerald-stanley-colten-boushie-verdict-1.4526313
> ...


there was zero reason for 4 kids to be on someone else's property. 

No need go address the justice system for that. Just don't do dumb things.


----------



## Cloud Cover (9 Feb 2018)

and that too...


----------



## FJAG (9 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> there was zero reason for 4 kids to be on someone else's property.
> 
> No need go address the justice system for that. Just don't do dumb things.



Five kids actually.

Here's a short summary of the evidence:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/what-happened-stanley-farm-boushie-shot-witnesses-colten-gerald-1.4520214

One can imagine why the jury may have had a reasonable doubt. I find the accidental discharge theory plausible when you consider that Boushie had a loaded 22 "rifle" between his legs at the time he was shot. If Stanley had shot deliberately then he could have argued self defence in that circumstance.

 :cheers:


----------



## Jarnhamar (9 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> there was zero reason for 4 kids to be on someone else's property.
> 
> No need go address the justice system for that. Just don't do dumb things.



Yup. They were driving around stealing shit. The helpless teenagers  bit didn't hold up in court.

That said I'm very surprised by the verdict. 





> Jurors have just left via the side door in large van under police escort.


Speaks volumes.


----------



## FJAG (10 Feb 2018)

Link to Saskatoon Star Phoenix re Stanley trial including the evidence that prior to driving to Stanley's farm they attempted to steal a truck at another farm:

http://thestarphoenix.com/news/local-news/gerald-stanley-trial-jury-delivers-not-guilty-verdict-in-murder-of-colten-boushie

There is a short video that shows a number of the trail photos.

 :cheers:


----------



## Loachman (10 Feb 2018)

Retired AF Guy said:
			
		

> From the August 2015 news release about the first eight Bell 412 EPs Canada sold to the Philippines:
> 
> Article Link



Whatever goes into a helicopter can be removed from a helicopter. There is no difference in the machine itself. Machines sold and delivered for SAR or VIP use can easily be reconfigured for any other use - and a new paint job, if necessary, is a simple thing to do.


----------



## Loachman (10 Feb 2018)

I highlighted a name in the last paragraph that I included. I see that as another indicator of the likelihood of continuing Liberal inaction.

http://business.financialpost.com/opinion/terence-corcoran-the-ugly-pipeline-war-is-no-accident-it-was-the-plan

Terence Corcoran: The ugly pipeline war is no accident. It was the plan

The Canadian pipeline crisis is developing along the usual constitutional divide and within the tired context of party politics punditry. Will Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government use its federal powers to overrule the unconstitutional moves by B.C.’s NDP government? Will B.C.’s attempt to block the $7.4-billion expansion of the Trans Mountain oilsands pipeline to the West Coast lead to a trade war with Alberta’s NDP?

And what will the Liberals’ new plans, announced Thursday, to gut the National Energy Board’s power and responsibilities, and new environmental rules released this week to protect the lives of fish against human encroachment by pipeline do to the state of the federation?

Wake up, Canada. This is not another political game show about the powers and rights of different levels of government. Nor is it about ritual inter-party rivalries among Liberals, New Democrats and Conservatives. The Trans Mountain constitutional meltdown is the product of an aggressive radical campaign by green extremists to rip up the Canadian economy.

<mucho snippage>

Among the Canadian green groups cited by Marx as eager recipients of funding were Environmental Defence Canada, World Wildlife Fund Canada, ForestEthics Canada, Greenpeace and others. At the time, in 2008, the head of World Wildlife Fund Canada was _*Gerald Butts*_, currently Prime Minister Trudeau’s principle secretary and top adviser. Other green activists sit on panels and outside cabinet rooms, providing bad advice and misguidance to politicians and business leaders.


----------



## ModlrMike (10 Feb 2018)

No other country would ring fence hundreds of billions of dollars worth of potential tax revenue.


----------



## Good2Golf (10 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> Not that I'm disagreeing with you, but what's the difference between a military Bell 412 and a civilian Bell 412?



MIL-STD-1553 avionics buses, multiband ARC-210s, etc...  That stuff doesn't get 'removed'.


----------



## Loachman (10 Feb 2018)

Necessary for Philippine use?


----------



## Jarnhamar (10 Feb 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> Link to Saskatoon Star Phoenix re Stanley trial including the evidence that prior to driving to Stanley's farm they attempted to steal a truck at another farm:
> 
> http://thestarphoenix.com/news/local-news/gerald-stanley-trial-jury-delivers-not-guilty-verdict-in-murder-of-colten-boushie
> 
> ...



Do you think the other members of the vehicle will be charged with trespassing, theft/attempted theft, drinking and driving, illegal possession of a firearm (which was probably stolen), having a loaded weapon in a vehicle or anything like that?  Seems they got a free pass.


----------



## Altair (10 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> I highlighted a name in the last paragraph that I included. I see that as another indicator of the likelihood of continuing Liberal inaction.
> 
> http://business.financialpost.com/opinion/terence-corcoran-the-ugly-pipeline-war-is-no-accident-it-was-the-plan
> 
> ...


if the liberals do use their nuclear option and shut down any attempt by BC to block kinder Morgan,  I wonder if the people writing these articles will give them any praise. 


http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/bc-alberta-pipeline-trans-mountain-expansion-1.4529422



> As B.C. looks for a way to fight back, Carr said he and his colleagues working on the issue stand ready to shut the dispute down.
> 
> If B.C. makes good on its threat to restrict the bitumen shipments, Ottawa will act "immediately," Carr said.





> Carissima Mathen, a law professor at the University of Ottawa, said that the federal government has always held the constitutional right to the final word on pipelines.
> 
> "No province is able to intervene in that process and they can't use their own law-making authority to try and create other obstacles or barriers to do that," she said


----------



## ballz (10 Feb 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Do you think the other members of the vehicle will be charged with trespassing, theft/attempted theft, drinking and driving, illegal possession of a firearm (which was probably stolen), having a loaded weapon in a vehicle or anything like that?  Seems they got a free pass.



Free pass? I think they've clearly been victimized enough.


----------



## Cloud Cover (10 Feb 2018)

The feds obviously have the final word- how else would Trudeau's father have imposed the NEP.
What is almost certainly going to happen is the Supreme Court will, in the end, be the final decision maker. It seems apparent that even if all governments were aligned on this, the environmental lobby and other special groups are not aligned and so they will have their day in court.(after they finish wreaking enough political destruction on everything else.)  Trudeau _et al_ already know this.


----------



## Jarnhamar (10 Feb 2018)

ballz said:
			
		

> Free pass? I think they've clearly been victimized enough.



They haven't been charged with anything. 

Not trying to come across as snarky but do you mean the trauma of having a victim fight back and turn the tables on them?


----------



## Altair (10 Feb 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> They haven't been charged with anything.
> 
> Not trying to come across as snarky but do you mean the trauma of having a victim fight back and turn the tables on them?


Probably meant seeing their friend die in front of them.


----------



## Cloud Cover (10 Feb 2018)

According to the CBC news article, the victim had in his hands a .22 long rifle, with the stock cut off, 5 rounds in the mag and one in the chamber, the safety was off and of course no trigger lock.  Now, the place is full of coyotes and other things like that, but that does not seem a likely explanation for having that firearm at that time. 
These kids were looking for trouble and they were going find it one way or another. Imagine if Stanley had simply called the police, and then an RCMP officer pulling that car over in the middle of nowhere and to his/her detriment, not seeing that rifle until it is too late. 
Frankly, if Boushie had lived he should have been the one charged.


----------



## ballz (10 Feb 2018)

I was being 100% sarcastic. My apologies for not using a [/sarcasm] tag to be clearer, but the thought and post were a bit of a knee-jerk reaction that I have been trying to hold back for the last 24 hours.

I am quite angry with the reaction to this whole thing, to the point that I have been trying to make myself take a pause to collect myself because my comments are very very unsympathetic to the family and friends of the person who was killed... and at the end of the day it's too bad someone had to die, but people have completely lost their ability to think straight at all. The person who died and the people who were with him have no one to blame but themselves for their own personal choices which led to a situation that did not work out in their favour.

The perpetrators, followed then by the legislative and executive branch of the government are the ones who victimized the actual victim, and it's the justice branch and our justice system that actually stood between an innocent man (who did not ask for these drunken misfits to come onto his property to trash and steal his stuff) and a cage. And I am very very sick of our justice system being defamed by a bunch of people who need to go back to grade school to learn some personal responsibility. Our justice branch is not perfect but it's probably the only part of government left I hold in any esteem and to see people trying to trample it because they want to use majority opinion against innocent people is putting me quite on edge.

"Justice does not mean that you are guaranteed the result that you want." - Marie Henein


----------



## Jarnhamar (10 Feb 2018)

ballz said:
			
		

> I was being 100% sarcastic. My apologies for not using a [/sarcasm] tag to be clearer, but the thought and post were a bit of a knee-jerk reaction that I have been trying to hold back for the last 24 hours.
> 
> I am quite angry with the reaction to this whole thing, to the point that I have been trying to make myself take a pause to collect myself because my comments are very very unsympathetic to the family and friends of the person who was killed... and at the end of the day it's too bad someone had to die, but people have completely lost their ability to think straight at all. The person who died and the people who were with him have no one to blame but themselves for their own personal choices which led to a situation that did not work out in their favour.



Ahh, sorry for not being more astute. I've seen some pretty wacky commentary on this.  

I actually thought he Stanly was guilty because I recall reading some stuff about the guy being shot in the back of the head when they were driving away. Seemed pretty clear cut to me.  Hearing the details (and seeing enough browning NDs) I can see why the jury chose not guilty (though still pretty surprised).

Sask farmers seem to be routinely victimized without very much support or relief (this from friends in Sask and reading).


----------



## jollyjacktar (10 Feb 2018)

I will admit, l haven't read any of the stories on CBC about this trial until now.  The only weapon l see mentioned at the link is the one Mr. Stanley had.  I don't believe those who are upset by the verdict are going to take any notice of what the young men were doing that night or what they had with them.

The story linked below is about all the rallies springing up across Canada.  Like the Cornwallis statue or the MMIW, they want blood and won't be satisfied until they get what they want as a verdict.  As far as l can determine it's another white man's injustice on First Nations people, in their eyes.

Truth, reasonable clarity and acceptance of whatever the real facts are will be lost to the people on both sides whom feel justice wasn't served.

PM Trudeau's comments seem to be one sided (to me) and are only going to pour gas on the fire.  I wish he could keep his gate closed at times like this.

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/saskatoon/boushie-rallies-saskatoon-regina-stanley-not-guilty-verdic-1.4529956


----------



## Remius (10 Feb 2018)

I’ll admit to also not knowing all the facts.  But I did I hear some stuff on the radio about it being an all white jury and the risk that the crown took in going after first degree murder charge rather than a criminal negligence approach. 

I’m sure this evening factors are playing into this.


----------



## Jarnhamar (10 Feb 2018)

*Justin Trudeau* chiming in on the verdict:

"Just spoke with @Puglaas. I can't imagine the grief and sorrow the Boushie family is feeling tonight. Sending love to them from the US"



While Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada *Jody Wilson-Raybould *says:
"As a country we can and must do better - I am committed to working everyday to ensure justice for all Canadians"





Being impartial is not a part of the job I guess.


----------



## Old Sweat (10 Feb 2018)

This could get real ugly very quickly, and I fear the remarks of JT and his Justice Minister will not help.


----------



## kratz (10 Feb 2018)

[quote author=Old Sweat]
This could get real ugly very quickly, and I fear the remarks of JT and his Justice Minister will not help.[/quote]

Agreed. 
The rush to condemn and demand censure through social media, despite the judicial system, is disturbing.


----------



## Cloud Cover (10 Feb 2018)

Ref: the all white jury. The Supreme Court of Canada has already, recently, ruled that there's nothing wrong with that, but the policy might benefit from om a review.  The key issue would have been bias or prejudice, and there is no factual evidence to support the assertions of the FN in this case. And, it was not Boushie on trial so I really don't see how the composition of the jury is truly relevant. Are the FN suggesting having a Native on the jury would have brought some value here- would such a presence change the law, facts and evidence of the case>>>no.
In my view the justice system worked here by preventing racialized views from tainting the jury. And, I haven't seen any official confirmation that there was not any FN in the jury. You can't tell just by looking at skin color and last names.


----------



## ballz (10 Feb 2018)

It's deeply disturbing, the arguments being brought up show that we as a society have forgotten, quite quickly, why we created constitutional democracies, three branches of gov'ts, a judicial system that assumes innocence and a burden of proof being laid on the Crown, etc... all things that we would probably fall apart without.

The argument about an all-white jury shows how much ignorance and bias is involved. The idea is to make the trial fair *for the accused.* Not give the Crown, which already has all the advantages in its favour, even more advantages by letting it stack a jury with people who are going to be prejudiced *against* the accused.

It's f**king mind-boggling.


----------



## FSTO (10 Feb 2018)

So federal ministers are commenting as to the grief they feel with the family of the deceased and that the justice system has to do better.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-ministers-boushie-verdict-reaction-1.4530093 

Similar retorts when Ghomeshi got off. Is the metoo movement the result? 
https://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2016/02/11/closing-arguments-today-in-jian-ghomeshi-trial.html

What will be the result of the Stanley acquittal?

One final note:
If I hear the PM or any of the ministers of the crown speak of white settler farmers extolling their privilege I will lump the entire pathetic group into a Mugabe-like dung heap of idiocy that do not deserve an ounce of our respect.


----------



## Rifleman62 (10 Feb 2018)

1. The argument about an all-white jury is racism IMHO. Or, is it when someone not white says something about white people?  Reverse racism or reverse discrimination, but you can't say that because you will be called racist!!

2. http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/aboriginal-background-must-be-considered-in-violent-crime-sentencing-top-court
*
   Aboriginal background must be considered in violent crime sentencing, top court rules* - 23 Mar 12
  _ The Supreme Court of Canada on Friday upheld the principle of differential sentencing for aboriginals in even the most extreme and 
   technical cases, such as the violation of long-term supervision orders_

3. Think about the Gerald Stanley who killed Colten Boushie. That traumatic event will be his memory/on his conscious until he dies. He may get PTSD. People will always be looking at him and muttering. Stanley is not in an occupation where he has been trained to intentionally take a human life.

4. See 2, above. If Colten Boushie killed Stanley, or beat him to a pulp, or killed a RCMP officer on a traffic stop, what would his sentence be? The first trial with this sentencing was years ago in BC Superior Court with an Indian women getting off after killing  a man/husband/boyfriend (can't remember - FJAG will know). See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gladue_report

5.. The PM and the Justice Minister should shut their cake hole and show leadership to all Canada not a tiny segment.


----------



## Good2Golf (10 Feb 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> The feds obviously have the final word- how else would Trudeau's father have imposed the NEP.
> What is almost certainly going to happen is the Supreme Court will, in the end, be the final decision maker. It seems apparent that even if all governments were aligned on this, the environmental lobby and other special groups are not aligned and so they will have their day in court.(after they finish wreaking enough political destruction on everything else.)  Trudeau _et al_ already know this.



As it was in determining the validity of Omar Khadr’s $20M lawsuit.   

Not a comment about your point specifically, W601, but rather that the Judiciary sometimes doesn’t get the last say where the Executive feels its opinion takes precedence.

Regards
G2G


----------



## YZT580 (10 Feb 2018)

So we have Liberal cabinet members implying that they know better than 12 jurists and a sitting judge.  The implications of that are very, very threatening to the rule of law and should be vigorously opposed by all.


----------



## kratz (10 Feb 2018)

ref: CTV local news



			
				Female protester interviewed said:
			
		

> It can not be acceptable to take a life of someone who comes on your property. This was clearly racially motivated.



Why bother buying and owning anything, including land, with blanket statements like this for a leading argument?


----------



## Cloud Cover (10 Feb 2018)

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> As it was in determining the validity of Omar Khadr’s $20M lawsuit.
> 
> Not a comment about your point specifically, W601, but rather that the Judiciary sometimes doesn’t get the last say where the Executive feels its opinion takes precedence.
> 
> ...


100%
The Supreme Court limited its decisions to the legal rights of the "child. They made no pronouncement on his guilt or innocence,   only about what the duty of the government is/was with the little turd.


----------



## jollyjacktar (10 Feb 2018)

At least someone knows what they're talking about, unlike JT and his Ministers.  I can't wait until the voters make him a Drama Teacher again.



> But some question the ministers speaking publicly on a judicial decision.
> 
> "Inappropriate" was the word former justice minister Peter MacKay used to describe the posts.
> 
> ...


----------



## George Wallace (10 Feb 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> At least someone knows what they're talking about, unlike JT and his Ministers.  I can't wait until the voters make him a Drama Teacher again.



Snowboard Instructor......A Drama Teacher may mean that he would be teaching impressionable minds.  That is not a good thing.


----------



## jollyjacktar (10 Feb 2018)

That works too.


----------



## mariomike (11 Feb 2018)

"Peremptory challenges" seem to be a topic of discussion in this case,
https://www.google.ca/search?rls=com.microsoft%3Aen-CA%3AIE-Address&rlz=1I7GGHP_en-GBCA592&dcr=0&biw=1280&bih=603&ei=StB_WsjbH4GUtQXksr7YDA&q=%22colten+boushie%22+%22peremptory+challenges%22+&oq=%22colten+boushie%22+%22peremptory+challenges%22+&gs_l=psy-ab.12..35i39k1l2.93972.93972.0.98826.1.1.0.0.0.0.193.193.0j1.1.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..0.1.192....0.gDLyw7xGi9w


----------



## Bird_Gunner45 (11 Feb 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> *Justin Trudeau* chiming in on the verdict:
> 
> "Just spoke with @Puglaas. I can't imagine the grief and sorrow the Boushie family is feeling tonight. Sending love to them from the US"
> 
> ...



I agree. The PM and justice minister coming out with the assertion that the legal system failed is extremely unprofessional. One can safely assume that the PMs comments were basically clag designed for sympathy. While he shouldn't comment on such things, "sending love" isn't a direct assault on the justice system. The justice ministers comments are more troubling as she is the minister and she directly imply's that she doesn't agree with the verdict of the trial, which casts aspersions on the justice system. This is not a good or proper road for her to be walking down. If there are doubts that the trial was fair based on evidence of bias in the jury there are mechanisms for that, and it certainly needs to be fleshed out. However, barring that, the minister is simply saying that " we need to do better" to ensure that we always get the verdict we want, not necessarily the proper one.


----------



## ModlrMike (11 Feb 2018)

The Minister forgets that the application of justice exists in two equally important forms: the punishment of the guilty, and the exoneration of the innocent.


----------



## Loachman (11 Feb 2018)

And the latter is the more important of the two.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (11 Feb 2018)

Not quite, ModlrMike:

It exists for the punishment of the guilty, and to refrain from punishing those the Crown cannot prove beyond a doubt to have been guilty.

Courts never (or very, very, very seldom) pronounce someone "innocent". That' is why the verdict that acquits someone is "not guilty" instead of "innocent".

Nevertheless, in my humble opinion, Trudeau's comments was stupid, but the Minister of justice's comments should cost her her job. She has absolutely no business whatsoever commenting as if an injustice has been committed in a trial where she is not a member of the jury and therefore, has neither seen the full evidence presented, nor been able to observe the witnesses. 

To put simply: If the justice system is actually broken, she's had two years to fix it and has done nothing - she should be fired; if it isn't broken, then she is impugning twelve jurors without cause and the judge. There is no evidence whatsoever of this so it is unacceptable and she should resign before getting fired.


----------



## FSTO (11 Feb 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Not quite, ModlrMike:
> 
> It exists for the punishment of the guilty, and to refrain from punishing those the Crown cannot prove beyond a doubt to have been guilty.
> 
> ...



That isn't going to happen OGBD. The narrative is that a white farmer murdered an innocent aboriginal boy and a racist jury let him off scott free. No federal cabinet minister is going to resign or apologize.


----------



## jollyjacktar (11 Feb 2018)

That would go against the dialectic of today's Liberals to do so.  Which is starting to feel like, "if you're white, you're not right".


----------



## Bird_Gunner45 (11 Feb 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Not quite, ModlrMike:
> 
> It exists for the punishment of the guilty, and to refrain from punishing those the Crown cannot prove beyond a doubt to have been guilty.
> 
> ...



Agree. It's a dangerous path to walk, particularly in light of the same thing happening in the Ghomeshi trial. Governments have the right to challenge the supreme court on matters of constitutional importance, such as was the challenge of same sex marriage and 2 x governments challenging veterans. Attempting to vote gather through saying that a trial was rigged is below board.



			
				Loachman said:
			
		

> And the latter is the more important of the two.



Disagree. The court system isn't there to exonerate the innocent, it is there to find justice for the victims of a crime through sentencing of a guilty party. That the system works to protect the innocent from false allegations is a critical benefit.


----------



## FJAG (11 Feb 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Not quite, ModlrMike:
> 
> It exists for the punishment of the guilty, and to refrain from punishing those the Crown cannot prove beyond a doubt to have been guilty.
> 
> ...



Agree 100%. 

I've been concerned for years now about an accelerating trend which started long before the Liberals. Vic Toews, I mean you. DoJ has been tweaking the laws for years so that it becomes easier to charge and convict, and to more harshly punish "popular" crimes. By "popular" I mean those offences which seem to be the fashion of the day; ones where the government has been taking heat from vocal special interest groups. There is less discretion available for judges to use common sense when dealing with the case before them because of such things as mandatory minimum sentences. The problem is particularly notable in the field of sexual offences where the presumption of innocence is almost completely undermined.

I find it particularly distressing that government comments about our jury system is that it needs to be "fixed" because there was an acquittal. There is an old adage in the legal profession that "hard cases make bad law" which means that changing a system just because one case didn't go the way one hoped or expected will undoubtedly lead to a whole lot of new problems.

I can only see two ways that the government could use to "fix" the perceived "injustice": eliminate or reduce peremptory challenges or mandate that there shall be racial representation on the jury every time that an accused or victim has a particular racial background. Both of those, IMHO, are stupid solutions.

Like FSTO, I don't see any Liberal falling on their sword over their stupid comments. In my opinion, they are going to double down on this one and do something stupid. Hopefully it will bite them in the ass in the next election.

 :cheers:


----------



## ModlrMike (11 Feb 2018)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> The Minister forgets that the application of justice exists in two equally important forms: the punishment of the guilty, and the exoneration of the innocent.



I agree, I was being overly simplistic. Perhaps I should have said to punish the guilty, and to protect the innocent. I use the word innocent in the context of the presumption of innocence. That the court does not pronounce one innocent is immaterial. Every defendant enters the court as innocent, whether or not they leave that way is what the process is there to determine.


----------



## Jarnhamar (11 Feb 2018)

[quote author=ModlrMike] Every defendant enters the court as innocent, whether they leave that way is what the process is there to determine.
[/quote]

Not according to our Minister of Justice and lesser extent PM.

The only reason the PM chimed in is to virtue signal because race is involved and, I'd guess, to make up for kicking the FN campaign promise can down the road.


----------



## Old Sweat (11 Feb 2018)

I, for one, would appreciate it very much if one of the lawyers in our group could comment on what form an appeal would take, and how its results are determined. Second, could the ex-defendant be charged with another offence such as careless use of a firearm, that is, is there a way for the Crown to skirt double jeopardy?


----------



## Jarnhamar (11 Feb 2018)

I think his firearm storage charges are still pending.


----------



## FJAG (11 Feb 2018)

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> I, for one, would appreciate it very much if one of the lawyers in our group could comment on what form an appeal would take, and how its results are determined. Second, could the ex-defendant be charged with another offence such as careless use of a firearm, that is, is there away for the Crown to skirt double jeopardy?


An appeal is available under the CCC as follows:



> 676 (1) The Attorney General . . . may appeal to the court of appeal
> 
> (a) against a judgment or verdict of acquittal . . . on any ground of appeal that involves a question of law alone;
> . . .



Effectively under a jury verdict (which are the finders of fact as opposed to law) it would be necessary to prove that the judge made an error in law (such as in the jury selection process or in his instructions to the jury) which are substantial enough to invalidate the jury's finding.

Effectively the matter would be argued before three judges of the Saskatchewan Court of Appeal based on transcripts of the evidence and legal arguments by counsel.

If successful the Court of Appeal would order a retrial and, in very rare circumstance, could substitute a conviction for the acquittal.

The crown would not be able to lay new charges under s 11(h) of the Charter which states:

11. Any person charged with an offence has the right ...
(h) if finally acquitted of the offence, not to be tried for it again and, if finally found guilty and punished for the offence, not to be tried or punished for it again;



> Double jeopardy is a procedural defence that prevents an accused person from being tried again on the same (or similar) charges and on the same facts, following a valid acquittal or conviction.



With the charges having been murder, I would think that the crown has put all of the facts into play and blown it's chances of trying this again on a lesser charge.

 :cheers:


----------



## Infanteer (11 Feb 2018)

Bird_Gunner45 said:
			
		

> Disagree. The court system isn't there to exonerate the innocent, it is there to find justice for the victims of a crime through sentencing of a guilty party. That the system works to protect the innocent from false allegations is a critical benefit.



Nope.

It isn't Bouschie vs Clayton, or estate of Bouschie vs Clayton, or family of Bouschie vs Clayton, its Regina vs Clayton.  The criminal justice system isn't designed to solve anything for victims, families of victims, or anyone else.  It resolves matters between accused and the state.


----------



## Cloud Cover (11 Feb 2018)

To some extent, the CCJ system does involve some measure of victim and community justice, from victim impact statements during sentencing submissions, and taking into account any aggravating or mitigating circumstances. But you're 100% right in the sense that neither of those issues has anything to do with finding of guilt or not guilty. The Crown still has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt every element of an offence, and the accused has every right to make arguments raising reasonable doubt by leveraging every single legal tool available, from the rules of criminal procedure, rules of evidence and the Charter.  Don't misread that as a statement supporting all of the accused that appear before a court, it just seems to me in this case the adage of letting guilty people go free is better than sending innocent  people to jail. In this case, the Crown did not succeed in proving every element of the offence to a proper jury. Hence, that means the accused did not commit the offence for which he was prosecuted and that simply means not guilty. To be found guilty he must have committed all of the required elements set out in the Criminal Code, and only the Criminal Code.  

Now, the politicians may force the Crown to go looking for an error in law, even if the error has nothing to do with the finding of a guilty verdict, and they just may get their appeal. That will not change the elements of the offence, the facts of the events in question, or explain any better the actions of the accused. Once charged, these are fixed and not dynamic. Certainly, in applying the logic required by law from the jury, they do not take into account the racial or social status of victims or the accused. Nor should they, otherwise we really would have an apartheid justice system.


----------



## Cloud Cover (11 Feb 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> An appeal is available under the CCC as follows:
> 
> Effectively under a jury verdict (which are the finders of fact as opposed to law) it would be necessary to prove that the judge made an error in law (such as in the jury selection process or in his instructions to the jury) which are substantial enough to invalidate the jury's finding.
> 
> ...



Why the Alberta court of appeal? Did Battleford convert?


----------



## FJAG (11 Feb 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> Why the Alberta court of appeal? Did Battleford convert?



 :facepalm:

I have a really bad cold right now. Congestion. Brain not working right. Mea Culpa.

 :cheers:


----------



## dapaterson (11 Feb 2018)

Saskaberta?

Albertewan?


Either way, doesn't solve the pipeline problem...


----------



## pbi (12 Feb 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> *Justin Trudeau* chiming in on the verdict:
> 
> "Just spoke with @Puglaas. I can't imagine the grief and sorrow the Boushie family is feeling tonight. Sending love to them from the US"
> 
> ...



This is disgusting and quite disturbing. Politicians are risking grossly overstepping their bounds here, in a manner that I find very dangerous.  While I'm probably somewhat to the "left" on some issues as compared to fellow posters here, this case is not one of them.

It is bad enough, in my opinion, that politicians have any say in the appointing of Justices: an invitation to introducing partisan politics in what must be a fair and impartial system.

For them to make the comments they are now making is totally out of bounds. The only correct comment they could make is "The Courts have spoken. The Crown is free to appeal if it has grounds".

To me, the suggestion by politicians (of ANY stripe, by the way: these just happen to be Liberals) that something is "wrong" or "unfair" in our court system because of a certain decision is wrong. The Crown did its best, and so did the defence. The Crown lost. That's what happens.

What good would it have done to "make sure" that a FN person(s) was sitting on the jury? To "guarantee" that the accused was found guilty? Are we going to make race a prerequisite for jury composition? Really? Think about that for a second, because IMHO it is a very slippery slope.

I've commented elsewhere that "justice" is not "vengeance", although that is what it seems to mean these days. Usually, I hear that sort of distorted thinking coming from the "lock 'em up" crowd dwelling toward the "right" or  "conservative" end of things, but it doesn't matter where it comes from, and politicians, unwittingly or not, shouldn't be encouraging it.

The bigger question might be just what the hell is going on in rural Saskatchewan, to produce such deep divisions and anger in society? Who is scared of whom, and why? What made that farmer feel that he had to resort to deadly force to protect his life and his home? And, on the other side of things, what made the RCMP treat Boushie's family in the manner they reportedly did, when they went to the residence to notify?


----------



## ModlrMike (12 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> Who is scared of whom, and why? What made that farmer feel that he had to resort to deadly force to protect his life and his home?



Five young people, one of whom was reportedly in possession of a rifle, went on to another man's property, and started causing mischief. There's no way this didn't end with a negative outcome - one way or another.


----------



## Cloud Cover (12 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> The bigger question might be just what the hell is going on in rural Saskatchewan, to produce such deep divisions and anger in society? Who is scared of whom, and why? What made that farmer feel that he had to resort to deadly force to protect his life and his home?


It isn't just Saskatchewan.


----------



## FSTO (12 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> The bigger question might be just what the hell is going on in rural Saskatchewan, to produce such deep divisions and anger in society? Who is scared of whom, and why? What made that farmer feel that he had to resort to deadly force to protect his life and his home? And, on the other side of things, what made the RCMP treat Boushie's family in the manner they reportedly did, when they went to the residence to notify?



When the Police is an hr to an hr and half away what choice do people have? There has been a rash of thefts throughout the prairies and farmers and ranchers are getting a little fed up with the free hand the thieves (native and non native) have had lately.

Finally what gives the group of young people the right to drive into a place and just start stealing stuff? Why would they not stop the car on the side of the road and ask for help?


----------



## FSTO (12 Feb 2018)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Five young men, one of whom was reportedly carrying a rifle, went on to another man's property. There's no way this didn't end with a negative outcome.


Actually 3 men and 2 women.


----------



## pbi (12 Feb 2018)

First off, if it's more than just SK in which people in rural areas are in fear for their lives, I go back to the question of finding out why. What is making these rural areas so dangerous that the response to a trespasser (or group of trespassers) is deadly force, seemingly right off the bat? Where is the back story here?

Don't mistake the intent of my question: it's just that-a question. The answer might be that in some places rural people do feel a high threat level. OK-if so, why? Threat from whom? Are rural people able to express their fears and concerns to any body? Or are they dismissed (perhaps as "racists")? Where is their side of this?

I get the inadequate policing part: geographically most of Ontario has little or no regular police coverage except for a few thinly spread OPP, and even down south some rural areas rarely see a cruiser, and must wait quite a while for a response.  Neither of which are automatically a real big problem, unless we are talking about an increasing threat level in these areas. Canada, I think,  is a historically under-policed country.

On the other hand, are there some rural people who think the right (and only... ) response to deal with FNs is deadly force? "Shoot first and ask questions later" ? If that is really true, how is that happening in our country? Killing people shouldn't be taken lightly in a civil society, no matter who does it.

I am guessing that this case is a warning indicator of much bigger problems. How will those problems get looked into, in a fair and dispassionate way that doesn't automatically assume that either side has a lock on what's right?


----------



## ModlrMike (12 Feb 2018)

Witness statements would suggest that it was not shooting that occurred first:

What happened on the Stanley farm


----------



## FSTO (12 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> First off, if it's more than just SK in which people in rural areas are in fear for their lives, I go back to the question of finding out why. What is making these rural areas so dangerous that the response to a trespasser (or group of trespassers) is deadly force, seemingly right off the bat? Where is the back story here?
> 
> Don't mistake the intent of my question: it's just that-a question. The answer might be that in some places rural people do feel a high threat level. OK-if so, why? Threat from whom? Are rural people able to express their fears and concerns to any body? Or are they dismissed (perhaps as "racists")? Where is their side of this?
> 
> ...



Okay first off it wasn't a hail of gunfire that met the SUV as it entered the yard. Initially the Stanley's thought it was someone coming in to check on a vehicle they may have left there to be repaired. The Stanley's had a vehicle/machinery repair business in their yard and many people came and went into the yard. But once the ATV was fired up and the Stanley's went over to investigate thats where things went south.

Its assumptions like you just made is what is making rural people distrust comments coming from away.


----------



## pbi (12 Feb 2018)

FSTO said:
			
		

> Okay first off it wasn't a hail of gunfire that met the SUV as it entered the yard. Initially the Stanley's thought it was someone coming in to check on a vehicle they may have left there to be repaired. The Stanley's had a vehicle/machinery repair business in their yard and many people came and went into the yard. But once the ATV was fired up and the Stanley's went over to investigate thats where things went south.
> 
> Its assumptions like you just made is what is making rural people distrust comments coming from away.



What assumptions were those? Or did I ask questions that looked like assumptions? I don't think I actually said "hail of gunfire" anywhere in my post.

See what I  mean, though? It's hard even to ask questions about this subject, from either angle, without stirring up feelings that one "obviously believes" one thing or the other. I wasn't there, so it's a bit hard for me to assume anything.

It just bothers me that we may have a worse situation in our country, or a part of our country, than what we understand.


----------



## EpicBeardedMan (12 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> It just bothers me that we may have a worse situation in our country, or a part of our country, than what we understand.



Me too... namely believing every story ever told to you by the "victim" without due process. I'm so sick of this trend that everyone who cries victim just HAS to be automatically believed to be telling the truth. The Boushie kid was no saint, just like a lot of "innocent men" being gunned down by the "evil police" in the states...the MSM and his family portray him like some angel who was just seeking some help for a flat tire, meanwhile hes trying to steal MVC's and carrying around a rifle barrel in a loaded SUV with his friends... So sorry, not sorry.

The bleeding hearts are so easily manipulated by the MSM it's absolutely INSANE.  :facepalm:


----------



## FSTO (12 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> What assumptions were those? Or did I ask questions that looked like assumptions? I don't think I actually said "hail of gunfire" anywhere in my post.



Your opening sentence is what I commented on.

"First off, if it's more than just SK in which people in rural areas are in fear for their lives, I go back to the question of finding out why. What is making these rural areas so dangerous that the *response to a trespasser (or group of trespassers) is deadly force, seemingly right off the bat?* Where is the back story here?"

To me you implied that the occupants of the SUV were met with deadly force as soon as they drove into the yard.


----------



## pbi (12 Feb 2018)

> Me too... namely believing every story ever told to you by the "victim" without due process



I agree that would be a bad idea, if I was doing it. But I'm not. I'm asking questions.



> I'm so sick of this trend that everyone who cries victim just HAS to be automatically believed to be telling the truth.



Yes, me too. It's called "the Victim Industry" or "the Victim Culture". It's the abuse of something real and legitimate. Not talking about that.



> The Boushie kid was no saint,



I think the "MSM" (which I follow) has made it pretty clear that is the case, nor was the other individual in the vehicle who was well known to police and had a record. 



> just like a lot of "innocent men" being gunned down by the "evil police" in the states..



Well...if I'm not mistaken, some innocent people actually have been shot or otherwise killed by the police in the US. If the police, whom we appoint to obey the law and protect us, are breaking that law and killing people, then IMHO it is the job of the media to raise the issue and prevent it from being dismissed. I also believe, by the way, that there are situations in which a police officer may kill a person with good justification.  It isn't just "either/or".



> The bleeding hearts are so easily manipulated by the MSM it's absolutely INSANE



And people who ask irritating questions are often tagged as "bleeding hearts" or "racists" or "police haters" or "colonialists" or whatever bumper sticker people feel like slapping on to shut down questions they don't like.


----------



## EpicBeardedMan (12 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> Well...if I'm not mistake, some innocent people actually have been shot or otherwise killed by the police in the US. If the police, whom we appoint to obey the law and protect it, are breaking that law and killing people, then IMHO it is the job of the media to raise the issue and prevent it from being dismissed. I also believe, by the way, that there are situations in which a police officer may kill a person with good justification.  It isn't just "either/or".



Debatable on A) How many of them were innocent. B) How many Police are actually pulling the trigger and the subject isn't dying due to cases of excited delirium, effects of being tazed, etc.



> And people who ask irritating questions are often tagged as "bleeding hearts" or "racists" or "police haters" or "colonialists" or whatever bumper sticker people feel like slapping on to shut down questions they don't like.



Wasn't using it as a label, just moreso a general brush stroke of people who live sheltered lives and think that people doing evil crap is a rarity and everyone calling the victim card is to be believed.


----------



## pbi (12 Feb 2018)

EpicBeardedMan said:
			
		

> Debatable on A) How many of them were innocent. B) How many Police are actually pulling the trigger and the subject isn't dying due to cases of excited delirium, effects of being tazed, etc...



Maybe some deserved to be shot. It certainly happens. But I don't become "guilty" because a police officer decides (out of fear, poor training, psychological issues, misunderstanding, racism, or whatever) to kill me outside the bounds of the law. I worked for a few years in hotel security: I know very well that some people are just looking for trouble, and need a good thrashing. I get it. But not everybody deserves that all the time, and certainly not every dodgy person deserves to be killed.



> Wasn't using it as a label, just moreso a general brush stroke of people who live sheltered lives and think that people doing evil crap is a rarity and everyone calling the victim card is to be believed.



Ack. And I didn't mean to say that you did. And I am with you on people who don't understand that there really are bad, evil people who deserve to die. There are. I'm just saying that taking human life in a civil society is a serious business. When it happens, we have to ask what the hell is going on, no matter who gets offended.

And, by "what the hell is going on", I mean (like I tried to say earlier) that maybe there really is serious criminal behaviour by some FN people: maybe rural folks in parts of SK really ARE frightened. If so, then we need to get this out in the open. Those farm folks need as big and loud a public platform as Boushie's supporters: they have a story too. If  people in this country are so scared that they feel they have no choice but to defend themselves with guns, that IMHO is failure on a bunch of levels. 

But we need to be able to have this out without people screaming "racists" and "bleeding hearts" at each other. I'm not so sure how to do that.


----------



## Jed (12 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> Maybe some deserved to be shot. It certainly happens. But I don't become "guilty" because a police officer decides (out of fear, poor training, psychological issues, misunderstanding, racism, or whatever) to kill me outside the bounds of the law. I worked for a few years in hotel security: I know very well that some people are just looking for trouble, and need a good thrashing. I get it. But not everybody deserves that all the time, and certainly not every dodgy person deserves to be killed.
> 
> Ack. And I didn't mean to say that you did. And I am with you on people who don't understand that there really are bad, evil people who deserve to die. There are. I'm just saying that taking human life in a civil society is a serious business. When it happens, we have to ask what the hell is going on, no matter who gets offended.
> 
> ...



People are afraid that this is the case. Invariably these are the same people who fear guns, big knives and not being able to look after their own self defence. That is the essence of the problem.


----------



## pbi (12 Feb 2018)

Jed said:
			
		

> People are afraid that this is the case. Invariably these are the same people who fear guns, big knives and not being able to look after their own self defence. That is the essence of the problem.


Isn't it more likely that the people who don't like guns, etc are the ones who would immediately deny that the SK farmers have anything to be afraid of: in other words, claiming that what I proposed definitely "isn't the case" ?  Wouldn't those people be the ones who believe the farmers are just motivated by ignorance and racism and trigger-happiness?

But, I wouldn't trivialize people who don't like the idea of killing. I would hope that most people in a civil society actually don't like it, and see it as something to be done only in a case of dire necessity./ If everybody likes the idea of killing, civil society won't be around long.


----------



## Cloud Cover (12 Feb 2018)

I disagree with pretty much everything this lawyer has to say about this matter:  https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/boushie-verdict-no-justice-without-indigenous-people-in-the-system-says-lawyer-1.3799738


"Public comments made by political leaders about the verdict in the Colten Boushie case can’t undermine the justice system when it comes to Indigenous people because it is already fundamentally broken, says a Native lawyer."  - what sort of BS is that? Anything that interferes with the accused right to a fair trial undermines the justice system. No further explanation needed or required. 

“That’s been a problem from the very beginning. No visibly Indigenous police officers, Crown counsel, defence counsel, jury, judges, corrections, I mean, all the way around this is a non-Indigenous system,” Palmater, who is Mi’kmaq, told CTV’s Your Morning Monday." -- well, as an educator and a lawyer, it would be nice if we could have more FN graduates, without disrupting the entire standards of the post secondary education system. For example, the testing and marking schemes are rapidly becoming "Indigenized" to meet their needs. Would you take a defence lawyer or a jury or a crown counsel serious if you knew they got a trophy diploma just for showing up at class some of the time? Thats how low the standards are dropping, just look at how the (now called) Law Society of Ontario behaves. 

“Society, unfortunately, and government has allowed to move forward dispossession, oppression and racism of Indigenous people with almost complete impunity. And this case is just a prime example of that.” - well, we've pretty much beat the crap out of that line of BS in this thread.

"Politicians are just speaking from the heart and they are speaking the truth, so critics will be critics. The fact remains a young man got killed and there was no justice,” he said on Your Morning Monday. “I pose this question to all those critics and all those people who think that Gerald Stanley was justified in what he did: What would you do if that was your child? What would you expect? And how would you feel?”- I would feel terrible for the parents because their drunken child was in the process of committing a crime spree with his pals and was accidentally killed in the process. 

“The system is flawed. It was designed to fail First Nations people and many other people. There has to be more positive change and you’re not going to get any better recommendations (than) from people who have suffered through the justice system, families like the Boushie family.”  - The Criminal Code was NOT designed to fail any particular race, religion or creed. It did have some very serious gender issues and those are slowly being fixed. Has the justice system failed the Boushie family- yes, the Crown and the police did not put the truth to the family that their son put himself in a crowd of idiots and was at the wrong place at the wrong time. Simple and painful as that may be for them to accept.  If the reverse had happened, if the crappy, unsafe rifle accidentally discharged and had shot Stanley, would there be FN and Lib outrage if there was a guilty verdict if one of those trespassers was convicted- of course they would.  OTOH, would they be happy and thankful if the verdict was not guilty - yes, the justice system would be just sunny and on its way to reconciliation. 

“I think, unfortunately, they’re just going to get more words to try to placate them,” she said. “There will be no real commitment for change and that’s part of the problem with this and other governments, it’s always been words and less action.”  - Does she really expect the Courts will allow the government to flip over a constitutional principle in order to attempt to manufacture more pleasing racialized outcomes to satisfy a vengeful segment of the population by creating an actual apartheid justice system rather than a perceived one.  Every Judge in this country is watching this and dreading what lies before them... will they stick to the law and the principles of the constitution or will they be forced to get creative.


----------



## Jed (12 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> Isn't it more likely that the people who don't like guns, etc are the ones who would immediately deny that the SK farmers have anything to be afraid of: in other words, claiming that what I proposed definitely "isn't the case" ?  Wouldn't those people be the ones who believe the farmers are just motivated by ignorance and racism and trigger-happiness?
> 
> No. Most of the folks that don’t like guns, big knives don’t live in rural Saskatchewan / Alberta.
> 
> But, I wouldn't trivialize people who don't like the idea of killing. I would hope that most people in a civil society actually don't like it, and see it as something to be done only in a case of dire necessity./ If everybody likes the idea of killing, civil society won't be around long.



I agree, never trivialize taking a life. It is sick and perverse to enjoy killing / torture / etc. Even if one perceives it to be justice and / or revenge.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (12 Feb 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> In this case, the Crown did not succeed in proving every element of the offence to a proper jury. Hence, that means the accused did not commit the offence for which he was prosecuted and that simply means not guilty. To be found guilty he must have committed all of the required elements set out in the Criminal Code, and only the Criminal Code.



That is sometimes not true. It simply means the Crown failed to prove that the accused committed the offence, not that the accused did not commit the offence (two very distinct things).

This is why I like the Scottish way of doing things were they have Guilty and Not Proven. Not proven simply means we didn't prove you did the crime. You may have actually done it, you may have not, we may never know, but it isn't the complete exoneration that our wording seems to imply.


----------



## FSTO (12 Feb 2018)

Another thing being lost here is that I doubt that Gerald Stanley woke up that morning and thought "I'm going to kill me an indian today".
By listening to the Ottawa chattering classes today, I'm have the feeling that that is exactly what many people here in Ottawa are thinking.


----------



## jollyjacktar (12 Feb 2018)

I think the impartial truth of what happened in this tragedy for both families has left the building in the rush to condemn due process.  

I can appreciate the Boushie family is grieving, angry and feel they were let down by the system.  That doesn't mean they were.

The Stanley family too are no doubt feeling they've been abandoned and run over.  Both of these families have suffered a great loss, no one has won here.

I am disheartened to see political figures who should be keeping their mouths closed, taking sides and bringing the system into disrepute.  That's not leadership.


----------



## Jarnhamar (12 Feb 2018)

The FN community seem oblivious to the nuances of the case. A  GoFundMe thing set up describes: 


> In August 2016, Colten was shot and killed on a farm while out for a drive with his friends.


.

Obviously they were doing more than going out for a drive but the community wants to gloss over that fact. 

A similar fund for Gerald Stanley to recoup court costs is up and naturally people are going berserk about it. From demanding GoFundMe remove it to stories of people taking contributors names and harassing then in facebook or trying to contact their work and get them fired or causing shit.


----------



## mariomike (12 Feb 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> The FN community seem oblivious to the nuances of the case. A  GoFundMe thing set up describes: .
> 
> Obviously they were doing more than going out for a drive but the community wants to gloss over that fact.
> 
> A similar fund for Gerald Stanley to recoup court costs is up and naturally people are going berserk about it. From demanding GoFundMe remove it to stories of people taking contributors names and harassing then in facebook or trying to contact their work and get them fired or causing shit.



For anyone who wishes to contribute, or compare the amounts in each fund,

Colten Boushie
https://www.gofundme.com/justice4colten

Gerald Stanley 
https://www.gofundme.com/gerald-stanley-support-fund


----------



## Cloud Cover (12 Feb 2018)

Eaglelord17 said:
			
		

> That is sometimes not true. It simply means the Crown failed to prove that the accused committed the offence, not that the accused did not commit the offence (two very distinct things).



This is not Scotland. This was a charge of murder- under Canadian law this an offence of specific intent and not general intent. If all the elements of an offence are not proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then the alleged crime did not occur pursuant to the _Criminal Code,_ and that is all that matters. There was a homicide but not a murder.  Homicide that is not culpable is not an offence. Black and white, right in the criminal code. If it is established through a trial that a person did not commit murder, manslaughter or infanticide or any of the items in section 222(5), they have not committed a culpable homicide.  See 222 (1)-(6).


----------



## jollyjacktar (12 Feb 2018)

Another photo opportunity.  The PM is going to meet the Boushie family.   :not-again:

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/politics/boushie-verdict-ottawa-parliament-meeting-1.4530880


----------



## Jarnhamar (12 Feb 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Another photo opportunity.  The PM is going to meet the Boushie family.   :not-again:
> 
> http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/politics/boushie-verdict-ottawa-parliament-meeting-1.4530880



Did the prime minister meet with the families of  Robert Hall and John Ridsdel after they were kidnapped, tortured and beheaded by the ISIS-affiliated terror group Abu Sayyaf?


----------



## George Wallace (12 Feb 2018)

Remember the last time Trudeau hosted a family?
Perhaps there is a pattern.


----------



## jollyjacktar (12 Feb 2018)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Remember the last time Trudeau hosted a family?
> Perhaps there is a pattern.



I wonder, if it were the Stanley family looking for a meeting,  would they get the same answer as that Silver Cross father did when he had concerns about where dollars were going.  A "gee is that the time?  We're fully booked up, maybe next time".


----------



## Loachman (13 Feb 2018)

I have never looked at Reddit before, and therefore have no comment regarding any bias that may or may not exist on that site, or on the veracity of comments regarding the Boushie incident in general, but https://www.reddit.com/r/canada/comments/7wt9ey/after_stanley_verdict_lawyers_say_political/du37b4q/ was pointed out to me. The poster seems to have done his research, and provides many links. I've only looked at a few, all of which were from regular media reports.

On one:

"The embattled Chief of Red Pheasant First Nation was sentenced, again, in North Battleford provincial court Wednesday.

"Stewart Baptiste received a suspended sentence and six months probation in connection to guilty pleas entered for two charges of violating his probation."

A sentence of probation for breaking probation strikes me as ineffective and silly.


----------



## ModlrMike (13 Feb 2018)

You know you've crossed the Rubicon when even the Red Star tells you to STFU...
*
For the sake of peoplekind, Justin Trudeau needs to shut his mouth*

Forget climate change, terrorism, potential war or a volatile stock market. The biggest threat to Canada right now is our leader’s mouth, writes Vinay Menon.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (13 Feb 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> This is not Scotland. This was a charge of murder- under Canadian law this an offence of specific intent and not general intent. If all the elements of an offence are not proven beyond a reasonable doubt, then the alleged crime did not occur pursuant to the _Criminal Code,_ and that is all that matters. There was a homicide but not a murder.  Homicide that is not culpable is not an offence. Black and white, right in the criminal code. If it is established through a trial that a person did not commit murder, manslaughter or infanticide or any of the items in section 222(5), they have not committed a culpable homicide.  See 222 (1)-(6).



Again just because it is not proven does not mean the offence didn't occur, they are two distinctly different things. You are not on trial to prove your innocence you are on trial for them to try and prove your guilt. If we had a guilty until proven innocent system what you are saying would be true as you actually have to prove you did not commit the offence. This is why the Scottish wording makes sense as for all intents and purposes it has the same effects on the accused post trial, however it is still possible you did it, just they failed to prove it.


----------



## jollyjacktar (13 Feb 2018)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> You know you've crossed the Rubicon when even the Red Star tells you to STFU...
> *
> For the sake of peoplekind, Justin Trudeau needs to shut his mouth*
> 
> Forget climate change, terrorism, potential war or a volatile stock market. The biggest threat to Canada right now is our leader’s mouth, writes Vinay Menon.



Holy shit.  What a great article.  I never thought the Red Star would print something cutting like this.  I expect it will fall on deaf ears.  So, more comedy gold to come l guess.


----------



## Remius (13 Feb 2018)

Not a bad article on what the jury might have faced.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/gerald-stanley-colten-boushie-jury-verdict-1.4532064


----------



## Altair (13 Feb 2018)

Good article on why the conservatives might need another 4 years in opposition. 

John Ivison: Scheer’s climate policy alienating potential new Conservative voters: http://nationalpost.com/opinion/john-ivison-scheers-climate-policy-alienating-potential-new-conservative-voters



> The Conservative leader is firmly ensconced as the leader of a Official Opposition that is united against a carbon tax.
> 
> His problem is that, unless he can persuade voters he cares about the environment and has a plan for tackling climate change, he will still be the Opposition leader after the next election.
> 
> ...





> Yet, the polling evidence is convincing – the Conservatives need to attract younger, urban, ethnically diverse voters or they will lose again in 2019.
> 
> Just hours before Scheer’s appearance at Manning, David Coletto, chief executive at Abacus Data, presented some new research that suggested the pool of voters who would consider voting Conservative has risen to 51 per cent of all Canadians, from 42 per cent at the last election. Yet Abacus polling said only 26 per cent of all voters say they will vote Tory if an election were held tomorrow.
> 
> ...





> Climate change is a symbolic issue for many of them and Scheer mocks policies intended to address it at his peril.
> 
> The Conservative mantra under Harper was to adopt divide-and-conquer policies that polarized it with all the other parties, letting them fight for the progressive vote.
> 
> ...


----------



## Loachman (13 Feb 2018)

Eaglelord17 said:
			
		

> Again just because it is not proven does not mean the offence didn't occur, they are two distinctly different things. You are not on trial to prove your innocence you are on trial for them to try and prove your guilt. If we had a guilty until proven innocent system what you are saying would be true as you actually have to prove you did not commit the offence. This is why the Scottish wording makes sense as for all intents and purposes it has the same effects on the accused post trial, however it is still possible you did it, just they failed to prove it.



Nobody, including Mr Stanley, denies that a homicide took place. That is not the issue. To find someone guilty of _*murder*_, _*intent*_ to kill has to be proven, and it was not.

I do not know if self-defence was considered in this case or not. I would, however, consider any such claim to be valid.

The jury apparently deliberated for fifteen hours. That is a reasonable indication that they considered all factors quite carefully and thoroughly.

Your second sentence adds little. A good lawyer could still get a guilty client off under the right circumstances with reverse onus. It would be a much bigger challenge, yes, but would you rather see more potentially innocent people go to jail than potentially guilty people be let off?

There have been more than enough people sentenced for crimes that they did not commit as it is. Reversing the onus would inflate that number and is repugnant.


----------



## Cloud Cover (13 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> Good article on why the conservatives might need another 4 years in opposition.
> 
> John Ivison: Scheer’s climate policy alienating potential new Conservative voters: http://nationalpost.com/opinion/john-ivison-scheers-climate-policy-alienating-potential-new-conservative-voters



I agree. The issue he has to cross is a viable, workable and politically acceptable alternative to carbon taxes. I don't believe those taxes are really reducing emissions on their own-the US is doing that without such a tax.
Need a better alternative than taxes, or causing scarce supply when the resource is in abundance, and especially causing/allowing higher pump and heating prices for no good reason.
Scheer would do better talking about escalating household costs, taking a page from Jack Laytons playboy.


----------



## ModlrMike (13 Feb 2018)

The real problem with a carbon tax is that the public has no faith that the government would use it for its intended purpose. I think people are willing to pay, if they can be assured that they are getting what they pay for. The other issue of course is that there's only one source of tax revenue, and that's the individual. Tax corporations all you want; in the end the individual pays.


----------



## Loachman (13 Feb 2018)

Some enlightenment from two lawyers in two letters in today's Globe and Mail:

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/letters/feb-13-justice-system-under-microscope-plus-other-letters-to-the-editor/article37947644/

The Stanley verdict

The purpose of a criminal trial is to determine if each essential element of the offence has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Murder contains two essential elements: actus reus and mens rea. Actus reus is the commission of the act, killing the victim, and mens rea is the accused having intended to do so. In the Gerald Stanley case, the actus reus was clearly proven and not denied by the accused. The problem was the mens rea – did the accused intend to kill the victim or was it an accident?

To secure a conviction, the Crown had to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Stanley intended to kill Colten Boushie (Stanley Acquitted In Shooting Death Of Boushie, Feb. 10). The jury wrestled with this issue for 15 hours before deciding unanimously that the Crown had failed to do so.

The length of deliberation suggests there was some evidence that he had an intention but not enough to provide proof beyond a reasonable doubt. That is how the system is supposed to work. The English legal system of criminal justice, which is the law in Canada, is the only system that requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

It is intended to ensure that no innocent person is ever convicted of an offence. I sympathize with the victim's family and understand that it is difficult for them to accept the verdict but they must try to understand what has happened here. The jury was called upon to decide, based only on the evidence presented to them, whether the Crown had proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Mr. Stanley intended to kill Mr. Boushie. After deliberating for 15 hours, it decided that the Crown had failed to do so, and as a result Mr. Stanley was found not guilty.

Garth M. Evans, Q.C., Vancouver

.......................................

Before we throw trial by jury under the bus in favour of some other system, three considerations:

We already have a robust mechanism for determining if the jury is biased. The challenge for cause procedure results in questioning jurors before they are sworn. It is often used when racial prejudices might influence the jury. The Crown chose not to use it here. The fact the Crown did not engage that procedure does not mean the rest of the system is wrong or needs to be changed.

Second, context matters: If media reports are accurate, protesters greeted the jury pool before they were selected, calling on them to find Mr. Stanley guilty regardless of what the evidence demonstrated. The identity of jury members is public information. It would be perceived by the accused that it would be much harder for someone who lived on reserve with the demonstrators to resist that call than it would be for someone unknown to the demonstrators.

When we politicize the outcome of a trial by protests, we make it much harder for the accused to feel comfortable that a particular juror will decide based on the evidence instead of his or her ethnic identification.

The underlying problem is that there are few Indigenous people in the jury pool. Justice Frank Iacobucci commented on that problem and made recommendations to fix it. That is the urgent reform needed.

Brian Casey, Q.C., Dartmouth, N.S.


----------



## Cloud Cover (13 Feb 2018)

I myself find it hard to believe there were few indigenous people in the jury pool. That there were no or few indigenous people on the actual jury is another matter.


----------



## Loachman (13 Feb 2018)

From something that I came across yesterday - and cannot remember where - initial selection was/is done (in that area/province at least) from the provincial health card database, as it was considered to be the most universal/inclusive single database. Those living on-reserve, however, are covered federally rather than provincially and are therefore not included in the invitation process - and were probably quite happy about that situation until now.

Few reserve residents pay income tax and many otherwise-eligible jurors may not have driver's licences. What other provincially-accessible databases exist that could be added?


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (13 Feb 2018)

Why do you find it hard to believe, Whiskey601?

The First Nation community from which the victim came is a little more than 50 Km from the site of the event that gave rise to the trial.

Now, I don't know about Saskatchewan, but around here, that would mean that there is a very high likelihood that the two communities are located in different judicial districts. Now, when jury panels (the group of potential jurors called out for selection) are created, they are usually selected at random from a list of sort for the judicial district where the trial takes place. You don't get people from all over the province, save in very specific types of cases where you know that finding local people without involvement or bias is near impossible for some reason or other.

So it is perfectly possible, I would almost say probable, that there were few First Nation communities or member from First Nations in the district where the trial was held, and therefore few to be on the randomly selected panel.

And Loachman: In Quebec, we use the electoral list. While many members of the various First Nations make the conscious decision not to vote - for political reasons - they are nevertheless usually entered on the electoral list.


----------



## George Wallace (13 Feb 2018)

Whiskey601

I think this may have been a part of why there were no First Nations on that jury:



> Second, context matters: If media reports are accurate, protesters greeted the jury pool before they were selected, calling on them to find Mr. Stanley guilty regardless of what the evidence demonstrated. The identity of jury members is public information. It would be perceived by the accused that it would be much harder for someone who lived on reserve with the demonstrators to resist that call than it would be for someone unknown to the demonstrators.



Meanwhile, here is another perspective:

http://thepoliceinsider.com/boushie-case-exposes-cracks-in-leadership/



> Boushie Case Exposes Cracks in Leadership
> February 12, 2018 7:35 am
> by James G Jewell
> 
> ...


----------



## Remius (13 Feb 2018)

I believe there were a few FN persons called to the jury pool but that the defense used peremptory challenges to dismiss them.

I think we have two situations that are unfortunately linked because of this trial.

1) A verdict that some people didn't like.  The problem is that most people don't understand the justice system.  Like in the Gomeshi trial.  Non credible witness can raise reasonable doubt.

2) A system that is perceived as not properly or fairly serving a segment of society 

Both issues are being mixed in together when really they should be looked at separately.

On one side I accept the verdict from a legal perspective.  I have no doubt that Mr. Stanley felt threatened and feared for himself.  Those kids were up to no good and lost all credibility at trial with changing stories or things that didn't add up.  I also don't believe Mr. Stanley wanted to kill anyone but I don't believe for a second his pistol was for scaring animals and I have a hard time believing that his gun just went off with his finger off the trigger.  But that's just a biased non informed opinion on my part.  

The other side about how we pick juries and how the justice system deal with FN is something that does need addressing but in the proper context and without specific cases like this entering the political debate.  The government says they have to do better.  then stop saying that and do it.  They've had years now to deal with this sort of thing.


----------



## Loachman (13 Feb 2018)

Ref your first line, from my Reply 520: "The challenge for cause procedure results in questioning jurors before they are sworn. _*It is often used when racial prejudices might influence the jury*_. _*The Crown chose not to use it here*_. The fact the Crown did not engage that procedure does not mean the rest of the system is wrong or needs to be changed."

No questions were asked, as I understand, but anybody who appeared to be indigenous was rejected anyway - undoubtedly because "racial prejudices might influence the jury".

A bulged spent casing from Mr Stanley's pistol was found. That was used to explain his claim that the weapon fired while the slide was to the rear. The ammunition was around sixty years old and likely stored for some, or all of that, in less-than-ideal conditions, which could explain a hangfire (possible, but almost impossible to prove or disprove).


----------



## mariomike (13 Feb 2018)

Reply #516

National Post


> Yet, the polling evidence is convincing – the Conservatives need to attract younger, urban, ethnically diverse voters or they will lose again in 2019.



Any opinions on if they will be able to?


----------



## Retired AF Guy (13 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> From something that I came across yesterday - and cannot remember where - initial selection was/is done (in that area/province at least) from the provincial health card database, as it was considered to be the most universal/inclusive single database. Those living on-reserve, however, are covered federally rather than provincially and are therefore not included in the invitation process - and were probably quite happy about that situation until now.
> 
> Few reserve residents pay income tax and many otherwise-eligible jurors may not have driver's licences. What other provincially-accessible databases exist that could be added?



How juries are selected in Saskatchewan:



> A jury is a group of impartial people who listen to the evidence in a court case and render a verdict.  In Saskatchewan, jury trials are only held at Court of Queen's Bench.
> 
> In a criminal trial, 12 jurors hear the evidence and decide if the accused person is guilty or not guilty. Before the jury makes their decision, the judge explains the law that they must consider when deciding the verdict. If there is a guilty verdict, the judge will decide what the sentence should be. Criminal jury trials are only held for indictable offences (more serious offences).
> 
> ...



 Article Link


----------



## pbi (13 Feb 2018)

A more realistic goal for The Tories for next year is to play a long game and aim to become kingmakers to a Liberal minority government. Avoid courting the social extremists, focus on the economy and jobs, produce a workable and credible program to protect the environment without wrecking the economy, and they have a very good chance. I very much doubt the NDP will ever repeat their last performance.

For the record, after a life of voting Tory, I voted Liberal last time. But, like a goodly number  of Canadians, I could go back to the Big Blue Tent.


----------



## Jarnhamar (13 Feb 2018)

[quote author=pbi] 
For the record, after a life of voting Tory, I voted Liberal last time. 
[/quote]

Genuinely curious, mind if I ask what motivated you to vote Liberal?
[I found this Conservatives were getting cocky, all but abandoned the CAF and firearm owners (two biggies for me) but their stance on refugees was what sealed the blue deal for me this go.]


----------



## Cloud Cover (13 Feb 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Why do you find it hard to believe, Whiskey601?
> 
> The First Nation community from which the victim came is a little more than 50 Km from the site of the event that gave rise to the trial.
> 
> ...



This, among other things, is why I find it hard to believe: http://aptnnews.ca/2018/02/12/justice-minister-examine-jury-selection-saskatchewan-verdict/

"Now let us read about the jury selection, from the Globe and Mail
“More than 700 people from across the massive Battlefords district were issued summons to appear as part of the jury panel.
Approximately 200 showed up in person on Monday morning.
When Chief Justice Martel Popescul asked whether anyone needed to be excused as potential jurors, a long line quickly formed.
About 70 people, roughly a third of those present, pleaded to be let go,
Nearly 50, including about a “dozen people who appeared Indigenous ”, were excused.”
Those “dozen people who appeared Indigenous ” were 4.9% of the 200 and more that showed up Monday for jury duty but asked to be excused.


Now, I do not like the 'appeared to be indigenous" part of that, and I cannot source the Globe and Mail article. But it does suggest but not prove that the stories about this are not lining up with the many narratives on the jury pool. The Battleford judicial district is apparently "massive" whatever that means.  op:   

The federal government is responsible for paying the NIHB benefits for health care costs of FN, but does that mean they are excluded from provincial health care system registration and by extension the jury selection system? Is that known as fact or a supposition? I'm just asking.


----------



## Retired AF Guy (13 Feb 2018)

Some information from Stats Canada on the Aboriginal population in Saskatchewan:



> *One in ten Aboriginal people in Canada live in Saskatchewan*
> 
> Numbering 157,740,Note 1 11% of the Aboriginal identity population in Canada lived in Saskatchewan in 2011. They made up 16% of the total population of that province.
> 
> ...



Full article can be found here.

And for those not familiar with the area, there is the city of North Battleford and the town of Battleford (aka "the Old Town"), two very different urban areas. Collectively, they are known as "the Battlefords". Populations (2011) of 13,888 and 4,065 respectively.


----------



## George Wallace (13 Feb 2018)

A pause for thought and reflection.

On the Saskatchewan Legal front, this is escaping the MSM:

https://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/canada/drunk-driver-who-killed-family-of-4-moved-to-healing-lodge-after-serving-1-month-1.3300680



> Drunk driver who killed family of 4 moved to 'healing lodge' after serving 1 month
> Josh Dehaas, CTVNews.ca Writer
> @JoshDehaas
> Published Friday, February 24, 2017 7:44PM EST
> ...



Two Legal Standards (three if you want to include the "elite") for Canadians is not just.  

Here we have a First Nations person basically getting off scot free after killing four people.  If one wants to question why tensions exist, then look at how our Legal SYSTEMS do not match and treat ALL Canadians equally.  

I would say that this, although well intended, is not working:


> “Indigenous programs target offenders’ needs in the context of indigenous history, culture and spirituality while at the same time addressing the factors related to criminal behaviour,” Corrections Canada said.


The problem(s) is being treated "reactively" and not "proactively".


----------



## ModlrMike (13 Feb 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> The federal government is responsible for paying the NIHB benefits for health care costs of FN, but does that mean they are excluded from provincial health care system registration and by extension the jury selection system? Is that known as fact or a supposition? I'm just asking.



I can't speak for elsewhere, but not in MB, and not in ON. Both provinces issue health numbers for both FN and non-FN residents.


----------



## Jarnhamar (13 Feb 2018)

Hangfire. 


https://youtu.be/_9umwdE8VoY


----------



## jollyjacktar (13 Feb 2018)

On the CBC Ottawa afternoon radio drive home show today at about 1710hrs, l listened to a Criminal Defence Lawyer from Toronto being interviewed. 

The subject was on the Justice Minister and PM weighing in on the trial, meeting the Bouchie family members today and the controversy of the trial, verdict and justice system and how these two individuals actions will have ramifications.

This lawyer absolutely savaged both Ministers, in particular the PM.  I know this radio segment will be available to listen to on the shows website in a day or so if one was so inclined.  It was interesting to hear this man break things down in a clear, concise and understandable manner.


----------



## ModlrMike (13 Feb 2018)

Unfortunately, Parliament seems to be full of cloth ears regarding this subject.


----------



## Loachman (13 Feb 2018)

Meanwhile, in the Province at the Centre of the Universe:

https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2018/02/12/dropping-brown-has-helped-ontario-tories-poll.html

Dropping Brown has helped Ontario Tories: poll

PC leadership hopefuls Christine Elliott, Caroline Mulroney and Doug Ford are all more popular than Premier Kathleen Wynne, a new poll suggests.

"*Elliott*, a former MPP, was the most popular – *46 per cent* of respondents would cast a ballot for a PC party led by her compared to 23 per cent for Andrea Horwath’s New Democrats, 20 per cent for Wynne’s Liberals, and 7 per cent for Mike Schreiner’s Greens.

"Rookie PC candidate *Mulroney*’s Tories were at *41 per cent* compared to 25 per cent for Horwath’s NDP, 22 per cent for Wynne’s Liberals, and 8 per cent for Schreiner’s Greens.

"Former Toronto councillor *Ford*’s PC party was at *39 per cent* compared to 24 per cent apiece for Horwath’s NDP and Wynne’s Liberals, and 7 per cent for Schreiner’s Greens."

By comparison:

"When *no leaders’ names* are surveyed, the Tories are at *43 per cent*, the Liberals at 28 per cent, the NDP at 20 per cent, and the Greens are at 8 per cent."

"In January, the company’s monthly tracking survey found *Brown*’s Tories at *35 per cent*, Wynne’s Liberals at 34 per cent, Horwath’s New Democrats at 23 per cent, and Schreiner’s Greens at six per cent."

I was already leaning towards Mrs Elliott, but Mr Ford would be more entertaining.


----------



## mariomike (13 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> I was already leaning towards Mrs Elliott, but Mr Ford would be more entertaining.



When Doug was Councillor for Ward 2, people were ( mostly ) able to work around him and his equally entertaining brother the mayor. 

It will be even more entertaining watching Doug lead negotiations with teacher's unions, doctors, correctional officers etc.


----------



## Rifleman62 (13 Feb 2018)

> A man who lost his son, daughter-in-law and two grandchildren to a drunk driver says he was disappointed to learn that the woman sentenced to 10 years in prison for their deaths was moved to a minimum-security “healing lodge” just one month after her sentencing.



Do you think Mr. Lou Van de Vorst will get a personal interview with the PM with all the accompanied photos to be used in selected markets in the next election? Let alone meet with other Ministers of the Crown.

Second photo ref: https://www.facebook.com/colten.boushie


----------



## Jarnhamar (13 Feb 2018)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> Do you think Mr. Lou Van de Vorst will get a personal interview with the PM with all the accompanied photos to be used in selected markets in the next election? Let alone meet with other Ministers of the Crown.



And old male white settler? Surely you jest.


----------



## George Wallace (14 Feb 2018)

From the Huffington Post:

Robert-Falcon Ouellette's Remarks On Gerald Stanley Are 'Reckless': Grand Chief


----------



## Halifax Tar (14 Feb 2018)

There is so much wrong being said by both sides about the Gerald Stanley trial

There is so much wrong being said about the death of Colten Boushie and the trial of Gerald Stanley, it’s hard to know where to begin.

First off, let me start by saying I covered the North Battleford Provincial Court and Battleford Court of Queen’s Bench from 2004-2008 for the Battlefords News-Optimist, averaging one to three days in any given week. The only people who spent more time in those courts were the court staff, RCMP, security, judges and lawyers.

More on link provided:
http://www.newsoptimist.ca/opinion/columnists/there-is-so-much-wrong-being-said-by-both-sides-about-the-gerald-stanley-trial-1.23171591


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (14 Feb 2018)

A very nicely put together article. A copy should be sent to the PM and his ministers - top of the reading pile.

Thanks for digging and sharing that, Halifax Tar.


----------



## Jarnhamar (14 Feb 2018)

Gerald Stanley still faces two counts of firearms offences which carry a maximum of two years jail. 

I wonder when the PM or justice minister  will suggest he's guilty and suggest he get the maximum sentence.


----------



## jollyjacktar (14 Feb 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> A very nicely put together article. A copy should be sent to the PM and his ministers - top of the reading pile.



I doubt it would make a difference and sadly the horse is out of the barn anyhow.


----------



## FSTO (14 Feb 2018)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> From the Huffington Post:
> 
> Robert-Falcon Ouellette's Remarks On Gerald Stanley Are 'Reckless': Grand Chief



The MP from Winnipeg had the nerve to go off script and will now be outed as an APPLE from the rest of the FN Leadership.


----------



## YZT580 (14 Feb 2018)

In perspective:  Colten Boushie was, I believe, out on parole for previous offences including violation of parole.  Perhaps when examining the laws in this case people should consider the lax system that failed to protect Stanley by incarcerating Boushie when it was evident that he had no intention of correcting his behaviour.  Indeed, I suspect that he was in violation of his existing parole conditions on the day he died by a) being in possession of a firearm and b) consumption of alcohol.  Or perhaps if his tribe had insisted that the court mandated conditions be met he wouldn't have been out cruising with his friends looking for a vehicle to steal.


----------



## Remius (14 Feb 2018)

But he was a good boy.   :


----------



## Cloud Cover (14 Feb 2018)

Trudeau is announcing changes to the legal framework "to protect Indigenous rights" for First nations and Indigenous people in the commons today.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/trudeau-to-announce-legal-framework-to-protect-indigenous-rights-1.3803111

Apparently this was already planned, no reason to doubt that, right? "Government sources said the announcement was planned ahead of the Boushie family’s arrival in Ottawa."

Cheers


----------



## Remius (14 Feb 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> Trudeau is announcing changes to the legal framework "to protect Indigenous rights" for First nations and Indigenous people in the commons today.
> 
> https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/trudeau-to-announce-legal-framework-to-protect-indigenous-rights-1.3803111
> 
> ...



I have no doubt that it was planned or being planned but tis latest incident probably put their feet to the fire.


----------



## Rifleman62 (14 Feb 2018)

> I have no doubt that it was planned or being planned but tis latest incident probably put their feet to the fire.



Just like the VAC return to lifetime pensions that was one of the items in the LPC election platform 2+ years ago and the new VAC benefits projected in 2 years. The Liberals sure move fast on *their* priorities as long as they sense a benefit.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (14 Feb 2018)

It doesn't sound to me to be about "fair" treatment before criminal courts. It seems to have to do with a framework for recognition and enforcement of the constitutionally protected "indigenous" rights. Those have usually to do with the fiduciary obligations of the Crown, the recognition of the right to be consulted, and hunting/fishing rights, etc.

The mention in the article that the First Nations and/or their members often have to resort to the courts to have them enforced would indicate that this is the nature of what will be discussed here. And, yes, if that is what it is, then the Liberals had announced they were working in that direction a long time ago. So no surprise, just a weird timing issue.

On the other hand, to me it's another slap in the face of Parliament and respect for the elected officials - but on that one most recent governments have been equally deficient - with this damn way of announcing at the last minute that you will introduce something before the Commons without proper notice, so that the non-government members are deprived of any reasonable time to prepare and research the potential problems and counter points to the government's position, the government itself having been preparing its arguments and "research" with a long lead time.


----------



## Cloud Cover (14 Feb 2018)

They shouldn't have to go to court every time to have their treaty rights and subsequent contractual rights enforced. The  Crown is usually the respondent in the majority of these types claims, they really must "have to do better."  And as far as I'm concerned, it really is a "they", I don't appreciate a bunch of government lawyers, bureaucrats and politicians making broad statements about white guilt when most Canadians have repeatedly told, suggested, protested, written and spoken to the very same government to start doing the right thing. For decades now this has been the case, so yes get moving on those matters.
But if this idiotic government starts to change or interfere with fundamental legal rights by  creating an apartheid criminal prosecution system with built in legal privileges that excuses or amplifies conduct of one over the other in race, ancestry, spirit, creed or religion, gender (or binary) then no, I do not support that at all, and I do not think either the Constitution or the Charter creates any Federal power to do so unilaterally.  The provinces have responsibility for the administration of Justice. The only one that will step up, maybe, is Quebec.


----------



## Jarnhamar (14 Feb 2018)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> Just like the VAC return to lifetime pensions that was one of the items in the LPC election platform 2+ years ago and the new VAC benefits projected in 2 years. The Liberals sure move fast on *their* priorities as long as they sense a benefit.



They realize they're loosing CAF votes so doubling down on FN votes.

I'm still blown away by the PM talking about this case like he is.


----------



## Loachman (14 Feb 2018)

http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/it-could-have-been-me-some-farmers-support-murder-acquittal-of-gerald-stanley

'It could have been me': Some farmers say they are easy targets, donate to Gerald Stanley fund

'We have a problem here. It's not a race problem. It's a criminal problem'

"Mark Pashovitz believes he and other Saskatchewan farmers are easy targets.

"They live in rural, isolated areas where it often takes police longer to respond to crimes. And their farm vehicles and equipment are tempting for thieves.

"That’s why he said he recently donated $1,000 to an online fundraiser to help pay the legal bills of Gerald Stanley, a white farmer acquitted last week of murder in the 2016 shooting death of a 22-year-old Cree man."

The GoFundMe page for Stanley, set up last Friday - the same day a jury found him not guilty of second-degree murder - had raised over $101,000 by Monday afternoon. Many donors were listed as anonymous, and some signed as “concerned landowner,” “previous victim,” and “one less thief”."

http://nationalpost.com/opinion/john-robson-stoking-fiery-division-over-the-boushie-verdict-doesnt-show-you-care

Boushie verdict doesn't show you care

It is difficult to see a path toward reconciliation with so many, including Trudeau, reinforcing the impression among some Aboriginals that the courts are a bigoted scam

"If Stanley truly believes what happened was an accident, there must be at least some compassion for a man who will live the rest of his days with the knowledge that he took a human life under frightening and fast-moving circumstances. _*Also, possibly, living in the fear of facing vigilante justice, with so many whipping up hatred and hysteria by claiming this white guy right here, in this photo, basically got away with racist murder and we all know where he farms.*_

"Rampant crime and ineffective policing are a huge issue in the rural parts of Western Canada. And it cannot seriously be argued that citizens everywhere would only object to repeated thefts and burglaries if the perpetrators were exclusively white. Disagreement over the verdict is one thing, but to suggest that Saskatchewan in 2018 is Mississippi burning is a reckless calumny."


----------



## Remius (14 Feb 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> They realize they're loosing CAF votes so doubling down on FN votes.
> 
> I'm still blown away by the PM talking about this case like he is.



To be honest I doubt it very much.  the CAF is not really an effective voting block.  Like all of Canadian society many people vote for various reasons.  Plus spread out and some voting in different ridings they aren't all that much of a concern to the Liberals any more than they were a concern to the CPC.  Even when you add family that might be voting in a different riding than their CAF family member.

it is more likely that the FN vote is more important, especially since they voted in higher numbers last election.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/grenier-indigenous-turnout-1.3365926


----------



## ModlrMike (14 Feb 2018)

It seems not everything in the Patrick Brown saga is as initially reported:

CTV News

Of course that's not the headline...


----------



## Cloud Cover (14 Feb 2018)

I doubt he is squeaky clean, (who is?) but it sounds like the stories morph to fit the blow back (no pun intended).


----------



## Rifleman62 (15 Feb 2018)

http://nationalpost.com/opinion/rex-murphy-alberta-b-c-clash-just-the-latest-result-of-petrophobes-war-on-the-oilsands

*Rex Murphy: In pipeline wars, Trudeau stands as always with Paris, never Alberta* - 9 Feb 18

"Lengthy posts and fully quoted articles are posted here."
https://milnet.ca/forums/threads/127408.0.html


----------



## Loachman (15 Feb 2018)

Written by somebody who lacks knowledge of how firearms function, but did his best (reporters cannot reasonably be expected to know everything about everything):

http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/gerald-stanleys-magical-gun-the-extremely-unlikely-defence-that-secured-his-acquittal

Gerald Stanley’s 'magical gun’: The extremely unlikely defence that secured his acquittal

For Gerald Stanley’s version of events to make sense, two improbable things had to occur simultaneously

"No firearms expert has been able to fully explain or reproduce the “freak accident” that Gerald Stanley claims caused his gun to fire unexpectedly into the head of Colten Boushie.

"The result is what David Tanovich, co-editor of Canadian Bar Review, said was a case of a “magical gun.” 

Stanley’s acquittal hinged on a claim of hangfire, an extremely rare scenario in which a cartridge discharges several seconds after it is struck by the firing pin.

"Even then, Boushie should still have survived if not for a second extremely specific malfunction that could not be replicated by experts testing Stanley’s gun."


----------



## EpicBeardedMan (15 Feb 2018)

Trudeau promises new legal framework for Indigenous people.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-speech-indigenous-rights-1.4534679   :facepalm:

e: Already posted.


----------



## FSTO (15 Feb 2018)

Once again Canadaland spouts all farmers are racist and the 5 people in the car are blameless in their actions.

http://www.canadalandshow.com/podcast/patrick-brown-vs-reputation/


----------



## EpicBeardedMan (15 Feb 2018)

That picture of Trudeau holding the FN woman is so cringy...my god...


----------



## Loachman (15 Feb 2018)

http://torontosun.com/news/national/malcolm-half-of-prospective-boushie-jurors-were-aboriginal-says-member-of-jury-pool

MALCOLM: Half of prospective Boushie jurors were Aboriginal, says member of jury pool

Candice Malcolm

Published: February 13, 2018 
Updated: February 13, 2018 7:40 PM EST

"The person estimates that more than half of the Aboriginal people were granted permission by the judge to be exempt from the trial and free to go home.

"As the prospective juror describes, some of the remaining 45 or so were vocal in expressing their bias and signalling to everyone in the room they were unfit to serve on the jury.

"“You could audibly hear some of them talking amongst themselves, discussing how they were going to hang Stanley, or they were going to make sure he gets hung, or that if they don’t get the results they want, that they were going to handle it themselves,” the person said of the Aboriginal people who remained. This account comes from one individual who spoke with the Sun, and has not yet been corroborated by other witnesses.

"“The thing that was the most shocking to me was the fact that they were so audible from where I was sitting (across the room) and there were police scattered throughout the room. No one stopped them.”

"Of the remaining potential jurors, “everyone was assigned a number and they literally pulled numbers from a bucket. It was totally random,” the person said, whose own number was not selected."


----------



## Loachman (15 Feb 2018)

http://edmontonsun.com/opinion/columnists/after-boushie-case-are-we-headed-for-gladue-2-0/wcm/95447d0e-6ceb-4ad9-948e-1600e3d5dd68

GUNTER: After Boushie case, are we headed for Gladue 2.0?

Lorne Gunter

Published: February 13, 2018

Updated: February 13, 2018 2:09 PM MST

"In the spring of 2016, when the sexual assault trial of former CBC host Jian Ghomeshi failed to produce the verdict the Trudeau government wanted, the government decided to change the law to make it even harder for men to defend themselves against rape allegations.

"Canada at the time already had one of the toughest “rape shields” in the world – a set of laws and judicial precedents that made it difficult to raise a woman’s past sexual behaviour in court, thereby making it harder for a defendant to establish the alleged victim had given consent.
I wouldn’t trust Ghomeshi around my wife or daughter, but that’s not the point.

"Because his defence lawyers had used his accusers’ emails and texts to expose serious inconsistencies between the accusers’ post-attack behaviour towards Ghomeshi and the claims they were making to police and prosecutors, the Trudeau Liberals changed Canadian law to make it very difficult to introduce an alleged victim’s electronic communications “of a sexual nature” or “for a sexual purpose.” This made it even harder than it had been for an accused to establish he had reasonable grounds to believe the alleged victim had consented.

"The underlying message of the amendments was: Due process and reasonable doubt are unimportant next to social justice for women. Therefore, it’s justifiable to stack the deck to make sure that when men are accused, they are found guilty.

"Now in the wake of the Gerald Stanley verdict in Saskatchewan, are we headed for a similar Liberal deck-stacking against those accused of crimes against Indigenous people?"


----------



## Rifleman62 (15 Feb 2018)

Sounding more and more like a Liberal hit job. I hope that's proven quickly to clearly indicate how crooked the ON Liberals are.

Further to ModlrMike's post, this just published.

http://www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4535373?__twitter_impression=true

"Lengthy posts and fully quoted articles are posted here."
https://milnet.ca/forums/threads/127409.0.html


----------



## Cloud Cover (15 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> Written by somebody who lacks knowledge of how firearms function, but did his best (reporters cannot reasonably be expected to know everything about everything):



Yet when I search the Internet for Tokarev Hand Gun misfires, I see they are aplenty. 
I have my CCJ students working on a proven as fact, assertions not proven, lore and myth, fabrication and fiction project on this entire file. It's good to see young people wake up to all of the distortion fields on such a crucial issue, especially since some will be working in this space. Not making any friends with the SJW faculty though! 

"PSE leaders issue statements on Colton Boushie verdict
“I haven't seen a day like this since I've been at the university,” said Laurentian University Interim President Pierre Zundel of the reaction he saw in his university community following the not-guilty verdict in the case involving the death of Colton Boushie. “Laurentian University is committed to reconciliation,” reads a statement from Zundel. “That means we will dig deep and help create a justice system that works for all people, including those it currently fails most consistently, namely Indigenous peoples.” Queen’s University Principal Daniel Woolf also issued a statement of condolence to Boushie’s friends and family, which came in addition to a candlelight vigil held by the school’s Indigenous Law Students’ Alliance and the Office of Indigenous Initiatives on Tuesday night. A number of other schools across the country also released statements and held solidarity events in the wake of the verdict."

As a side note, I was surprised how many of the students own or have used firearms, roughy half of the class even though the sporting club has been banned, including biathlon. (I would have thought that anything starts with Bi would survive, guess not.


----------



## pbi (15 Feb 2018)

Here is what I was talking about earlier, in terms of "the other side of the story", from the SK farming community:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/stanley-verdict-again-raising-concerns-over-rural-crime-1.4535146

One could argue whether this should have been presented earlier, but at least it's out there. 

Now, will the PM or a Minister talk with these farmers? Marginalizing them or avoiding them like nuclear waste will only make this problem worse. Its very clear that the CCC doesn't allow us to kill to protect property alone (nor should it), but  obviously these people fear more than just property crimes.


----------



## ModlrMike (15 Feb 2018)

There's a single reason why property rights are not enshrined in the constitution - it makes it easier for government to take it from you.


----------



## Cloud Cover (15 Feb 2018)

Whoah, whoah whoah there! Insofar as real property is concerned" "When Aboriginal title is proven it erases the Crown’s assumed beneficial interest in relation to Aboriginal lands."  A victorious outcome for the _Tsilhqot’in Nation_ from the Supreme Court of Canada. 

As for why the right to own or possess property for the rest of us was not included in the _Charter_: 

"Despite the responsible and conservative judicial interpretation given the right to property in the Canadian Bill of Rights, there existed among senior Department of Justice officials a deep-seated fear that the juxtaposition of the right to property and "due process" in a constitutional instrument would give rise to an excessively wide definition of the term "property" and result in extreme substantive interventionism by the Canadian judiciary.  The solution frequently proposed to this perceived problem was to recommend the separation of the right to property from the right to life, liberty and security of the person and to qualify the right to property by some expression which has less substantive import than "due process", such as "according to law" or "natural justice".

https://commonlaw.uottawa.ca/ottawa-law-review/sites/commonlaw.uottawa.ca.ottawa-law-review/files/09_18ottawalrev551986.pdf at page 67.


----------



## Loachman (15 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> Here is what I was talking about earlier, in terms of "the other side of the story", from the SK farming community:



The Reddit thread that I posted earlier is an eye-opener, although I was already generally aware of the problems in rural Saskatchewan (and other provinces; plenty of crack houses in isolated areas with negligible police presence) from people who live there.


----------



## Kat Stevens (15 Feb 2018)

I live in rural Alberta. There is a known chemical lab two range roads over from me. Thefts are through the roof because it's easy to lift something to exchange for drugs.  My house is a 20 minute drive from the nearest RCMP detachment, 15 if they put their foot into it. That's if the lone member on patrol in this county at night is at the det. If not, it can be up to an hour. The suggestion that a guy should take a beating, or worse, while he waits for the law to show up (if they show up, property crimes are low priority in these here parts) rather than defend "just stuff" is revolting. If I'm outnumber 5-2 in a showdown with an unpredictable adversary, is that not reason enough to fear for my life? I wont comment on the verdict, because I wasn't in the courthouse, and I certainly wasn't in that farmyard, but my sentiments are pretty much the norm out here.


----------



## Loachman (15 Feb 2018)

More deaths are inevitable unless policing is improved, and courts and governments take legitimate concerns seriously. That includes eliminating the practice of letting indigenous criminals, especially the violent ones, off with lighter sentences because of an unfortunate collective history.

Simultaneously, real improvements to the lives of these communities need to be made, but that absolutely must include some effort on their part, and acceptance of their responsibility for the actions of their members, in return.

Until then, these tensions will merely bubble and churn away out of majority sight until they erupt again, in, most likely, a much worse way.

Both sides deserve better, and need to heal very real rifts. I'd not be surprised one whit if limited open warfare breaks out in the future if that does not happen.

I am not optimistic, especially as our "leadership" is encouraging one side and subtly threatening the other.


----------



## Jarnhamar (15 Feb 2018)

[quote author=Kat Stevens]  The suggestion that a guy should take a beating, or worse, while he waits for the law to show up (if they show up, property crimes are low priority in these here parts) rather than defend "just stuff" is revolting.
[/quote]

100%


----------



## Piece of Cake (15 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> More deaths are inevitable unless policing is improved, and courts and governments take legitimate concerns seriously. That includes eliminating the practice of letting indigenous criminals, especially the violent ones, off with lighter sentences because of an unfortunate collective history.



In Canada - and most of the Western World - corrections is focused on recidivism, not punitive. Research suggests that longer sentences has a negative affect on recidivism rates.  Where   corrections needs to improve, is to provide adaqute and appropriate programming to aboriginal inmates.


----------



## Loachman (15 Feb 2018)

I am not necessarily a fan of lengthy sentences, or of simply caging somebody, unless that person has demonstrated and continues to display uncontrollable violent tendencies from which the public deserves, and must have, protection. Public protection absolutely must be paramount. Rehabilitation, if and where possible, is the next priority, which includes meaningful support in the host community to the maximum extent possible.

New York reduced crime drastically, many years ago, by treating even minor crimes seriously. That discouraged many minor offenders from escalating to bigger crimes. They quickly understood that throwing a stone through a window would result in arrest, a cell overnight, a trial, and an appropriate sentence rather than just a stern talking-to and immediate release following a promise to behave.

Failure to effectively discourage/deter is unacceptable - it helps nobody, especially the offenders, who merely, correctly, and rapidly learn that they can get away with almost anything, often until somebody is seriously hurt or killed.

The carrot (and carrots are infinitely preferable if and when they work) to that stick is meaningful provision of work-related training and job-finding assistance.

Band leaders - too-often corrupt and abusive towards their own people - need to be exposed and held to account as part of that process. I would, if able, eliminate payments to bands and, instead, provide payments to individual adults. Band leaders could then apply taxes to their members to support necessary programmes. Ordinary members would then see how much is being taken from them, and would have more interest in controlling excesses (such as the legendary multi-million-dollar off-reserve Chief's house, if such actually exist).

Kind of like democracy.

I have a long-time indigenous friend who lives off of, but works on, a small reserve, and hear regular tales of the favouritism and outright nepotism and other abuses and problems that abound. There are no apparent off-reserve problems as far as I know, like the reserve at the centre of this conflict.

This is not an indigenous problem. many people of any race or ethnicity, when provided with the bare necessities of life and no incentive to do better, such as many welfare recipients. Payments should not be clawed back dollar-for-dollar for money earned from employment, either, as there is no incentive to work if one ends up with the same amount of money.

People who work have much more self-esteem than those who do not, have more regard for the things that they can buy with earned income, more respect for the rights and property of others, and much less need to relieve their boredom by drinking heavily and harassing farmers or other productive people.

People need hope for better futures, preferably via their own efforts but with assistance when needed. The opposite is despair.


----------



## Rifleman62 (15 Feb 2018)

https://www.thestar.com/news/queenspark/2018/02/15/patrick-brown-says-hes-suing-ctv-over-sexual-misconduct-allegations.html

*Patrick Brown says he's suing CTV over sexual misconduct allegations* - 15 Feb 18
_'My lawyers are talking to CTV' former Ontario PC leader says in Facebook post._

Extract: “In the court of public opinion and among the many journalists I’ve spoken to, these allegations are now seen for what they are — fictitious and malicious,” the former Ontario PC leader posted Thursday on his Facebook page.



https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2018/02/15/rcmp-to-investigate-internal-facebook-post-that-said-colten-boushie-got-what-he-deserved.html
*
RCMP investigating post in officers’ Facebook group claiming Colten Boushie ‘got what he deserved’* - 15 Feb 18
_Sources in an APTN report told the network the woman who made the post was an officer._

Extract: The RCMP told the Star that there are no officers with the name linked to the Facebook account, and didn’t confirm whether the woman worked as an officer under another name. Sources in an APTN report told the network the woman was an officer.

“Too bad the kid died but he got what he deserved. How many of us work on or near reserves and are getting fed up with the race card being used every time someone gets caught breaking the law?,” she said. The comment was posted in a Facebook group called “News Stories that Matter to or May Impact RCMP,” which has about 1,200 members.


----------



## YZT580 (15 Feb 2018)

(“Too bad the kid died but he got what he deserved. How many of us work on or near reserves and are getting fed up with the race card being used every time someone gets caught breaking the law?,” she said.

The comment was posted in a Facebook group called “News Stories that Matter to or May Impact RCMP,” which has about 1,200 members.

“Obviously, this remark is absolutely appalling and unacceptable,” Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale said in a teleconference with journalists Thursday.  from the STAR)  What is appalling and unacceptable is the sad fact that it is true.  The kid had been getting away with it for years if news reports are to be believed.  Sadly this time it all caught up with him.  It is too bad he died but if it wasn't him and this time it would have been another next time.  And until Goodale is willing to face and address that sad truth, it will happen again.


----------



## Piece of Cake (15 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> Public protection absolutely must be paramount.



Agreed.  However this is not practiced by all.  For example, let's look at the pracrice of some police departments in Ontario. Too often, instead of processing someone who has been arrested -who is well known to the law enforcement in that area - police will drop that person off at a hospital under section 17.  This individual will then be seen by a doctor who will either place this person on a form, or will be discharged.  In both cases, neither results in a charge.  

Now let's say this person is placed on a form.  Now the hospital is responsible to ensure the safety of the public as the hospital has to provide security to watch this person and ensure that they 1) don't harm someone 2) don't harm themselves 3) don't escape.  The staff that are performing these functions do not have the same tools as the police constables who brought this person in.  

Don't get me started on those found to be NCR, but released 2 years after a murder.



			
				Loachman said:
			
		

> New York reduced crime drastically, many years ago, by treating even minor crimes seriously. That discouraged many minor offenders from escalating to bigger crimes. They quickly understood that throwing a stone through a window would result in arrest, a cell overnight, a trial, and an appropriate sentence rather than just a stern talking-to and immediate release following a promise to behave.



Yes, the broken windows theory.  I agree with some points but not all.  What about a person who makes a simple mistake?  Should that mistake follow him /her around for the rest of their life? 

Where will the extra resources come from that are needed to process and house those who commit a simple crime? Given that resources are limited, what would you like to trade in exchange?  Should we take money from education? Sports programs? Housing? All of the above have a negative correlation to crime.  How about we take it from health care?

Lastly, and this is a personal opinion. I would rather have 10 people who committed a crime go free, than convict one innocent person.


----------



## YZT580 (16 Feb 2018)

We live with the consequences of our mistakes all the time.  Why should criminal activities allow a person to escape the consequences just because it is a first offense?  The courts generally accept and are very compassionate for a first offender as perhaps they should but they should never let the offender off without some form of suitable chastisement.  But when it is the third and fourth time then enough is enough.  It is time to protect people from an obviously unrepentant individual.  But then again, if we had made it clear to that offender the first time that his behaviour was not acceptable then maybe we wouldn't be dealing with the third time.  Repealing Harper's third offence laws was one of Trudeau's biggest mistakes imho.  People know that they can continue to get away with it.  When that happens eventually someone dies.


----------



## pbi (16 Feb 2018)

> The suggestion that a guy should take a beating, or worse, while he waits for the law to show up (if they show up, property crimes are low priority in these here parts) rather than defend "just stuff" is revolting. If I'm outnumber 5-2 in a showdown with an unpredictable adversary, is that not reason enough to fear for my life?



I'm at risk of being misunderstood. In the scenario you described above, your life is clearly and reasonably in danger. As  (or "if") I understand the CCC, it is acceptable to use force, sometimes lethal force, to protect your life in self defense. That's fine.

For a different example, in Canada an armoured truck guard carries a side arm. There is probably a long gun racked inside the truck. But, under the CCC, those weapons are there to protect life, not money or property.

When I was a student at Quantico, a USMC Legal Officer who was a resident of Florida, was explaining US gun laws to all us foreigners. He very proudly stated that in his state, if a policeman came on his property without a warrant, he could shoot him. I thought this was madness. 

What I don't believe in, or want, is a society where any trespasser (or passer by who acts questionably, or a policeman who steps on someone's property) can be shot, no questions asked, unless they are a reasonable threat to life.  The penalty for trespassing, or petty theft, or just plain stupidity, is not death. At least not in Canada.


----------



## pbi (16 Feb 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Genuinely curious, mind if I ask what motivated you to vote Liberal?
> [I found this Conservatives were getting cocky, all but abandoned the CAF and firearm owners (two biggies for me) but their stance on refugees was what sealed the blue deal for me this go.]



Three reasons:

First, because of what seem to me to be systemic problems in our political system, the Tories were sinking into the swamp of what I call "Second-Term-itis". This pathology (IMHO) affects all parties in Federal power in Canada, regardless, and the Liberals are absolutely no exception, nor would the NDP be if (God Forbid) they ever got in power somehow.  It is characterized by increasing levels of arrogance, secrecy, disdain for the spirit and principles of democracy, increasing appeal to various special interest groups,  disingenuousness that often becomes dishonesty; and finally corruption.

As I've posted elsewhere, some of history's greatest leaders (to wit: Washington and Wellington) have warned against the corrosive and poisonous nature of party politics. I think we see it on a fairly regular basis in this country. (and the US too, for that matter...)

We could of course argue just how much of each symptom the Tories showed, or not, and whether my concerns were factual or just impressions. Regardless, this was important for me;

Second, although I do hold some beliefs which might be bumper-stickered as "conservative", I am more of a "centrist" and certainly not a "right winger". I'm probably what's called a "Red Tory". In  my opinion the Tories were beginning to drift too far towards "right-wing" rhetoric. Again an impression perhaps, but it meant something to me.  I don't want this country run by any "wing" (and it normally never has been, as compared to other countries), so that also influenced me.

Finally, as "all politics is local", I felt that the Liberal Candidate here in Kingston was by far the best qualified candidate to represent the riding, as he had already been the Mayor and understood the issues faced here. Because of the nature of Kingston he had experience dealing with both Provincial and Federal levels of government. He was also known to some of my family members who spoke well of him.

So, that was then. This is now. I don't give my vote mindlessly to any party, and in my opinion my loyalty to what I want this country to be is far, far more important than my "loyalty" to any political party. The Liberals will not get my vote automatically: nobody will.


----------



## mariomike (16 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> As I've posted elsewhere, some of history's greatest leaders (to wit: Washington and Wellington) have warned against the corrosive and poisonous nature of party politics. I think we see it on a fairly regular basis in this country. (and the US too, for that matter...)



Or, to paraphrase LaGuardia, “There is no Liberal or Conservative way of fixing a sewer.”


----------



## jollyjacktar (16 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> Finally, as "all politics is local", I felt that the Liberal Candidate here in Kingston was by far the best qualified candidate to represent the riding, as he had already been the Mayor and understood the issues faced here. Because of the nature of Kingston he had experience dealing with both Provincial and Federal levels of government. He was also known to some of my family members who spoke well of him.
> 
> So, that was then. This is now. I don't give my vote mindlessly to any party, and in my opinion my loyalty to what I want this country to be is far, far more important than my "loyalty" to any political party. The Liberals will not get my vote automatically: nobody will.



This was the reasoning, I voted for the NDP candidate for my riding until the boundaries were redrawn in 2006.  Now perhaps I made an error in judgement then as this particular ex-NDP MP is now being accused of "#me too" problems and my vote added to his being sent to Ottawa.


----------



## Rifleman62 (16 Feb 2018)

Kinder Morgan is all about protecting the environment. Still blaming Harper. Spin,spin, spin.

https://www.nationalobserver.com/2018/02/14/news/inside-interview-trudeau-spills-kinder-morgan-pipeline

*Trudeau spills on Kinder Morgan pipeline* - 14 Feb 18

Extract: PMJT: "The national objective is, as we said many times — protecting the environment and growing the economy at the same time. Those are the two things that we set out as a core of what we do, and what we recognize Canadians know that we need. We need to make sure we’ve got jobs for the future, but we also need to make sure we’re protecting the environment, which means making sure we’re moving towards a transition off of fossil fuels in the long run, making sure we’re protecting our oceans, making sure we’re creating opportunities for Canadians and their families to have good work.

What means tangibly for us, is that we put forward a national plan on fighting climate change, on reducing carbon emissions. We moved forward on a historical oceans protection plan and we’re moving forward on getting our resources to market safely and securely through the Kinder Morgan pipeline. And all those things tie together as a part of the whole."


----------



## pbi (16 Feb 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> This was the reasoning, I voted for the NDP candidate for my riding until the boundaries were redrawn in 2006.  Now perhaps I made an error in judgement then as this particular ex-NDP MP is now being accused of "#me too" problems and my vote added to his being sent to Ottawa.



Despite my slagging off of NDP earlier,  I was relatively happy under the Provincial NDP in Manitoba in the period 2002-2005. I thought they did OK, but then I wasn't really there all that long.


----------



## pbi (16 Feb 2018)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> Kinder Morgan is all about protecting the environment. Still blaming Harper. Spin,spin, spin.
> 
> https://www.nationalobserver.com/2018/02/14/news/inside-interview-trudeau-spills-kinder-morgan-pipeline
> 
> ...



Right. But what's wrong with striking a balance? We need oil and gas products, for sure (and we will for years to come), but we also need clean air, clean water and clean soil, or we'll be dead or quite ill.


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (16 Feb 2018)

Patrick Brown says he'll run for the PC leadership again?  This could get interesting,........backlash votes from "tired of #metoo" people?


----------



## jollyjacktar (16 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> Despite my slagging off of NDP earlier,  I was relatively happy under the Provincial NDP in Manitoba in the period 2002-2005. I thought they did OK, but then I wasn't really there all that long.



We elected Darryl Dexter in NS as the first and probably last NDP government.  They lasted one spin and were a complete bunch of tools.  Dexter in particular.


----------



## FSTO (16 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> Despite my slagging off of NDP earlier,  I was relatively happy under the Provincial NDP in Manitoba in the period 2002-2005. I thought they did OK, but then I wasn't really there all that long.



You are lucky you left. They left a total disaster for the PC's to attempt to clean up.


----------



## pbi (16 Feb 2018)

FSTO said:
			
		

> You are lucky you left. They left a total disaster for the PC's to attempt to clean up.



Ahhh. Just like in Ontario, where I am pretty sure they will never, ever, come back again. Good intentions but not very good execution.

But, then, what about Alberta...who could have called that one? The Devil must have been calling up clothing stores to issue winter kit...


----------



## Scott (16 Feb 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> We elected Darryl Dexter in NS as the first and probably last NDP government.  They lasted one spin and were a complete bunch of tools.  Dexter in particular.



The Dexter NDP were a different beast, though when he stuck it to Joan Jessome I couldn't help guffawing, a lot. That got Michael de Addrer a lot of play.


----------



## jollyjacktar (16 Feb 2018)

Scott said:
			
		

> The Dexter NDP were a different beast, though when he stuck it to Joan Jessome I couldn't help guffawing, a lot. That got Michael de Addrer a lot of play.



Yeah, a bit of Blue on Blue action happening there.


----------



## FSTO (16 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> Ahhh. Just like in Ontario, where I am pretty sure they will never, ever, come back again. Good intentions but not very good execution.
> 
> But, then, what about Alberta...who could have called that one? The Devil must have been calling up clothing stores to issue winter kit...



Manitoba is a strange beast. About 200km NNW of the Yellowhead Highway (TCH 16), East side of Brandon and most of Winnipeg is pretty hard core NDP, the rest is hard core PC. The liberals have the odd enclave in Winnipeg. Its kind of reverse of the federal scene where the Conservatives require a strong NDP vote to defeat the Libs, in Manitoba the PC's require a strong Liberal vote to defeat the NDP. 
Winnipeg, which holds over 80% of the population of the province is the lynch pin to who runs the province.


----------



## FJAG (16 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> I'm at risk of being misunderstood. In the scenario you described above, your life is clearly and reasonably in danger. As  (or "if") I understand the CCC, it is acceptable to use force, sometimes lethal force, to protect your life in self defense. That's fine.
> 
> For a different example, in Canada an armoured truck guard carries a side arm. There is probably a long gun racked inside the truck. But, under the CCC, those weapons are there to protect life, not money or property.
> 
> ...



PBI asked me to comment on this post so here goes.

In the US, the various states have passed what are called "Stand Your Ground" laws (Also called "line in the sand" and "no duty to retreat" laws). They vary from state to state but in essence provide that you have no requirement to retreat from a place where you have a right to be and can use force to repel an unlawful intruder. See here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stand-your-ground_law

In Canada the law is different but not toothless. In essence it is covered under ss 34, 35, 464(2) and 25 of the Criminal Code.

S 34 provides for the right for someone to defend themselves and others with such force as is reasonably necessary from acts of force or the threat of force. The section and of course case law provides for what the circumstances and limits of that are.

S 35 provides for the right to protect or assist in protecting property that is about to be entered by someone not entitled by law to do so or take the property or damage the property so long as the act being used to protect the property is a reasonable one.

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-6.html#h-9

S 494(2) provides that an owner of property (and anyone assisting them) may make a citizen's arrest without warrant of anyone committing a criminal offence against that property. They have an obligation to forthwith deliver any person arrested to a peace officer.

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-130.html#h-164

In respect to an arrest under s 494(2), s 25 of the CCC provides that anyone who is authorized or required by law to do anything in the administration or enforcement of the law (specifically here, making an arrest) is justified in using such force which is reasonably necessary if acting on reasonable grounds.

http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/page-4.html#h-6

The problem, as with much of the law, is determining what the facts are at any given time and if the response or acts of the "innocent" person are in fact reasonable in the circumstances. That generally runs on a continuum. At one end using deadly force to protect yourself from imminent deadly force is fairly clear and obvious. At the other is the question of how much force is reasonable to apprehend a criminal who is trying to escape or evade capture and no longer a risk to the property. 

The police and the crown should analyze those situations in order to determine if charges should be laid against the "innocent" party. Regrettably, in many cases they tend to charge and let the trial sort it out. I don't think that this is necessarily out of an overabundance of caution but because, more often than not, there are conflicting stories muddy the waters.

At the end of the day, the questions may need to be answered by either a judge or jury who, of course, will be analysing the situation with typical twenty/twenty hindsight in a quiet courtroom rather than the chaos of a farmyard.

 :cheers:


----------



## Remius (16 Feb 2018)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> Sounding more and more like a Liberal hit job. I hope that's proven quickly to clearly indicate how crooked the ON Liberals are.
> 
> Further to ModlrMike's post, this just published.
> 
> ...



If I were to put my tin foil hat on I would bet on it being an insider job from the PCs.  

Think about it.  Kathleen Wynn was starting to chip away at his lead.  They needed a way to get him to go away.  In no time they have a leadership campaign up and running and ready to go.  Polls for those other candidates or even without a candidate are higher than what Patrick brown had.  

Brown claims he never resigned and they promptly throw him out.

Maybe there was enough rumour and innuendo to make this happen. 

I think the Liberals were happy to face brown.  Or...maybe they (The liberals) just wanted to smear him a bit to increase their lead thinking the PCs would have no choice but to keep them on and underestimated how quick they would resolve the issue. 

 :Tin-Foil-Hat:


----------



## Kat Stevens (16 Feb 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> PBI asked me to comment on this post so here goes.
> 
> In the US, the various states have passed what are called "Stand Your Ground" laws (Also called "line in the sand" and "no duty to retreat" laws). They vary from state to state but in essence provide that you have no requirement to retreat from a place where you have a right to be and can use force to repel an unlawful intruder. See here:
> 
> ...



So now, not only do you have rural residents scared of the feral bipedal creatures that seem to roam around out here unchecked, they also live in fear that, if they protect their property and selves, they'll be charged, tried, smeared in the media, and then left destitute for defending themselves against the government. It's truly a great time to be alive.


----------



## Retired AF Guy (16 Feb 2018)

Somewhat related to what FJAG posted earlier, here, courtesy of the National Post, is the full transcript of Chief Justice Martel Popescul instructions to the jury in the Stanley murder trial. 

 Full transcript of judge’s instructions to Colten Boushie jury: Put yourself in a juror’s shoes


----------



## Cloud Cover (16 Feb 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> In respect to an arrest under s 494(2), s 25 of the CCC provides that anyone who is authorized or required by law to do anything in the administration or enforcement of the law (specifically here, making an arrest) is justified in using such force which is reasonably necessary if acting on reasonable grounds.
> 
> The problem, as with much of the law, is determining what the facts are at any given time and if the response or acts of the "innocent" person are in fact reasonable in the circumstances. That generally runs on a continuum. At one end using deadly force to protect yourself from imminent deadly force is fairly clear and obvious. At the other is the question of how much force is reasonable to apprehend a criminal who is trying to escape or evade capture and no longer a risk to the property.
> 
> ...


Section 27 also goes directly towards the use of force to prevent (_immediate future tense_)the commission of an offence and in _R v Hebert_ the Supreme Court confirmed that Section 27 includes an offence that also_ is being committed_ (_present tense_) in the moment:

"Similarly, s. 27 justifies the use of force which is reasonably necessary to prevent the commission of an offence.  This section is of general application and the person asserting the justification need not be a peace or public officer or a member of a restricted class of persons. However, the section is clearly designed to permit an innocent bystander, _who witnesses an offence being or about to be committed, _to use force to prevent the offence from occurring.”

This does allow a person to step in and use force for example, to break up a bar fight, prevent or stop any type of assault, theft, etc. as long as the force applied is not excessive (ie reasonable and proportionate) in the circumstances. Curiously, the section says nothing about arresting and then delivering the offender to the police.  


" ...Section 27 (1)  ... requires that the trier of fact apply the accused’s perception of the situation and his or her belief as to the reaction necessary to the situation as long as there is a reasonably verifiable basis for that perception...... I will repeat yet again that an accused does not have an onus of demonstrating that he or she was acting in defence of another; rather, the Crown has the onus of demonstrating the contrary beyond a reasonable doubt."  

"The sections of the Code authorizing the use of force in defence of a person or property, to prevent crime, and to apprehend offenders, in general, express in greater detail the great principle of the common law that the use of force in such circumstances is subject to the restriction that the force used is necessary; that is, that_ the harm sought to be prevented could not be prevented by less violent means and that the injury or harm done by, or which might reasonably be anticipated from the force used, is not disproportionate to the injury or harm it is intended to prevent._"


----------



## Piece of Cake (16 Feb 2018)

I have attached the national use of force model.


----------



## Loachman (16 Feb 2018)

Retired AF Guy said:
			
		

> Somewhat related to what FJAG posted earlier, here, courtesy of the National Post, is the full transcript of Chief Justice Martel Popescul instructions to the jury in the Stanley murder trial.



Thank-you very much for that. It was a lengthy read, but an absolutely fascinating and educational one.

I have never read the transcript of a judge's instructions before. I was very impressed by its detail and completeness.

It also provided much more detail regarding the unfortunate events as they unfolded.

I was already completely confident that the verdict was a correct and just one, and this confirmed it.

Not being a lawyer, I do not know if it contains any weaknesses that could be exploited in a potential appeal, but I could not see any.

I found "it is not disputed that Mr. Stanley was legally justified in defence of his property to retrieve his handgun and fire it into the air" to be of great interest. I have, previously, read accounts where that act has resulted in charges of careless use being laid, and often convictions being made.

Much appreciated. Thanks again.


----------



## FJAG (16 Feb 2018)

Retired AF Guy said:
			
		

> Somewhat related to what FJAG posted earlier, here, courtesy of the National Post, is the full transcript of Chief Justice Martel Popescul instructions to the jury in the Stanley murder trial.
> 
> Full transcript of judge’s instructions to Colten Boushie jury: Put yourself in a juror’s shoes



Can't get past the d*** pay wall.  



			
				whiskey601 said:
			
		

> Section 27 also goes directly towards the use of force to prevent (_immediate future tense_)the commission of an offence and in _R v Hebert_ the Supreme Court confirmed that Section 27 includes an offence that also_ is being committed_ (_present tense_) in the moment:
> 
> "Similarly, s. 27 justifies the use of force which is reasonably necessary to prevent the commission of an offence.  This section is of general application and the person asserting the justification need not be a peace or public officer or a member of a restricted class of persons. However, the section is clearly designed to permit an innocent bystander, _who witnesses an offence being or about to be committed, _to use force to prevent the offence from occurring.”
> 
> ...



True enough but I would think that by going to the car to take the keys, Stanley was more than likely involved in preventing escape and/or effecting arrest; if anything. 

The reason that s27 probably does not include the "deliver to police" provision is most likely because s 27 is an act to stop an offence before it occurs and where arrest isn't available because at the time no offence has happened yet. S494(2) and (3) relate to an arrest after a crime has been committed and therefore there is a need to provide for the disposition of the arrested offender.

 :cheers:


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (16 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> I found "it is not disputed that Mr. Stanley was legally justified in defence of his property to retrieve his handgun and fire it into the air" to be of great interest. I have, previously, read accounts where that act has resulted in charges of careless use being laid, and often convictions being made.



That, Loachman, is because it is still dependant on other circumstances surrounding the discharge. In the case of Mr. Stanley , discharging his handgun in the air in the middle of his farm which is  hundreds of acres big made it safe. I live in the country, in farmland, but the way the farmhouses are arrayed, I have a neighbour's residence about 75 meters from my house, and his next neighbour is maybe fifty meters away. On the other side, my next neighbour's residence is about 150 meters away, and all of us are about 25 meters from the main road. It's the old French colonial "long and narrow" land organization, combined with building extra houses in between the original farms for kids of the original farmers over the years. So, in my case, if I was to discharge my hand gun in the air, while not in a position to prove that I was very careful as to the direction I shot in, I might still be considered to have been careless.


----------



## Cloud Cover (16 Feb 2018)

Loach: for me the discussion about careless use of a firearm was enlightening. On the one hand the Crown argues intent to murder, on the other they say death caused by careless use.
Jury says no to both.


----------



## Cloud Cover (16 Feb 2018)

I have the jury instructions document in MS Word, how do I send it by PM? I don't see an attachment option.


----------



## FJAG (16 Feb 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> I have the jury instructions document in MS Word, how do I send it by PM? I don't see an attachment option.



Maybe print it as a pdf and then attach it to a post?

 :dunno:


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (16 Feb 2018)

You can actually attach it to a post in this thread as a word document, no need to transfer to an other format. It's just in PM's that we don't have the attachment function


----------



## FJAG (16 Feb 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> You can actually attach it to a post in this thread as a word document, no need to transfer to an other format. It's just in PM's that we don't have the attachment function



I don't like opening Word documents on the web. Too many macro viruses out there. PDF's are a bit safer.

 :cheers:


----------



## Cloud Cover (16 Feb 2018)

attached ...


----------



## FJAG (16 Feb 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> attached ...



Excellent!

Thx

 :cheers:


----------



## Loachman (16 Feb 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> That, Loachman, is because it is still dependant on other circumstances surrounding the discharge. In the case of Mr. Stanley , discharging his handgun in the air in the middle of his farm which is  hundreds of acres big made it safe.



The only case that I can identify by memory is the famous Ian Thomson one:

http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/firebombs-left-no-choice-homeowner-tells-gun-trial

http://nationalpost.com/opinion/matt-gurney-after-two-years-judge-acquits-man-who-defended-himself-with-a-gun

In that case, two charges were dropped prior to the trial. I thought he was tried for all four charges.

I probably cannot track the other cases down now, as they were older and received much less press.

Mr Thomson's legal experience - the dropped charges - may have influenced Mr Stanley's legal experience regarding warning shots. Those are still not recommended, for real safety as well as legal liability issues. Mr Thomson, being a firearms instructor, aimed his a little more carefully.


----------



## Altair (16 Feb 2018)

Looks like brown is trying to pull a Moore.


----------



## Loachman (16 Feb 2018)

Piece of Cake said:
			
		

> Yes, the broken windows theory.  I agree with some points but not all.  What about a person who makes a simple mistake?  Should that mistake follow him /her around for the rest of their life?



As long as the penalty is reasonable; the prime intent was to educate and deter at an early stage. From what I remember, arrests for such things resulted an overnight stay at taxpayers' expense and a release the next day, with charges either dropped or stayed.

If the petty crook failed to lean, subsequent police action also escalated.



			
				Piece of Cake said:
			
		

> Where will the extra resources come from that are needed to process and house those who commit a simple crime? Given that resources are limited, what would you like to trade in exchange?  Should we take money from education? Sports programs? Housing? All of the above have a negative correlation to crime.  How about we take it from health care?



The theory was, and it appeared to work, that, by influencing career choice at an early stage there was much less drain upon scarce resources overall.

One night in a cell, perhaps two for slower leaners, was better than a month for something bigger after no action at all prior to that, and then followed later by three months, six months, a year or two, and then life once the crook's chosen profession really takes off.

Deterrence, as in military defensive matters, is much cheaper than lengthy prison sentences or wars.



			
				Piece of Cake said:
			
		

> Lastly, and this is a personal opinion. I would rather have 10 people who committed a crime go free, than convict one innocent person.



On that we agree, as does lengthy legal tradition.


----------



## ModlrMike (17 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> Looks like brown is trying to pull a Moore.



I rather think he's trying to reclaim his reputation.

On the other hand, that Tanya Granic Allen sounds like someone they should be very, very afraid of.


----------



## Altair (17 Feb 2018)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> I rather think he's trying to reclaim his reputation.
> 
> On the other hand, that Tanya Granic Allen sounds like someone they should be very, very afraid of.


Hes running for the leadership with a cloud of alleged sexual misconduct over his head and a massive target for the wynne party. He's doing the party no favors,  he's in this for himself at this juncture. 

Its very Roy Moore like. Of all the leadership candidates Wynne wants to fact you know she's kneels down and prays she goes up against Brown. Or Doug. But mostly Brown. 

I would imagine the PCs don't pick him to be leader but they've come this far down the road of self destruction,  why not go all the way?


----------



## GR66 (17 Feb 2018)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> ...
> 
> On the other hand, that Tanya Granic Allen sounds like someone they should be very, very afraid of.



http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/tanya-granic-allen-ontario-pc-leadership-1.4538156

Yes, that's exactly what the Ontario PC party needs...a hard swing to the social conservative right.
 :


----------



## Cloud Cover (17 Feb 2018)

Ref the earlier discussions about use of information to fill jury pools, there is an article pin todays Toronto star about this regarding problems with Ontario's system:
https://www.thestar.com/news/investigations/2018/02/16/how-a-broken-jury-list-makes-ontario-justice-whiter-richer-and-less-like-your-community.html

*********************
"A two-year Toronto Star/Ryerson School of Journalism investigation documenting the racial makeup of jurors in 52 criminal trials since 2016 in Toronto and Brampton reveals flaws in the jury selection process that skews towards property owners, fails to reflect the GTA’s growing diversity and excludes potentially millions of Ontarians from serving their civic duty.

The jury selection list is based on the province’s property assessment rolls, excluding many renters, boarders, students, seniors, spouses who are not named on property titles, transient and low-income people, Indigenous people and those unable to afford property in a red-hot real estate market.

What remains is a prospective juror list disproportionately comprised of white Ontarians able to afford the significant costs of serving in a system that often pays jurors less than minimum wage and does not cover expenses such as travel, parking, meals and child care. It is a particular hardship for hourly workers — Ontario has no law compelling companies to compensate employees for jury duty — the self-employed or those in temporary or contract jobs."
*********************************
Something is wrong with their information. I know people who rent, are mature students (white,asian, female), and have been called to jury duty in Ontario.


----------



## Cloud Cover (17 Feb 2018)

GR66 said:
			
		

> http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/tanya-granic-allen-ontario-pc-leadership-1.4538156
> 
> Yes, that's exactly what the Ontario PC party needs...a hard swing to the social conservative right.
> :



Might not be what the PC party needs, but a hard swing to the fiscal and ethical right as an immediate correction is what the province of Ontario needs. That does not mean "social conservatism" but it does mean getting financially lean and shedding a lot of government involvement and politically correct regulatory involvement in things that are creating divisions, not solving problems and generally dragging the province down.


----------



## Underway (17 Feb 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> Ref the earlier discussions about use of information to fill jury pools, there is an article pin todays Toronto star about this regarding problems with Ontario's system:
> https://www.thestar.com/news/investigations/2018/02/16/how-a-broken-jury-list-makes-ontario-justice-whiter-richer-and-less-like-your-community.html
> 
> *********************
> ...



Not really.  It says "excluding _many_ renters blah blah..."  not all.  The policy in Ontario is definitely biasing the jury pool. And everything about paying jurors garbage is correct.  And the loss of wages is a real issue.  The entire jury selection/list process could do with some significant updating/overhaul.  Perhaps using voting lists to select jurors.  That would also help ensure that people who are selected for jury duty actually live where they are supposed to vote.  However that might just encourage people not to vote (don't want to get called for jury duty...lol)


----------



## Remius (17 Feb 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> Might not be what the PC party needs, but a hard swing to the fiscal and ethical right as an immediate correction is what the province of Ontario needs. That does not mean "social conservatism" but it does mean getting financially lean and shedding a lot of government involvement and politically correct regulatory involvement in things that are creating divisions, not solving problems and generally dragging the province down.




Right now I’d settle for fiscally in the middle given the spending and waste this current government has done. 

To be honest if the PC party picks a social conservative or a populist then Wynne will steal the election. Again.


----------



## Piece of Cake (17 Feb 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> Might not be what the PC party needs, but a hard swing to the fiscal and ethical right as an immediate correction is what the province of Ontario needs. That does not mean "social conservatism" but it does mean getting financially lean and shedding a lot of government involvement and politically correct regulatory involvement in things that are creating divisions, not solving problems and generally dragging the province down.



I would be happy with a government that is friendly towards drivers. The gas tax needs to go into building more roads as well as public transit.


----------



## Remius (17 Feb 2018)

The problem is that money does go to roads but end up building bike lanes and bike paths instead of going where it is needed.


----------



## Underway (17 Feb 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> Right now I’d settle for fiscally in the middle given the spending and waste this current government has done.
> 
> To be honest if the PC party picks a social conservative or a populist then Wynne will steal the election. Again.



Or the NDP *suppresses a shudder*.



			
				Piece of Cake said:
			
		

> I would be happy with a government that is friendly towards drivers. The gas tax needs to go into building more roads as well as public transit.



There is a conservative way forward here with regards to gas and carbon taxes.  Gas and carbon taxes are consumption taxes.  Consumption taxes as far as taxes go are generally progressive taxes.  They tax use.  

Income taxes I think most of us can agree are regressive taxes.  Badly implemented income taxes discourage work, innovation etc...  Income taxes should be lowered to encourage people to work more or keep more of their money to invest on improving their lives.

Gas should/needs to be taxed.  It's a proxy for road use, a shared service.  I suppose we could all just pay tolls on all our roads instead but that's not really practical without either large amounts of inconvenience (toll booths) or invasion of privacy (GPS tracking of where your car drives).  Carbon taxes are generally (philosophically) the same thing.  They tax pollution of a shared resource (no arguments about whether carbon is a pollutant or not pls, other threads for that, just using it as an example) which is the air and environment.

So the PC plan to get votes in Ontario should be as follows.  Scap the bureaucratic and idiot carbon market.  That is just ripe for corruption a la Europe's example.  Implement the carbon tax.  Use the proceeds of the carbon tax to reduce income taxes (like BC does which is genius).   The income taxes that are reduced should be the minimum personal exemption so all Ontarians benefit.  The goal for this reduction should be to hit approximately $20,000 of exemption.  This also means that no minimum wage increase is necessary to $15 because the take home pay of those working minimum wage jobs just got quite a bit higher.

This does a few things.  One it doesn't damage small business with min wage increases.  It allows all Ontarians to take home pay and equally distributes the actual amount of lower taxes to all tax brackets.  But it disproportionately benefits poor and middle income families.  $3000 more take home is not that much to the six figure crowd but its a huge amount to the min wage crowd.  Depending on where you live that could be two or three months rent, a lot of groceries, or daycare for one kid for 37 seconds.  It also discourages harmful behaviour of pollution, and people pay for the use of a shared resource.

I'd vote for that in a second.  Not this school sex ed crap again.


----------



## mariomike (17 Feb 2018)

Underway said:
			
		

> Not this school sex ed crap again.



Not to disagree, but it's a political hot-button for some Ontario voters,
https://www.google.ca/search?rls=com.microsoft%3Aen-CA%3AIE-Address&rlz=1I7GGHP_en-GBCA592&dcr=0&biw=1280&bih=603&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=7KSIWoqPLoi0tQXXwrfoAg&q=%22sex+education%22+ontario+protest&oq=%22sex+education%22+ontario+protest&gs_l=psy-ab.3...21406.27074.0.28501.25.18.0.0.0.0.136.1598.14j4.18.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..11.0.0....0.An_8QE20w2Y


----------



## dapaterson (17 Feb 2018)

Piece of Cake said:
			
		

> I would be happy with a government that is friendly towards drivers. The gas tax needs to go into building more roads as well as public transit.



Too many roads already, treated as a free good, and too expensive to maintain.  Made worse by urban sprawl, and suburbs that refuse to pay their fair share of taxes. 

Start charging for use of roads and you'll find demand shrinks.


----------



## Rifleman62 (17 Feb 2018)

Don't know where you live, but shortage of family Doctors, specialists (and up to a year + wait to see one), wait times for MRI's (family MD can not request: must be from specialists), other special tests wait times, shortage of hospital beds, and percentage of all Provincial budget.

Meanwhile we can't afford Vets, and are running recession type deficits. Now for example, Grandpa/Grandpa/Grandma/Grandma who have a  disablity can now emigrate to get Old Age Security, free health care and vote (LIBERAL).


http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/immigration-hussen-medical-inadmissibility-1.4537076

*Ottawa to present plan to amend policy that rejects immigrants on medical grounds by April, Hussen says* - 15 Feb 18
_Immigration minister says he has to consider impact on provincial budgets_

Extract: 1. Immigration Minister Ahmed Hussen said today he will present a plan by April to amend an outdated policy that excludes immigrants based on their medical conditions — but the NDP wants quicker action to end the "discriminatory" clause.

NDP immigration critic Jenny Kwan held a news conference today calling on the government to repeal a section of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act that allows applicants to be rejected because they could impose an "excessive demand" on the health care system. She said the issue has been on the government's radar since 2016, yet the "discriminatory" policy that causes "heartache and hardship" remains.

            2. A spokesperson for Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC) said the department has been reviewing the policy "with the goal of ensuring that applicants are treated in a fair and equitable manner, and that the policy aligns with Canadian values regarding the inclusion of persons with disabilities in society, while also recognizing the need to protect publicly-paid health and social services."

            3. Maurice Tomlinson, senior policy analyst at The Canadian HIV/AIDS Legal Network, warned that the government must repeal the clause, not rework it. "Any tinkering with it would only perpetuate discrimination against persons with disabilities," he said. "This hurtful, stigmatizing and unnecessary regime must end."


----------



## Piece of Cake (17 Feb 2018)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Too many roads already, treated as a free good, and too expensive to maintain.  Made worse by urban sprawl, and suburbs that refuse to pay their fair share of taxes.
> 
> Start charging for use of roads and you'll find demand shrinks.



As a person who takes the 407 on a regular basis, I would agree.  However, when I look at roads that have the same number of lanes since the 1980s, it is clear that our transportation infrastructure has not kept up with the times.


----------



## Bird_Gunner45 (17 Feb 2018)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> Don't know where you live, but shortage of family Doctors, specialists (and up to a year + wait to see one), wait times for MRI's (family MD can not request: must be from specialists), other special tests wait times, shortage of hospital beds, and percentage of all Provincial budget.
> 
> Meanwhile we can't afford Vets, and are running recession type deficits. Now for example, Grandpa/Grandpa who have a  disablity can now emigrate to get Old Age Security, free health care and vote (LIBERAL).



Grandpa/grandpa? How progressive of you!


----------



## mariomike (17 Feb 2018)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Too many roads already, treated as a free good, and too expensive to maintain.  Made worse by urban sprawl, and suburbs that refuse to pay their fair share of taxes.
> 
> Start charging for use of roads and you'll find demand shrinks.



Tried and failed. The city tried to toll the Gardiner Expressway and Don Valley Parkway - roads they own and and maintain - to fund more subways and "Smart Track". 

Queen's Park would not allow it. The city can't even install a speed bump without first asking Queen's Park for permission.


----------



## McG (17 Feb 2018)

Underway said:
			
		

> Income taxes I think most of us can agree are regressive taxes.


Well, many of the boutique credits that seem to be popular amongst federal Conservatives are regressive but, otherwise, I don’t think most could agree that income tax is inherently regressive ... in fact some have argued on these board that Canadian income taxes are too progressive and risk chasing the wealthy away.

But we can agree on consumption taxes.  If they are levied against luxuries, they are progressive ... but if they start raising the cost of necessities, like food or getting to work, then maybe not so much.


----------



## Bird_Gunner45 (17 Feb 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> Right now I’d settle for fiscally in the middle given the spending and waste this current government has done.
> 
> To be honest if the PC party picks a social conservative or a populist then Wynne will steal the election. Again.



The problem for the PC party is that they seem to want to always, as has been noted, go socially conservative. The problem with that is that the vast majority of people in Ontario live within urban areas (11 million to 1.8 million in 2011) and have little interest in pro-choice (why even bring this up....) or other social conservative ideals.

They need to stick with discussing smaller government and lower spending/taxes and get away from this garbage. Or else they will trade winning in Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound for losing the 30-ish ridings in Toronto. If they do what the PC's did in Manitoba- look at a map and realize that half the province lives in one place so being un-electable in that place was a bad idea -  than they can dis-lodge the Liberals. If they try to cater to rural conservatives than they'll lose again. It's that simple.


----------



## Piece of Cake (17 Feb 2018)

We have forgotten the PROGRESSIVE part in the PC.


----------



## dapaterson (17 Feb 2018)

I was personally expecting the Ontario Tories to implode in late April / early May; they're ahead of schedule.  

https://www.thebeaverton.com/2018/02/patrick-brown-doug-ford-likely-split-important-asshole-vote-tory-leadership-race/


----------



## Retired AF Guy (17 Feb 2018)

Underway said:
			
		

> Not really.  It says "excluding _many_ renters blah blah..."  not all.  The policy in Ontario is definitely biasing the jury pool. And everything about paying jurors garbage is correct.  And the loss of wages is a real issue.  The entire jury selection/list process could do with some significant updating/overhaul.  Perhaps using voting lists to select jurors.  That would also help ensure that people who are selected for jury duty actually live where they are supposed to vote.  However that might just encourage people not to vote (don't want to get called for jury duty...lol)



From Ontario's Ministry of the Attorney Generals website:



> Jury Roll Process
> 
> May:
> 
> ...



Last summer I received one of those letters and I'm a renter.

 Link


----------



## Piece of Cake (17 Feb 2018)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> Don't know where you live, but shortage of family Doctors, specialists (and up to a year + wait to see one), wait times for MRI's (family MD can not request: must be from specialists), other special tests wait times, shortage of hospital beds, and percentage of all Provincial budget.



While this is true, it has nothing to do with politics. The shortage of doctors in Ontario is a result of the lack of medical students spots in med school. The reason for the lack of spots? The college of physicians and surgeons control these numbers.  It is sad that Canadians students have to leave Ontario to go to med school and then come back to Ontario to practice.... with a lot of student debt... If they come back at all.


----------



## pbi (17 Feb 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> attached ...


Thanks very much for posting that. A fascinating read, and one that many people shooting off their mouths on both sides should consider. One thing is very clear: Gerald Stanley very clearly had reason to be afraid for his life and that of his family. Second, that the young people in that car were obviously on a rampage of some sort. That alone doesn't justify Boushie's death, but it casts quite a different light on the moment.


----------



## pbi (17 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> I am not necessarily a fan of lengthy sentences, or of simply caging somebody, unless that person has demonstrated and continues to display uncontrollable violent tendencies from which the public deserves, and must have, protection. Public protection absolutely must be paramount. Rehabilitation, if and where possible, is the next priority, which includes meaningful support in the host community to the maximum extent possible.
> 
> New York reduced crime drastically, many years ago, by treating even minor crimes seriously. That discouraged many minor offenders from escalating to bigger crimes. They quickly understood that throwing a stone through a window would result in arrest, a cell overnight, a trial, and an appropriate sentence rather than just a stern talking-to and immediate release following a promise to behave.
> 
> ...



 :goodpost:
Well said. My thoughts exactly.


----------



## pbi (17 Feb 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> PBI asked me to comment on this post so here goes.



Thanks very much FJAG. Send me the bill....


----------



## FJAG (17 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> Thanks very much FJAG. Send me the bill....



These days my hourly rates are massively reduced.

Based on my writing income it works out to about $0.07 an hour. I have a bill for $0.02 on the way to you. That's pretty much what my advice is worth these days.  :2c:

 ;D

 :cheers:


----------



## pbi (18 Feb 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> These days my hourly rates are massively reduced.
> 
> Based on my writing income it works out to about $0.07 an hour. I have a bill for $0.02 on the way to you. That's pretty much what my advice is worth these days.  :2c:
> 
> ...



Sooooo.....a bottle of good single malt would be like a five year retainer...??


----------



## FJAG (18 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> Sooooo.....a bottle of good single malt would be like a five year retainer...??



Probably a bottle of New Amsterdam Coconut Vodka would do that.

 :cheers:


----------



## Rifleman62 (19 Feb 2018)

That's $15.99 USD or $20.13 Cdn for 1.75 Lt here in Phoenix.


----------



## FJAG (19 Feb 2018)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> That's $15.99 USD or $20.13 Cdn for 1.75 Lt here in Phoenix.



US$11.99 for 750ml and US$18.99  for 1250ml here at ABC in Florida.

Add ice, 1/2 orange juice, 1/2 ginger ale and a dash of ICE black raspberry for a very nice tropical drink.

You're welcome.

 :cheers:


----------



## Altair (20 Feb 2018)

Ontario PCs have a presser tomorrow at 9:30 am. 

Rumor has it Patrick Brown wont be allowed to run. Best move they could make really.


----------



## FJAG (20 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> Ontario PCs have a presser tomorrow at 9:30 am.
> 
> Rumor has it Patrick Brown wont be allowed to run. Best move they could make really.



Hear! Hear!

 :cheers:


----------



## pbi (20 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> Ontario PCs have a presser tomorrow at 9:30 am.
> 
> Rumor has it Patrick Brown wont be allowed to run. Best move they could make really.



I'm not sure about that. His recent problems aside, he seems to have the platform that stands the best chance of defeating the Wynne govt. He appears to have struck a balance in proposed policies that would have the widest appeal, without just being pseudo-Liberal on the one hand, or pandering to the more extreme socon vote on the other. But I say these things without having completed a detailed analysis of his policies.

That said, I've wondered from the start of this mess if the Tories were actually just looking for a way to dump him, for whatever reason. I noted that the caucus and his election team seemed to sever the lifeline very quickly, and one or two other Tory MPPs have since made comments which IMHO seemed to suggest dissatisfaction that predated the scandal.

Or maybe it was just factionalism bubbling away.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (20 Feb 2018)

I must confess that I don't know much about Ontario politics (other than the fact that I had heart attacks just about every time I compared my in-laws electricity bill to mine in Quebec), but this is the first time in a long time that in Quebec, we are doing this about politics in another province ... and it's fun!

op: op: op:

 :nod:


----------



## Remius (20 Feb 2018)

Except that sadly, Ontario politics is more about the cult of personality and buying votes through spending. 

Patrick brown will not win the personality war with Wyne.  She's a very good campaigner but terrible at governing.  

It is telling that polls for the PC s went up with every other leadership candidate.


----------



## Jarnhamar (20 Feb 2018)

[quote author=Altair]

Rumor has it Patrick Brown wont be allowed to run. *Best move they could make really.*
[/quote]

Why?


----------



## mariomike (20 Feb 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> Except that sadly, Ontario politics is more about the cult of personality < snip >



I wonder if Ford Nation will be as powerful province-wide as it is city-wide?



			
				Remius said:
			
		

> <snip> buying votes through spending.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ckIcOiJyH4


----------



## Remius (20 Feb 2018)

I doubt it.  But some people might be fed up enough with Wynne to vote for him. 

I'm not going to judge yet but he's not my first choice.

If he wins the leadership I'll look a bit closer.  I don't want to paint him with the Rob Ford Brush some will inevitably do.


----------



## Remius (20 Feb 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Why?



Because the PC ship was taking on water.  Before the harassment claims, Wynne was closing the gap with Brown and she might have just pulled out another win over him.  His issues are creating a distraction and will likely fracture the party when what they should be doing is getting to the business of picking a leader that can win.  By staying in the race his presence causes too many disruptions. 

Do you want o hear about what the PCs will offer Ontario or do you want to keep hearing about what they think of Brown?  Because that is what will happen if he stays in the race.


----------



## mariomike (20 Feb 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> I don't want to paint him with the Rob Ford Brush some will inevitably do.



Rob was the more likeable of the pair.  

Or, paint him with the same brush as another well known politician, as some will inevitably do,

February 19, 2018 

Sun

"Doug Ford tears a page from Donald Trump’s script book"
http://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/bonokoski-doug-ford-tears-a-page-from-donald-trumps-script-book


----------



## Remius (20 Feb 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Rob was the more likeable of the pair.
> 
> Or, paint him with the same brush as another well known politician, as some will inevitably do,
> 
> ...



which is why he also isn't my first choice.

Mulroney or Elliott for me.  The others might have me vote for another party/candidate. but I'm more of a red tory.


----------



## Jarnhamar (20 Feb 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> Because the PC ship was taking on water.  Before the harassment claims, Wynne was closing the gap with Brown and she might have just pulled out another win over him.  His issues are creating a distraction and will likely fracture the party when what they should be doing is getting to the business of picking a leader that can win.  By staying in the race his presence causes too many disruptions.
> 
> Do you want o hear about what the PCs will offer Ontario or do you want to keep hearing about what they think of Brown?  Because that is what will happen if he stays in the race.



That makes sense, thanks.  Amazing that  Wynne is even a possibility.  Maybe Ontario deserves her though.


----------



## YZT580 (20 Feb 2018)

If after the last 12 years of financial fiascoes and blatant mismanagement folks here cast a liberal ballot instead of (fill in the blank including Attila the Hun) than we deserve to go down the toilet!!


----------



## Altair (20 Feb 2018)

Looks like brown will be allowed to run. 

How this doesn't tear apart the party for the next few weeks and how he isn't a giant liability during a campaign versus wynne is beyond me. 

Amazing how the PCs keep finding ways to self destruct.


----------



## Rifleman62 (20 Feb 2018)

Another misspoke. This is the new headline at CTV/CBC. Originally it was India investing $1B in Canada. Now its India investing $250K in Canada and Canada investing $750K in India.

Script please.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/trudeau-announces-two-way-investment-deal-with-india-1.3810630#_gus&_gucid=&_gup=twitter&_gsc=4SBbqtQ

*Trudeau announces two-way investment deal with India*


----------



## Rifleman62 (20 Feb 2018)

From the G & M Evening Update newsletter

*Judge strikes down mandatory minimum sentence for Indigenous woman in drug trafficking case*

An Ontario judge has ruled that the two-year mandatory minimum sentence would be cruel and unusual punishment in the circumstances of an Indigenous woman who brought $128,000 in cocaine to Canada. Cheyenne Sharma, who is from a background of extreme poverty, faced a minimum of two years, but her lawyers used the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms to challenge the legality of the minimum sentences. They said the mandatory sentence has a disproportionate effect on individuals with Indigenous backgrounds. Ms. Sharma was sentenced to 17 months in custody.

The ruling comes shortly after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould decried unfairness in the justice system following the acquittal of a white farmer, Gerald Stanley, in the shooting death of an Indigenous man, Colten Boushie.


----------



## Lumber (20 Feb 2018)

Can someone explain why 2 years in jail for trafficking drugs is unfair to an indigenous person but not to say, me?


----------



## Jarnhamar (20 Feb 2018)

LoL


----------



## FJAG (20 Feb 2018)

Lumber said:
			
		

> Can someone explain why 2 years in jail for trafficking drugs is unfair to an indigenous person but not to say, me?



No.

 :cheers:


----------



## Lumber (21 Feb 2018)

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/patrick-brown-accused-of-dirty-politics-1.4543691

They REALLY don't want Patrick Brown around.


----------



## pbi (21 Feb 2018)

Lumber said:
			
		

> http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/patrick-brown-accused-of-dirty-politics-1.4543691
> 
> They REALLY don't want Patrick Brown around.



Randy Hillier's broadside into Brown is interesting, coming from such a stalwart PC figure: I think it raises again the question of why the Party really dumped Brown so fast: was the sex scandal just a useful thing that came along at the right moment?

 It also blows up the tin-foil hatter idea that the move to dump Brown was a Liberal covert op: the last think you could ever, ever accuse Randy Hillier of is being a tool of the Liberals.  He has been described as "Don Cherry with rubber boots and plaid", and is all about defending farmers and their property rights.

His accusations in front of the cameras are pretty blunt: he is either very sure of himself or he hasn't heard about libel laws.


----------



## suffolkowner (21 Feb 2018)

If Brown is allowed to run again I can see him winning. What I find interesting is that people in Ontario are so sick of the Wynne-Liberals that it doesn't matter who leads the PC's or what there policies are


----------



## pbi (21 Feb 2018)

suffolkowner said:
			
		

> If Brown is allowed to run again I can see him winning. What I find interesting is that people in Ontario are so sick of the Wynne-Liberals that it doesn't matter who leads the PC's or what there policies are



I hope not. I am ready to vote PC if I see an intelligent, moderate, fiscally sound and pro-economy platform that appeals to me as a Red Tory. If I see a ranting,  populist appeal to anger, stupidity and bigotry, I don't know what I will do.  :


----------



## suffolkowner (21 Feb 2018)

Brown's platform was a little too heavy on vote buying for my take but I was in favour of swapping the cap and trade for the carbon tax the others don't even seem like they have a plan


----------



## Remius (21 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> I hope not. I am ready to vote PC if I see an intelligent, moderate, fiscally sound and pro-economy platform that appeals to me as a Red Tory. If I see a ranting,  populist appeal to anger, stupidity and bigotry, I don't know what I will do.  :



 :nod:  Me too.


----------



## dapaterson (21 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> I hope not. I am ready to vote PC if I see an intelligent, moderate, fiscally sound and pro-economy platform that appeals to me as a Red Tory. If I see a ranting,  populist appeal to anger, stupidity and bigotry, I don't know what I will do.  :



Bloc Quebecois?


(Yes, I know.  Federal, not provincial, and not in Ontario...)


----------



## Lumber (21 Feb 2018)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> Bloc Quebecois?
> 
> 
> (Yes, I know.  Federal, not provincial, and not in Ontario...)



Honestly, compared to what's out there in the world, not the worst option in my eyes right now. At least they have a good reason for their ethno-nationalism.


----------



## Rifleman62 (21 Feb 2018)

Quote from: pbi on Today at 07:19:17


> I hope not. I am ready to vote PC if I see an intelligent, moderate, fiscally sound and pro-economy platform that appeals to me as a Red Tory. If I see a ranting,  populist appeal to anger, stupidity and bigotry, I don't know what I will do



If you are a masochist, vote for Kathleen or the NDP to allow her to form another government. Soon she will have enough people in her pocket, paid by the taxpayer (in ON and Canada) to be in power forever.


----------



## pbi (21 Feb 2018)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> Quote from: pbi on Today at 07:19:17
> If you are a masochist, vote for Kathleen or the NDP to allow her to form another government. Soon she will have enough people in her pocket, paid by the taxpayer (in ON and Canada) to be in power forever.



I don't think I will ever vote NDP.  We had that here once, and it didn't go well. Even some of the unions ended up PO'd. The Liberals have reached (passed...) the stage of what I call "second-term-itis".


----------



## mariomike (21 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> I don't think I will ever vote NDP.  We had that here once, and it didn't go well. Even some of the unions ended up PO'd.



I remember the Social Contract aka Rae Days. ( Twelve days of forced unpaid leave. )

A crew Scheduler would force you to take an unpaid Rae Day. 

But, in the next breath, schedule you, at time-and-a-half, to replace a co-worker on _their_  Rae Day . 

ie:  You lost 144 hours pay at straight time. But, gained 144 hours overtime at time-and-a-half.


----------



## Remius (21 Feb 2018)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> Quote from: pbi on Today at 07:19:17
> If you are a masochist, vote for Kathleen or the NDP to allow her to form another government. Soon she will have enough people in her pocket, paid by the taxpayer (in ON and Canada) to be in power forever.



The problem being the leadership contest where the candidates have to cater to the extreme right of the party to get votes. if they go too far right they may not have time during the campaign to get those centrists in the province to vote for them.  Two of those candidates, should they win will all but ensure that those votes go elsewhere.


----------



## pbi (21 Feb 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> The problem being the leadership contest where the candidates have to cater to the extreme right of the party to get votes. if they go too far right they may not have time during the campaign to get those centrists in the province to vote for them.  Two of those candidates, should they win will all but ensure that those votes go elsewhere.



This seems to be a constant problem for what I like to call "moderate conservatism" (or maybe Red Toryism  ;D ) in the last few years. There appears to be an almost irresistible temptation to begin drifting towards the right wing and angry populism. Populism can be exploited by parties on either end of the spectrum (I never heard of a "centrist populist movement") but I'm not talking about the  "left" end right now. We saw some of this in the US, when the Republicans found themselves in uncomfortably close quarters with some fairly far-right  elements who are not even what I would call "conservatives": more like fascists and other trash. This must have been very uneasy for a number of Republicans: I have a US friend who has been a Republican all his life and would not vote Dem,  but was seriously worried about the apparent drift of the party.

To me, being a moderate conservative does not automatically imply being a racist, bigot, homophobe, misogynist, anti-environment or closet neo-Nazi. It means avoiding mad, ill-informed rushes to social change without thought and evidence; not succumbing instantly to silly political correctness or the Victim Industry; supporting business and industry (which are the engines of everything, BTW); and having a realistic view on defence and security issues.  To me, being a principled conservative should not mean that you can never change your mind: " a foolish consistency is the mark of a small mind", or never act for the public good or for the true welfare of others. It means that you conserve what is good and foundational and common sense, while making changes in an intelligent and measured way


----------



## Loachman (21 Feb 2018)

There is a high probability that this area will see more violence, and more deaths, in the future:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/gunshot-trespass-report-battleford-farm-1.4541625

RCMP searching for suspect after attempted break-in, gunshot on farm west of North Battleford

Seniors who own the farm say they have never experienced such an incident in 40 years on property

By Cory Coleman, CBC News  Posted: Feb 19, 2018 12:19 AM CT| Last Updated: Feb 19, 2018 3:08 AM CT 

"Kathy Smith said it was about eight inches above where her husband was standing. 

"If he had been 5-10 [in height], he would have got a bullet in the brain," she said. 

"The incident has left the couple, both 79, shocked and wondering what could have happened if they weren't alerted by the alarm.

"It just scares me to think, what if he broke a window and came in with a gun," she said.

"It seems to be a sad world when you can't even live in your own place without some idiot thinking he can take what we have."

"The couple have lived on their farm for 40 years and said they have never experienced an incident like this.

"RCMP say they dispatched police dog services and believe the suspect had fled on foot into a waiting vehicle."


----------



## Colin Parkinson (21 Feb 2018)

When you start looking at that Reserve, you can see the problems run deep, it will likely take a generation to fix. The loss of the accountability Act won’t help, but the ability for off reserve members to vote will help in the long run.


----------



## FJAG (21 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> This seems to be a constant problem for what I like to call "moderate conservatism" (or maybe Red Toryism  ;D ) in the last few years. There appears to be an almost irresistible temptation to begin drifting towards the right wing and angry populism. Populism can be exploited by parties on either end of the spectrum (I never heard of a "centrist populist movement") but I'm not talking about the  "left" end right now. We saw some of this in the US, when the Republicans found themselves in uncomfortably close quarters with some fairly far-right  elements who are not even what I would call "conservatives": more like fascists and other trash. This must have been very uneasy for a number of Republicans: I have a US friend who has been a Republican all his life and would not vote Dem,  but was seriously worried about the apparent drift of the party.
> 
> To me, being a moderate conservative does not automatically imply being a racist, bigot, homophobe, misogynist, anti-environment or closet neo-Nazi. It means avoiding mad, ill-informed rushes to social change without thought and evidence; not succumbing instantly to silly political correctness or the Victim Industry; supporting business and industry (which are the engines of everything, BTW); and having a realistic view on defence and security issues.  To me, being a principled conservative should not mean that you can never change your mind: " a foolish consistency is the mark of a small mind", or never act for the public good or for the true welfare of others. It means that you conserve what is good and foundational and common sense, while making changes in an intelligent and measured way



Exactly right and very much my way of thinking.

You don't have to look as far as the US however to see the issue. We had our own "divide/reunite" the right period with the Reform party. (which I do not put in the same category as the Tea Party, Alt-Right etc.). The trouble is that conservatism is a numbers game and one constantly has to enter into unholy alliances. The best thing would be if the more conservative Liberals and the more liberal Conservatives could create a true centrist party and leave the NDP and the more extreme right to the fringes where they belong.

op:


----------



## Altair (21 Feb 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> Exactly right and very much my way of thinking.
> 
> You don't have to look as far as the US however to see the issue. We had our own "divide/reunite" the right period with the Reform party. (which I do not put in the same category as the Tea Party, Alt-Right etc.). The trouble is that conservatism is a numbers game and one constantly has to enter into unholy alliances. The best thing would be if the more conservative Liberals and the more liberal Conservatives could create a true centrist party and leave the NDP and the more extreme right to the fringes where they belong.
> 
> op:


http://nationalpost.com/opinion/andrew-coyne-divide-and-conquer-in-canadian-politics-it-seems-maybe-not



> In writing on this previously, I’ve attributed this insecurity to the party’s long history of electoral futility, especially at the federal level. But that only invites the question: why have the Tories been such losers? Why, since 1935, have they lost two elections in three to the Liberals? And here we come across an intriguing puzzle.
> 
> For the start of that near-century of Liberal dominance coincides with the arrival of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation, forerunners of the NDP. By the conventional assumptions of politics, the splitting of the left-of-centre vote — at any rate, the non-Conservative vote — should have been fatal to the Liberals’ chances, delivering election after election to the Conservatives.
> 
> ...



Found this to be interesting the other day.


----------



## pbi (21 Feb 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> Exactly right and very much my way of thinking.
> 
> You don't have to look as far as the US however to see the issue. We had our own "divide/reunite" the right period with the Reform party. (which I do not put in the same category as the Tea Party, Alt-Right etc.). The trouble is that conservatism is a numbers game and one constantly has to enter into unholy alliances. The best thing would be if the more conservative Liberals and the more liberal Conservatives could create a true centrist party and leave the NDP and the more extreme right to the fringes where they belong.
> 
> op:


You might be onto something there. But what to call it? The Conservative Progressives? ;D


----------



## Kirkhill (21 Feb 2018)

Liberal-Conservatives  - The Party of John A. MacDonald

The party that united Presbyterians (and French Calvinists) and Methodists and other Non-Conformist Dissenters with the Catholics against the Episcopalian Anglicans.

In fact in Canada the Orange Lodge was explicitly created to unite Catholics and Dissenters against Bishop Strachan's establishment Episcopalians.



> The Liberal-Conservative Party was the formal name of the Conservative Party of Canada until 1873, and again from 1922 to 1938, although some Conservative candidates continued to run under the label as late as the 1911 election and others ran as simple Conservatives before 1873. In many of Canada's early elections, there were both "Liberal-Conservative" and "Conservative" candidates; however, these were simply different labels used by candidates of the same party. Both were part of Sir John A. Macdonald's government and official Conservative and Liberal-Conservative candidates would not, generally,[clarification needed] run against each other. It was also common for a candidate to run on one label in one election and the other in a subsequent election.[1]
> 
> The roots of the name are in the coalition of 1853 in which moderate Reformers and Conservatives from Canada West joined with bleus from Canada East under the dual premiership of Sir Allan MacNab and A.-N. Morin. The new ministry committed to secularizing Clergy reserves in Canada West and abolishing seigneurial tenure in Canada East.[2] Over time, the Liberal-Conservatives evolved into the Conservative party and their opponents, the Clear Grits and the Parti rouge evolved into the Liberal Party of Canada.[3]



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal-Conservative_Party


----------



## pbi (21 Feb 2018)

Chris Pook said:
			
		

> Liberal-Conservatives  - The Party of John A. MacDonald
> 
> The party that united Presbyterians (and French Calvinists) and Methodists and other Non-Conformist Dissenters with the Catholics against the Episcopalian Anglicans.
> 
> ...


What, sir, what? Slanderous! As an Anglican I take exception! We should have sorted out all the bloody Dissenters and Nonconformists and Puritans when we had the chance! Beware The Church of The Big Pointy Hats!!


----------



## Old Sweat (21 Feb 2018)

Chris Pook said:
			
		

> In fact in Canada the Orange Lodge was explicitly created to unite Catholics and Dissenters against Bishop Strachan's establishment Episcopalians.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal-Conservative_Party



Could you run this Orange Lodge bit by me again, svp? The Orange Lodge was established in Canada by Ogle Gowan, a Protestant Irish immigrant, to bolster Protestant values and survived well into the late-20th century in Eastern Ontario. (While there had been earlier groups, the first lodge organized under Gowan's purview was set up in Brockville.) It may have also opposed the Family Compact et al, but this is the first time I have seen it linked with Catholics in a positive way. In fact it was active in opposing the 1837 Upper Canada rebellion.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orange_Order_in_Canada


----------



## Kirkhill (21 Feb 2018)

Perhaps some confusion on my part, conflating Ogle Robert Gowan's role as Grandmaster with the Orange Order at large.



> He arrived in Leeds County, Upper Canada in 1829 and settled in Brockville. In 1830, he called a meeting which formed the Grand Orange Lodge of British North America; Gowan became its deputy grand master and later became Canadian grand master.
> 
> Gowan was elected to the Legislative Assembly of Upper Canada for Leeds in 1834 and 1835 but was unseated due to violence at the polls by his Orange supporters. In 1836, he was elected in Leeds; *despite his innate distrust of Roman Catholics, he had formed an alliance with Catholic voters to help bolster his support at the polls*. In the same year, he founded the Brockville Statesman.
> 
> During the Lower Canada Rebellion of 1837, he helped raise a company of volunteers which also fought at the Battle of the Windmill. After the rebellion, *Gowan declared his support for responsible government and the division of the clergy reserves among all recognized religious groups in the province*. In 1844, he was elected to the 2nd Parliament of the Province of Canada for Leeds and Grenville. In the assembly, *he supported John A. Macdonald against the interests of the Family Compact*. In 1846, he was replaced by George Benjamin as grand master of the Orange Order in Canada. He helped lead the Orange opposition to the Rebellion Losses Bill in Canada West. In 1849, he stated his support for an elected Legislative Council. In 1852, he moved to Toronto where he served on city council in 1853 and 1854 and took over the publishing of the Toronto Patriot, formerly a Family Compact newspaper. In 1853, he regained the position of grand master, but Benjamin's supporters formed a separate Orange organization. In 1856, Gowan stepped down to allow the rift to be healed under a new grand master, George Lyttleton Allen. He was elected in an 1858 by-election to represent North Leeds and, in 1861, he retired from politics.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ogle_Robert_Gowan


----------



## Jarnhamar (21 Feb 2018)

Speaking of Orange, the new "new" message icons on milnet.ca look awfully NDPy   :Tin-Foil-Hat:

 ;D


----------



## mariomike (21 Feb 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Speaking of Orange, the new "new" message icons on milnet.ca look awfully NDPy   :Tin-Foil-Hat:
> 
> ;D



Subliminal messaging?


----------



## daftandbarmy (21 Feb 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Subliminal messaging?



More propaganda from the SNCOs Union?


----------



## beirnini (22 Feb 2018)

"the reunited Conservative party was able to take power, with the help of the worst corruption scandal in a century"

If ever there was a mountain made from a molehill:

"In the end, the ["Gomery" _Commission of Inquiry into the Sponsorship Program and Advertising Activities_] concluded that $2 million was awarded in contracts without a proper bidding system, $250,000 was added to one contract price for no additional work, and $1.5 million was awarded for work that was never done, of which $1.14 million was repaid. The Commission found that a number of rules in the Financial Administration Act were broken."

And as if that wasn't enough of an indignity upon our democracy, "The overall operating cost of the Commission was $14 million."


----------



## Lumber (22 Feb 2018)

beirnini said:
			
		

> "the reunited Conservative party was able to take power, with the help of the worst corruption scandal in a century"
> 
> If ever there was a mountain made from a molehill:
> 
> ...



Interesting, this article pegs it at $60 million, although released in 2005, which was one year earlier than the CBC article referenced above.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/gomery-cost-soars/article4114779/


----------



## Edward Campbell (22 Feb 2018)

Chris Pook said:
			
		

> Perhaps some confusion on my part, conflating Ogle Robert Gowan's role as Grandmaster with the Orange Order at large.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ogle_Robert_Gowan




It seems to me that Gowan was, rather like Mackenzie and Macdonald a politician first and was willing to build coalitions with whomever ... long spoons and all that.

I think Old Sweat and I raised our eyebrows at the thought of many Ontario Orangemen cooperating with Roman Catholics on much of anything.

My family's roots are in Dufferin and Wellington Counties (my paternal grandfather didn't move to Saskatoon until about 1920) ... that's about as Orange as you could get and I gather it remained so until the 1970s. I can guarantee, from observation, that in the 1960s, there were many active (some quite large) Orange Order lodges in Shelburne, Grand Valley, Orangeville (of course), Arthur, Mount Forest, Fergus and so on. Even today, as I pointed out to my wife last year, when I took her for a trip back there, the region is dominated by Presbyterian churches and a wee bit light on Roman Catholic ones.


----------



## Loachman (22 Feb 2018)

"Snapshots" from Another Taxpayer-Funded Holiday.

Lots of family-fun-times photographs in front of various landmarks dressed in Indian clothing (no cries of "cultural appropriation" from the SJW crowd yet, that I've seen, though), very little work, and his hosts seem irritated:

https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/trudeau-s-unusual-india-visit-raises-eyebrows-criticised-by-canada-watchdog/story-Xg6UmLGX4g3AkPHhD87oVL.html

Justin Trudeau’s ‘unusual’ India trip raises eyebrows, panned by Canada watchdog

The Canadian prime minister’s schedule includes just half-a-day of official engagements in New Delhi.
world Updated: Feb 20, 2018 15:25 IST 

Anirudh Bhattacharyya 

Hindustan Times, New Delhi 

"As Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau continues his eight-day visit to India, the fact that his schedule includes just half-a-day of official engagements in New Delhi is being described as “unusual” by veteran diplomats and criticised by a Canadian watchdog.

"A veteran Indian diplomat said in his long experience with bilateral visits, he had never experienced a trip of this nature, where the visiting dignitary spent so little time in official engagements with counterparts in the Indian government. 

"In addition, he said, it was equally surprising that six cabinet ministers accompanying Trudeau had scant official engagements, except for foreign minister Chrystia Freeland, who will confer with external affairs minister Sushma Swaraj ahead of the meeting between the prime ministers in New Delhi on February 23.

The diplomat spoke on condition of anonymity since he did not want to appear “churlish”.

"The low-key start to the visit on February 17 also raised eyebrows, with commentators noting that Trudeau was received at the Delhi airport by minister of state Gajendra Shekhawat. 

"This, they noted, was in marked contrast to the warm welcome and hugs from Prime Minister Modi that marked the arrivals of US president Barack Obama, Israeli premier Benjamin Netanyahu and Abu Dhabi crown prince Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan. 

"Commentators also noted that there had been no tweet from Modi’s official account welcoming Trudeau and that he had not accompanied the Canadian leader to his home state of Gujarat. Reports have suggested that the Indian government is unhappy with Canada’s soft stance on Sikh radicals, who have increased pro-Khalitsan activities in recent years.

"Indian officials were also taken aback by the length and breadth of Trudeau’s visit, and the tacking on of an additional day for a town hall in New Delhi on February 24.

"The Ottawa-based Canadian Taxpayers Federation, an advocacy group, is not impressed with the itinerary. Its federal director, Aaron Wudrick, said in an email, “While it is understood that a Prime Minister will have to travel frequently, the proportion of time being spent actually meeting foreign counterparts on this trip does not suggest a good use of public money. 

“A week is a long time for a PM to spend visiting one country, and a half of a day out of eight is very little official business.”

http://nationalpost.com/news/is-trudeau-hobnobbing-with-terrorists-why-india-doesnt-trust-canada-all-that-much

Is Trudeau ‘hobnobbing’ with terrorists? Why India doesn’t trust Canada all that much

There are real fears in India that Canada is a terrorist hotspot that could plunge their northwest regions into sectarian violence

Tristin Hopper 

February 22, 2018 6:00 AM EST
Last Updated February 22, 2018 6:00 AM EST

"It’s pretty clear by now that Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is not having the most productive time in India. His itinerary is unusually light and, according to Indian media, high profile politicians seem to be actively avoiding him."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/jaspal-atwal-invite-dinner-sophie-1.4545881

Convicted attempted murderer invited to formal dinner with Trudeau in India

B.C.'s Jaspal Atwal was convicted for 1986 attempt to assassinate Indian cabinet minister on Vancouver Island

By Terry Milewski, CBC News Posted: Feb 21, 2018 7:46 PM ET Last Updated: Feb 21, 2018 8:09 PM ET

"Atwal, who did not travel to India with the Trudeaus' entourage, was convicted of the attempted murder of an Indian cabinet minister, Malkiat Singh Sidhu, on Vancouver Island in 1986.

"At the time, he was a member of the International Sikh Youth Federation, banned as a terrorist group in Canada, the U.K., the U.S. and India.

"He's also been convicted in an automobile fraud case and was charged, but not convicted, in a 1985 near-fatal attack on Ujjal Dosanjh, an opponent of the Sikh separatist movement who later became premier of British Columbia.

"Trudeau has been under pressure throughout his India tour to answer Indian concerns about Sikh separatism in Canada. Today, he was asked about the public display of "martyr" posters honouring Talwinder Parmar, the leader of the 1985 Air India bomb plot, which took 331 lives.

"I do not think we should ever be glorifying mass-murderers," Trudeau said, "and I'm happy to condemn that."

India Report On Justin Trudeau & Sikh Radicalism In Canada https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vLzsZ3L0aI


----------



## jollyjacktar (22 Feb 2018)

Nice work if you can find it, as they say.  I hope he doesn't drown with his snout so deeply buried in the trough.   :


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (22 Feb 2018)

Trudeau "does not think we should be glorifying mass murderers". 

You mean, he's not not even sure of that???


----------



## jollyjacktar (22 Feb 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Trudeau "does not think we should be glorifying mass murderers".
> 
> You mean, he's not not even sure of that???



He was cool with Uncle Fidel...

He seems to attract the bad boys, doesn't he?   :rofl:


http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-india-atwal-controversy-1.4546502


----------



## Colin Parkinson (22 Feb 2018)

beirnini said:
			
		

> "the reunited Conservative party was able to take power, with the help of the worst corruption scandal in a century"
> 
> If ever there was a mountain made from a molehill:
> 
> ...



I had friends that had to deal with "Group Actionon" It was pretty clear they were a waste of time, never delivered a product, always late and always getting the contracts. I also suspected Ryder Travel of the same hanky panky.


----------



## Kirkhill (22 Feb 2018)

E.R. Campbell said:
			
		

> It seems to me that Gowan was, rather like Mackenzie and Macdonald a politician first and was willing to build coalitions with whomever ... long spoons and all that.
> 
> I think Old Sweat and I raised our eyebrows at the thought of many Ontario Orangemen cooperating with Roman Catholics on much of anything.
> 
> My family's roots are in Dufferin and Wellington Counties (my paternal grandfather didn't move to Saskatoon until about 1920) ... that's about as Orange as you could get and I gather it remained so until the 1970s. I can guarantee, from observation, that in the 1960s, there were many active (some quite large) Orange Order lodges in Shelburne, Grand Valley, Orangeville (of course), Arthur, Mount Forest, Fergus and so on. Even today, as I pointed out to my wife last year, when I took her for a trip back there, the region is dominated by Presbyterian churches and a wee bit light on Roman Catholic ones.



Point taken.  Curiously my Presbyterian Uncle and Grandmother landed up in Orangeville.

I am familiar with the Orange Order in Northern Ireland.  I don't recall it having a strong following in Scotland (the Masons were more common).  The Canadian Orange Order is not as well known to me, although my RC wife's family from Saskatoon was well acquaint with them.

My understanding of the Religious Wars in Canada, a work in progress for me, is that it has made for some very strange bedfellows over the years.  George Brown, scion of the Liberals was a vehemently anti-Catholic Presbyterian and yet the Liberals became the party of Quebec and then the party of French and Irish RCs.    Meanwhile the Conservatives aligned Strachan's Scots and English Episcopalians of the Family Compact with the Seigneury and the Church of Quebec.  

And previously Frenchmen serving in the British Army were actively engaged in expelling the influence of the French Church from Quebec.

The point I keep coming to is that the simplistic division of Canada into Protestant English and Catholic French factions, mimicing Irish divisions, is a fiction born of modern political need.


----------



## FJAG (22 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> "Snapshots" from Another Taxpayer-Funded Holiday.
> 
> Lots of family-fun-times photographs in front of various landmarks dressed in Indian clothing (no cries of "cultural appropriation" from the SJW crowd yet, that I've seen, though), very little work, and his hosts seem irritated:
> 
> ...



Seems like it's a bit much now for many Indians.



> Justin Trudeau is ridiculed by Indians for his 'fake, tacky and annoying' wardrobe of traditional outfits - and finally dons a suit after criticism



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5421779/Justin-Trudeau-ridiculed-Indians-fake-outfits.html

 :cheers:


----------



## jollyjacktar (22 Feb 2018)

You could remove the reference to the clothing a keep the rest of the headline.


----------



## Rifleman62 (22 Feb 2018)

Spend, spend, spend. What a vacation. I asked CTV to look into who paid for all the all the outfits the Trudeau family are wearing. Any bets who?

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/feds-use-taxpayer-money-to-fly-celebrity-chef-to-india-1.3814009

*Feds use taxpayer money to fly celebrity chef to India* - 21 Feb 18

Vancouver-based celebrity chef Vikram Vij, a vocal Liberal supporter, was flown to India on the government’s dime to cook for a group of top diplomats, CTV News has learned.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has been travelling across India with his family in hopes of boosting business ties with the South Asian nation.

The government flew Vij to India to help prepare Indian cuisine for a reception at the residence of the Canadian High Commissioner on Thursday.

Vij’s flight and hotel were paid for by taxpayers’ dollars, CTV News has learned.

In a statement to CTV News, a government spokesperson confirmed that Vij was invited to the reception and that his “out-of-pocket expenses” are being covered.

“Where appropriate, it is accepted practice for Canadian missions to invite ‎chefs from Canada to showcase Canadian food products and cuisine. Vikram Vij ‎is a prominent Indo-Canadian whose Vancouver restaurants are world-renowned for melding Canadian ingredients and the traditions of Indian cuisine,” the spokesperson said in a statement.

“Mr. Vij generously offered a week of his time, away from his Canadian business, to assist with the menu and food preparation for the Canada Reception. (Global Affairs Canada) is undertaking to cover his out-of-pocket expenses (eg. airfare and accommodation). Mr Vij's involvement will contribute to make the event a memorable celebration of the Canada-India friendship.”

Vij publically threw his support behind Trudeau ahead of the 2015 federal election. He even helped fire up a crowd in Vancouver during one of Trudeau’s campaign rallies.


----------



## Loachman (22 Feb 2018)

https://globalnews.ca/news/4037948/trudeau-family-criticized-for-indian-outfits/

February 21, 2018 12:55 pm   Updated: February 22, 2018 8:53 am   

Trudeau family criticized for overdoing it on their traditional Indian outfits

By Marilisa Racco  National Online Journalist, Smart Living  Global News

"It’s one thing to pay respectful homage to a culture, but it’s another thing entirely when your traditional attire starts to veer into costume territory. That’s exactly what some are saying about the Trudeaus.

"Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is already ripe for the picking (or trashing) as many have criticized him for his official trip that includes his wife and three children, and that is being questioned on its political relevance. Although the PM announced a $1 billion Canadian-Indian investment deal yesterday, the family’s insistence on consistently donning traditional Indian attire is starting to draw less than flattering attention.

"Described as “too Indian, even for an Indian,” the Trudeaus have commissioned some of India’s most prestigious designers to outfit them for every photo op. What was perhaps most glaring was the juxtaposition between the Canadian political family and the Bollywood stars they met on Feb. 20. Sophie was in a cream-coloured and beaded sari, their children Xavier and Ella-Grace wore a sherwani and lehenga, respectively, and the PM donned a gold sherwani complete with traditional mojari shoes - while the Indian stars wore slacks and jackets.

"Some people have taken to Twitter to express fashion fatigue, including National Conference leader Omar Abdullah."

Associated tweets:

"Is it just me or is this choreographed cuteness all just a bit much now? Also FYI we Indians don’t dress like this every day sir, not even in Bollywood. pic.twitter.com/xqAqfPnRoZ

- Omar Abdullah (@OmarAbdullah) February 21, 2018"

"Have any foreign leaders arrived to Canada dressed in Mountie costumes? https://t.co/LaIaycGPCo #TrudeauinIndia pic.twitter.com/DvShaYlnWP

- Mark O'Henly (@SeeClickFlash) February 19, 2018"

"Meet the newly wed indian couple.#JustinTrudeau wearing indian groom costume and #KristyDuncan wearing typical indian bridal maroon dress standing outside Hindu Temple and Trudeau wearing wedding necklace (Indian wedding custom)
Perfect. #TrudeauInIndia pic.twitter.com/7P8hvEVL5j

- Navdeep Singh (@NavdeepDhingra) February 19, 2018"

"Wonder how much Canadians paid for the Trudeau family stylist plus cost of costume changes for this Conde Nast Traveller junket💰💰💰 🙄#TrudeauinIndia #cdnpoli

- Prem 🇨🇦👌🏻🙏🏻💕 (@Prem_S) February 21, 2018"


----------



## Rifleman62 (22 Feb 2018)

Sorry to those offended, our PM looks like a duffus. He really is an embarrassment. Meanwhile the CF-18 will be flying into at least 2032. Fifty year old "fighters".


----------



## FJAG (22 Feb 2018)

The BBC chimes in on the Trudeau wardrobe:



> Justin Trudeau's 'Bollywood' wardrobe amuses Indians



http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-43151115

I won't post an extract. You need to read it with the pictures.

 :cheers:


----------



## Loachman (22 Feb 2018)

More Sunny Ways....

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/information-watchdog-blasts-liberals-ahead-of-her-retirement/article38060282/

Information watchdog blasts Liberals ahead of her retirement

Daniel Leblanc 

OTTAWA 

Published 15 hours ago

Updated February 21, 2018

"In her last week in office, Canada's information watchdog is accusing the Liberal government of reneging on its promise to bring a new era of openness to Ottawa and of failing to defend the "Charter right" of Canadians to quick and easy access to federal documents and data."


----------



## YZT580 (22 Feb 2018)

And I would be willing to bet that the chef wasn't flying in economy either!!  Round trip business on Air India is just a little over 12000 but a first class ticket is also available.  Meanwhile, we can't afford medical coverage for our vets!!!  Aren't YOU glad you voted for him?


----------



## Kat Stevens (22 Feb 2018)

There needs to be a concerted "point and laugh" campaign launched every time our esteemed leader shows up in his latest cosplay outfits. Even when he shows up in his leader of a western nation costume. Maybe _especially_ when he shows up in his western leader costume.  Emperor's New Clothes, and all that.


----------



## beirnini (22 Feb 2018)

Lumber said:
			
		

> Interesting, this article pegs it at $60 million, although released in 2005, which was one year earlier than the CBC article referenced above.
> 
> https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/gomery-cost-soars/article4114779/


I'm not sure which set of numbers is correct, but I am pretty sure of one thing: The spectacular political opportunism that sprung up around this relatively piddling "scandal" did our nation no favours. Considering our bloated federal procurement system the misallocation of millions, or even tens of millions does not remotely qualify as "scandal of the century" for a country as wealthy as Canada. But the way it's brought up by some you'd think we were brought to the brink of bankruptcy.


----------



## Lumber (22 Feb 2018)

If the biggest issues you guys have to talk about is what the people said about what the PM wore, and accident on the part of a High Commission staffer in regards to a _dinner _invitation, then I'd say we're not doing so bad.


----------



## Kat Stevens (22 Feb 2018)

Lumber said:
			
		

> If the biggest issues you guys have to talk about is what the people said about what the PM wore, and accident on the part of a High Commission staffer in regards to a _dinner _invitation, then I'd say we're not doing so bad.



He's a laughing stock around the world, and makes Canada one by extension. If you think that's okay, then I'd say we're boned.


----------



## Remius (22 Feb 2018)

Lumber said:
			
		

> If the biggest issues you guys have to talk about is what the people said about what the PM wore, and accident on the part of a High Commission staffer in regards to a _dinner _invitation, then I'd say we're not doing so bad.



Lumber, I think that that we are doing  a lot worse if we also just dismiss this as just what he is wearing and an "accidental invite" given to a convicted criminal. 

I could care less about what he is wearing (he is looking a bit ridiculous though).  I won't put the accidental invite on him but I am concerned that he might be hurting relations with India.  India is a major player and emerging economy seen by some as a foil to China.  Accidental invites and other gaffes are not acceptable.  Not at that level and not when a lot is at stake.  Things like this can come back to haunt.


----------



## Lumber (22 Feb 2018)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> He's a laughing stock around the world, and makes Canada one by extension. If you think that's okay, then I'd say we're boned.



No he's not; the world is fawning over the PM. 



			
				Remius said:
			
		

> Lumber, I think that that we are doing  a lot worse if we also just dismiss this as just what he is wearing and an "accidental invite" given to a convicted criminal.
> 
> I could care less about what he is wearing (he is looking a bit ridiculous though).  I won't put the accidental invite on him but I am concerned that he might be hurting relations with India.  India is a major player and emerging economy seen by some as a foil to China.  Accidental invites and other gaffes are not acceptable.  Not at that level and not when a lot is at stake.  Things like this can come back to haunt.



No, this is doing a lot worse:

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/905130/Paris-gang-violence-death-france

https://www.politico.eu/article/spain-corruption-pp-rajoy-never-ending-problem-graft-ignacio-gonzalez/

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-if-true-this-is-the-worst-case-of-corruption-in-israel-s-history-1.5841423

https://www.hrw.org/news/2018/01/18/china-rights-crackdown-goes-global

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/26/mexico-maelstrom-how-the-drug-violence-got-so-bad

https://businesstech.co.za/news/general/163503/the-shocking-truth-about-rape-in-south-africa/

https://theintercept.com/2018/01/12/el-salvador-tps-trump-gang-violence/


----------



## mariomike (22 Feb 2018)

Lumber said:
			
		

> No he's not; the world is fawning over the PM.



CTV News
January 23, 2018 
"Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and German Chancellor Angela Merkel were deemed the most respected leaders globally, while U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin received the dubious distinction of receiving the worst approval ratings."


----------



## Kat Stevens (22 Feb 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> CTV News
> January 23, 2018
> "Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and German Chancellor Angela Merkel were deemed the most respected leaders globally, while U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin received the dubious distinction of receiving the worst approval ratings."



That's a pretty low bar these days. Kinda like being the best snow fort builder in Namibia.


----------



## Underway (22 Feb 2018)

Lumber said:
			
		

> If the biggest issues you guys have to talk about is what the people said about what the PM wore, and accident on the part of a High Commission staffer in regards to a _dinner _invitation, then I'd say we're not doing so bad.



True.  Only Canadian's would be so neurotic as to think the rest of the world actually gives a crap about us.  Our geopolitical reality that keeps us safe in the world is balanced by the fact that we are also irrelevant in many ways.

However the concern for Mr. Trudeau is as follows IMHO.

Omar Khadr- the out of court settlement
Daesh "rehab" instead of jail time.  
Accidentally invites a convicted attempted murderer and Indian terrorist to dinner.

These each are separate issues.  Each with their own particulars.  Some not so serious, others very serious.  However, together they create a narrative that is not favourable whether accidental or revealing (perhaps both).  I suspect the CPC strategists are sharpening their knives on this right now.


----------



## Altair (22 Feb 2018)

Underway said:
			
		

> True.  Only Canadian's would be so neurotic as to think the rest of the world actually gives a crap about us.  Our geopolitical reality that keeps us safe in the world is balanced by the fact that we are also irrelevant in many ways.
> 
> However the concern for Mr. Trudeau is as follows IMHO.
> 
> ...


Yup. They will be. And it's a shame. They are a party that has been accused of being overly negative and all they have done to date is attack and be negative about the liberal party.

Which is fine, and it's their right, but at some point they are going to need to convince people of reasons why to vote for them other than we aren't the liberals.


----------



## Loachman (22 Feb 2018)

Lumber said:
			
		

> No he's not; the world is fawning over the PM.



As they do over his Kardashian siblings.

Who would have voted for him, or be "fawning over" him now, based upon his abilities, were he bald and named "Smith"?


----------



## jollyjacktar (22 Feb 2018)

I am quite pissed off with these family vacations he's taking at our expense.  In an 8 day visit he's only going to do a 1/2 days work.  Flying this Chef in from BC etc etc.


----------



## Lumber (22 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> As they do over his Kardashian siblings.
> 
> Who would have voted for him, or be "fawning over" him now, based upon his abilities, were he bald and named "Smith"?



Moot. I wasn't arguing his popularity was based on merit instead of his hair. I was countering Kat Steve's assertion that "He's a laughing stock around the world," which he is clearly not.

You are all making the mistake of assuming that my saying "you're wrong about this or that" to mean the same thing as "Go Liberals! Go Trudeau!".

Maybe I'm just trolling because my indifference toward most Politics (notice I used a big P)...


----------



## MarkOttawa (22 Feb 2018)

Just check latest headlines:

1) _Toronto Star_ (!!! on CP story):



> India-Canada relations at ‘rock bottom’ after Trudeau invitation error, ex-Liberal cabinet minister says
> https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2018/02/22/trudeau-faces-more-trouble-on-india-trip-after-invitation-error-reports-of-snub-by-indian-pm-modi.html



2) _Times of India_:



> On India trip, Khalistan keeps returning to haunt Canadian PM Justin Trudeau
> https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/canadian-pmo-does-damage-control-as-justin-trudeaus-trip-runs-into-khalistani-hitch-again/articleshow/63027955.cms



3) CNN (from New Delhi):



> From 'snub' to scandal, Trudeau's India visit sparks outrage
> https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/22/asia/extremist-scandal-trudeau-india-visit-intl/index.html



I'd say our dear PM Dressup, if not actually wrecking Indo-Canadian relations, has put them back quite some ways--all in hope of domestic political pay-off:

CBC:



> *Analysis*
> How Trudeau's India trip lays the groundwork for the 2019 election
> _Indo-Canadians helped Liberals win the 2015 federal election, but the party faces new challenges in 2019_
> 
> ...



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## mariomike (22 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> Who would have voted for him, or be "fawning over" him now, based upon his abilities, were he bald and named "Smith"?



Change your name and find a hair specialist?


----------



## Journeyman (22 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> ... at some point they are going to need to convince people of reasons why to vote for them other than we aren't the liberals.


???  Hmmm, yet "ABC - Anyone But Conservatives" was an acceptable platform 18 months ago.


----------



## Altair (22 Feb 2018)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> ???  Hmmm, yet "ABC - Anyone But Conservatives" was an acceptable platform 18 months ago.


If it's ABL, one can easily shift their vote to the NDP, no?

CPC still need to try show people why they should vote for them, and not just focus on being a group focused of raging against the liberals. 

Say what you will of the NDP, but they have their message back on track and a bunch of policy ideas out. The conservatives...no carbon tax, liberals suck, anything else?


----------



## Underway (22 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> If it's ABL, one can easily shift their vote to the NDP, no?
> 
> CPC still need to try show people why they should vote for them, and not just focus on being a group focused of raging against the liberals.
> 
> ...



Conservatives don't need anything until election time.  No one pays attention too opposition platforms until an election is called.  Then approximately 20% of us always vote Conservative, 22% always vote Liberal,  12% always vote NDP,  10% minds can be changed and remainder don't vote.  So how does a platform matter right now again?


----------



## Altair (22 Feb 2018)

Underway said:
			
		

> Conservatives don't need anything until election time.  No one pays attention too opposition platforms until an election is called.  Then approximately 20% of us always vote Conservative, 22% always vote Liberal,  12% always vote NDP,  10% minds can be changed and remainder don't vote.  So how does a platform matter right now again?


If that's the case, nothing really matters before the election campaign starts.

Regardless, I guess no real hard can come from yelling you suck for a few years, but I don't think that's the best way to go about things personally.


----------



## pbi (22 Feb 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> Lumber, I think that that we are doing  a lot worse if we also just dismiss this as just what he is wearing and an "accidental invite" given to a convicted criminal.
> 
> I could care less about what he is wearing (he is looking a bit ridiculous though).  I won't put the accidental invite on him but I am concerned that he might be hurting relations with India.  India is a major player and emerging economy seen by some as a foil to China.  Accidental invites and other gaffes are not acceptable.  Not at that level and not when a lot is at stake.  Things like this can come back to haunt.



I share Remius  concern that this silly, almost patronizing behaviour could harm relations with India, one of the world's most important countries, and a coming economy we could tap into. What is the point of this Mr Dress Up business? When an Indian PM comes to Canada, do we hope to see him wearing a plaid shirt, or a curling team windbreaker, or snowshoes? It seems like another case of quite bad judgement.

And I voted for his government!!  Yow. That stings.


----------



## mariomike (22 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> When an Indian PM comes to Canada, do we hope to see him wearing a plaid shirt, or a curling team windbreaker, or snowshoes?



"When in Rome..."


----------



## Lumber (22 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> I share Remius  concern that this silly, almost patronizing behaviour could harm relations with India, one of the world's most important countries, and a coming economy we could tap into. What is the point of this Mr Dress Up business? When an Indian PM comes to Canada, do we hope to see him wearing a plaid shirt, or a curling team windbreaker, or snowshoes? It seems like another case of quite bad judgement.
> 
> And I voted for his government!!  Yow. That stings.



I think it would be awesome if a foreign head of government or state put on a flannel jacket and got photographed in line for a double-double at tims, or was scene sporting a québec style toque while eating poutine, or wearing a stetson and cowboy boots, swigging a Keyston XL.

I'm proud of our Canadian stereotypes and our cultural garb, and to see a foreign dignitary sporting it in good fun would make me smile.


----------



## ModlrMike (22 Feb 2018)

There's a difference between symbolically experiencing cultural touchstones, and dressing up like a parody of someone's culture.


----------



## Underway (22 Feb 2018)

What matters politically is the opposition making the gov't look bad.  All gov't have a best before date.  The opposition tries to hasten that timeline.  Platforms matter during an election year and right after the election.  In between those times they don't really matter, except to those who are politics watchers or party members.  Policy conventions can be useful in that they can create a "feel" for the public/press but generally the part brass throw those ideas out to run a campaign.



			
				Lumber said:
			
		

> québec style toque


 Avec les pom pom?


----------



## Lumber (22 Feb 2018)

Underway said:
			
		

> Avec les pom pom?



'ben oui! Toujours avec les pom pom!


----------



## Loachman (22 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> When an Indian PM comes to Canada, do we hope to see him wearing a plaid shirt, or a curling team windbreaker, or snowshoes?



_*Not*_ in a completely different costume at each of several different locations every day over and over and over again. Once is fine, and also enough.

His son looks like he's had enough in some of these as well.

Are there any still-living FLQ members that this hypothetical Indian Prime Minister could invite to dinner while here? If not, maybe Omar could be available.

Somebody's going to photoshop a clown nose and smile onto the brighter-coloured get-ups in this portfolio. I can't be the only one who's thought of that.


----------



## George Wallace (22 Feb 2018)

Lumber said:
			
		

> I think it would be awesome if a foreign head of government or state put on a flannel jacket and got photographed in line for a double-double at tims, or was scene sporting a québec style toque while eating poutine, or wearing a stetson and cowboy boots, swigging a Keyston XL.
> 
> I'm proud of our Canadian stereotypes and our cultural garb, and to see a foreign dignitary sporting it in good fun would make me smile.



I think that it would be just as insulting to Canadians if a foreign Head of State came here and dressed up as an aboriginal, as much as this costumed 'actor' is insulting the populace of India.  He and his family are being ridiculed in the Press all around the world now.  If his socks didn't do it before, this visit to India has made him a laughing stock; a National embarrassment.

Making matter worse is the inclusion of a convicted assassin, whom he has been photographed with at least three times in the past decade, in his entourage.  Not taking responsibility; but blaming one of his Cabinet Ministers for the inclusion on the trip is yet another failure on his part.


----------



## Loachman (22 Feb 2018)

Bonus cartoon included:

https://www.surreynowleader.com/news/surrey-mp-apologizes-for-inviting-criminal-to-trudeau-reception/

Surrey MP apologizes for inviting criminal to Trudeau reception

Posing for photos with controversial people has been a bane for politicians 

Amy Reid/Tom Zytaruk

Feb. 22, 2018 1:11 p.m.

"Surrey Liberal MP Randeep Sarai has offered in a prepared statement an “apology without reservation” for his role in what is proving to be a public relations disaster for the federal Trudeau government."

http://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/guest-column-still-clueless-in-ottawa

GUEST COLUMN: Trudeau's trip to India lacks purpose

By Arthur G. Rubinoff, Special to Postmedia Network

"Prior to Prime Minister Paul Martin’s visit to India in January 2005, I was approached by the Privy Council to provide a rationale for his trip and explain to the Indians why he was going there and what he should say.

"It was clear that the prime minister did not know the reason for his trip, other than to escape Ottawa in the middle of winter. I suggested that Mr. Martin commend India for “being a responsible nuclear power,” and he did just that. I reported this in an article for the McGill International Review Vol. VI., No 2. (Spring 2006) entitled “Clueless in Ottawa, Canada’s Need for an India Policy.”

"It is evident in the tepid reception that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has received that Canada still lacks a policy to engage India. There does not seem to be any purpose for, or proper planning to, his visit. The Indians do not seem to know why he is there. Is Mr. Trudeau merely reliving his childhood visit to the Taj Mahal with his own offspring? An equivalent visit by Indian prime minister Narendra Modi would be coming to Canada to see Niagara Falls."


----------



## George Wallace (22 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> If it's ABL, one can easily shift their vote to the NDP, no?
> 
> CPC still need to try show people why they should vote for them, and not just focus on being a group focused of raging against the liberals.
> 
> Say what you will of the NDP, but they have their message back on track and a bunch of policy ideas out. The conservatives...no carbon tax, liberals suck, anything else?



I don't know.  The leader of the big Orange Machine has been making quite a few gaffs in the media lately, as well.  I am not sure that all those ABC crowd will have many alternatives next election.  Both the Red Machine and Orange Machine seem to have very similar leanings when it comes to recognized "terrorist groups/organizations" and how we handle anyone affiliated with them here in Canada.


----------



## McG (22 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> This seems to be a constant problem for what I like to call "moderate conservatism" (or maybe Red Toryism  ;D ) in the last few years. There appears to be an almost irresistible temptation to begin drifting towards the right wing and angry populism.





			
				FJAG said:
			
		

> You don't have to look as far as the US however to see the issue. We had our own "divide/reunite" the right period with the Reform party. (which I do not put in the same category as the Tea Party, Alt-Right etc.). The trouble is that conservatism is a numbers game and one constantly has to enter into unholy alliances. The best thing would be if the more conservative Liberals and the more liberal Conservatives could create a true centrist party and leave the NDP and the more extreme right to the fringes where they belong.


I don’t think a new centrist party is what we need.  I think it would be better to roll-back/undo the Unite the Right merger. I think there were a lot of “blue Liberals” who could regularly be counted upon to vote LPC but would have comfortably voted PC given any dissatisfaction with their usual party, and there were a lot of “red Tories” who could regularly be counted upon to vote PC baring any specific dissatisfiers.  With the merger of Progressive Conservatives and social conservatives, the CPC is now far enough right so as to no longer compete for the centrist vote against the Liberals. With his right flank secured, Justin Trudeau was free to lead the Liberals to flank the NDP to the left during the last election. 

So there is a void where red Tories and blue Liberals. I think that void is best filled not by dropping a new party into it but by getting the old parties to start fighting for it again.  Split the CPC back into its old parts.  Ignoring the fringes: on the right would be Libertarians and a social conservative party, at right of centre would be a revived PC party, on the left of centre would be LPC, and on the left would be Green and NDP.  And to avoid the split vote problem that gave rise to the Chrétien majorities, ranked ballots using a condorset system.


----------



## Rifleman62 (22 Feb 2018)

The "leader" of a G7 country making chappati on an eight day vacation. Do you think the PM is missed by anyone in Ottawa? Butts probably just wanted to get rid of him for a while figuring he could do no harm.



> In this photograph released by the Amritsar District Public Relations Officer on February 21, 2018, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau (second from right), his wife Sophie Gregoire Trudeau (left), daughter Ella-Grace and son Xavier prepare chappati for a communal vegetarian meal known as 'langar' at a community kitchen at the Golden Temple in Amritsar.HANDOUT / AFP/Getty Images



I have asked around for someone to find out how much all these different items of dress are costing us.

Duffus he is.


----------



## jollyjacktar (22 Feb 2018)

I just read a comment on CBC that stated " I just hope he goes next to one of those countries that put a big disk in their lip"

 :rofl:


----------



## Altair (22 Feb 2018)

http://nationalpost.com/commodities/b-c-to-seek-reference-case-in-courts-over-pipeline-dispute/wcm/875e4768-b85a-4d67-8aab-a8085cb59a11



> After weeks of mounting tensions, Alberta and British Columbia moved Thursday to cool off the trade war that had threatened to escalate into a full-blown constitutional crisis.
> 
> “In a small way today, B.C. blinked,” Alberta Premier Rachel Notley said after B.C. softened its stance on the most controversial of a five-point plan to boost oil-spill preparedness on the West Coast. As a result, she said, Alberta would lift its ban on B.C. wine.
> 
> ...


 Crisis over. 

No need for the feds to get nasty. Everyone happy?


----------



## jollyjacktar (22 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> http://nationalpost.com/commodities/b-c-to-seek-reference-case-in-courts-over-pipeline-dispute/wcm/875e4768-b85a-4d67-8aab-a8085cb59a11
> Crisis over.
> 
> No need for the feds to get nasty. Everyone happy?



But your pal didn't save the day...


----------



## Altair (22 Feb 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> But your pal didn't save the day...


As I said at the time,  the BC government hadn't done anything yet.  

Should they proceed I definitely think the federal government would have stepped up and squashed the move by BC. 

But while there were a lot foaming at the mouth demanding immediate action,  this has been resolved without the federal government having to get nasty with BC. A much better way,  no? 

Now the courts will get this and in all likelyhood side with transmountain and the federal government. And with BC now not able to stop the pipeline,  who now doubts that it gets built?


----------



## jollyjacktar (22 Feb 2018)

The proof will be in the doing.  And nothings doing yet.  As the Brits say " there's many a slip twixt the cup and the lip".   I'll believe it when l see it and not before else we'd be living like the Jetsons by now.


----------



## McG (22 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> http://nationalpost.com/commodities/b-c-to-seek-reference-case-in-courts-over-pipeline-dispute/wcm/875e4768-b85a-4d67-8aab-a8085cb59a11
> Crisis over.
> 
> No need for the feds to get nasty. Everyone happy?


I think the word you are looking for is “postponed”.  The crisis is not averted ... not yet.


----------



## Kat Stevens (22 Feb 2018)

Sorry, but until the oil has been squirted down the tube and onto a tanker, I'll save my happy dance. Things have a way of getting mired in the courts.


----------



## McG (22 Feb 2018)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> Sorry, but until the oil has been squirted down the tube and onto a tanker, I'll save my happy dance. Things have a way of getting mired in the courts.


That’s the right answer.

BC is fighting a delay.  It does not even need to win in the courts.  It just needs to last until the investors bail (and they know this).  Hopefully, if that comes to pass, the federal government will still see the proceedings through to conclusion for the next time.


----------



## Altair (23 Feb 2018)

MCG said:
			
		

> That’s the right answer.
> 
> BC is fighting a delay.  It does not even need to win in the courts.  It just needs to last until the investors bail (and they know this).  Hopefully, if that comes to pass, the federal government will still see the proceedings through to conclusion for the next time.


they are not going to be restricting the oil flowing through the pipelines until they win the court case. 





> his government would proceed with the first four points of his environmental protection plan * but send the fifth and most controversial point – restricting the flow of diluted bitumen from Alberta – to the courts in a reference case.*


BC needs to win in order to do any damage. Unless you believe they have a case,  crisis over.


----------



## McG (23 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> they are not going to be restricting the oil flowing through the pipelines until they win the court case.
> BC needs to win in order to do any damage. Unless you believe they have a case,  crisis over.


Pipelines need to be built.  BC can do the damage it wants by delaying.


----------



## Altair (23 Feb 2018)

MCG said:
			
		

> Pipelines need to be built.  BC can do the damage it wants by delaying.


Transmountain can build the pipeline, increase the amount of oil flowing through it when it's built and if, and only if BC wins their court case can the flow of oil be effected. That can be years away. And in all likelyhood, they will not win. 

What delay?


----------



## McG (23 Feb 2018)

Is the province not still backing Burnaby’s appeal to block the pipeline via bylaw?  And what are investors going to do if KM starts building a pipeline while the province threatens to block its use once built?


----------



## Altair (23 Feb 2018)

MCG said:
			
		

> Is the province not still backing Burnaby’s appeal to block the pipeline via bylaw?  And what are investors going to do if KM starts building a pipeline while the province threatens to block its use once built?


That city bylaws can hold up a national energy project?

I don't think the city has a leg to stand on, do you?


----------



## McG (23 Feb 2018)

Well, the first court did not seem to think they had a leg to stand on (that’s why it is going to appeal), but that does not matter.  As I already stated, BC and its municipalities don’t need to win in the court.  They can achieve their aim through delay.

It worked for Montreal and the TransCanada pipeline.  BC knows it can work again ... especially if the federal government remains disengaged.


----------



## Kat Stevens (23 Feb 2018)

Every municipality and regional district along the proposed line can ask for court injunctions against construction until the impact on the mating cycle of the red striped racing worm can be ascertained, or any of a jillion other reasons to study environmental impact. They could tie it up for decades.


----------



## Altair (23 Feb 2018)

I for one will be happy when this nonsense is over with, and I hope for the sake of Alberta and Canada on a whole that these pipelines are built.


----------



## pbi (23 Feb 2018)

Lumber said:
			
		

> I'm proud of our Canadian stereotypes and our cultural garb, and to see a foreign dignitary sporting it in good fun would make me smile.



Yes. Yes...I see now that it probably would...... ;D


----------



## pbi (23 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> I for one will be happy when this nonsense is over with, and I hope for the sake of Alberta and Canada on a whole that these pipelines are built.



I bet the PM wishes that too. I know I do. I live one block from the CN main line in Kingston, and I don't like seeing those long drags of dozens of tanker cars, even at the reduced running speed. IMHO, far far more risky and accident-prone than any properly engineered pipeline would ever be.

I don't believe that we can't exploit our resources in an intelligent way and still protect our environment to a prudent and reasonable degree that our children will not curse us for. To me it isn't "either/or".


----------



## Rifleman62 (23 Feb 2018)

More new outfits. Video from Canada House as the PM dances the night away.

https://www.ndtv.com/offbeat/justin-trudeau-breaks-into-bhangra-at-delhi-event-twitter-is-divided-1816200  (Video at Link)

*Justin Trudeau Breaks Into Bhangra At Delhi Event. Twitter Is Divided* - 23 Feb 18
_Dressed in a black shervani and accompanied by wife Sophie Trudeau, the 46-year-old danced to the beats of a dhol at a venue that was decked up like a big, fat Delhi wedding._



Crikey, even Don Martin!

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/don-martin-blog/don-martin-if-this-is-trudeau-putting-canada-back-on-the-world-stage-we-should-get-off-1.3815230  (Video at Link)

*Don Martin: If this is Trudeau putting Canada 'back' on the world stage, we should get off* - 22 Feb 18

First, that testy unproductive China visit last fall. Then there was the angry group of Pacific Rim partners left stewing as Canada waffled back from a free trade agreement. And let's not get started on how repeated soothing Justin Trudeau visits have only ramped up President Donald Trump’s trash-talking of Canada for re-negotiating NAFTA in bad faith. Now add India to the list of countries which have lowered their opinion of Canada as a result of prime ministerial visits.

If this is Trudeau putting Canada back on the world stage, we should get off.

This week’s far-too-long tour of India by a prime minister looking for campaign-friendly photo-ops has become a cross between the Keystone Cops and Mr. Dressup. Poor advance team scouting, lousy political intelligence-gathering, awkward fashion advice and a major security breach have turned a minor snub at the arrival gate into a sustained epic failure. For six days Trudeau has wandered the country with a collection of mediocre cabinet ministers in tow who have little reason to be there beyond being Sikh.

Meanwhile his foreign affairs and international trade ministers stayed home.

This is not to begrudge the effort. India is an overlooked economic giant with unlimited potential for Canadian interests. It's in the mission delivery where things have fallen apart. In the quest for perfect optics, they missed the big picture problem of an India whose leaders believe, rightly or wrongly, that Canada is too cozy with Khalistani extremists. 

And you knew this was truly a voyage of the damned when, just as Punjab was pacified, it fell apart all over again. A Canadian Sikh extremist, convicted in the attempted murder of an India cabinet minister, was discovered as an honored reception guest.

By the time CTV News discovered the nonsensical inclusion of a celebrity Indian cuisine chef from Canada, flown at taxpayers’ expense to whip up a dinner in India, well, it was almost comic relief.

Given his now-proven tendency to bring tension to otherwise calm international relationships, Justin Trudeau should just stay home. For the next while, for the preservation of our good name, the world doesn’t need more Canada.


----------



## Loachman (23 Feb 2018)

http://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/justin-trudeau-in-the-real-world/

Justin Trudeau in the real world

Paul Wells: The prime minister’s so-called ‘state visit’ trip to India was so tone-deaf, hopeless and unserious he might as well never have gone 

February 22, 2018 

"In most of the world, secession is not a once-in-a-generation five-week downer that causes awkward moments around the dinner table. In India, the 1947 partition that led to the creation of Pakistan created a river of blood, hundreds of thousands of deaths, tens of thousands of rapes, millions internally displaced, betrayal, upheaval and grief. In much of India it’s hard to walk into any room without meeting people whose family stories prominently feature harrowing tales of this massive human tragedy.

"Visitors aren’t expected to sit for an essay exam on the ramifications of all this for the modern-day Sikh independence movement. Maybe a highly-hypothetical secession of the Sikh homeland would go more smoothly! But this is the emotional landscape within which such questions are considered, in a real place with real people.

"So maybe if you visit India, don’t spend the week parading across the landscape dressed like the Griswolds, to be met at a couple of stops by an easily-identifiable convicted violent extremist who has a well-documented recent history of popping up in British Columbia at Liberal events and on Liberal organizational charts. Especially if the fellow in question specialized in violence related to the very sectarian disputes Trudeau is suspected of taking too lightly."

"This trip began with an omen when the official PMO news release announcing it called it a “state visit.” Canadian heads of government don’t make state visits; _*governors-general*_ do. Prime Ministers make official visits. In Ottawa, people familiar with the distinction are so common they are practically falling from the trees."

"Apparently none fell on anyone in Trudeau’s staff. And so this kind of is a state visit after all, insofar as it’s premised on the assumption that its protagonist is a ceremonial figure who is not authorized to make executive decisions. It follows a China trip in which the PM arrived in chinos and left with no trade deal, and an APEC summit in Danang that went so badly the Liberals had to send a sometime Liberal party factotum to Tokyo weeks later to mend fences. It’s not a great thing when the question that arises, consistently, when a prime minister travels is what the hell he thinks he’s doing."


----------



## jollyjacktar (23 Feb 2018)

"Just not ready.  Nice hair though."  The words of those commercials ring so true still for me and it appears to increasing numbers of peoplekind as well.


----------



## Edward Campbell (23 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> http://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/justin-trudeau-in-the-real-world/
> 
> Justin Trudeau in the real world
> 
> ...




My comments are in the India thread, so I will not repeat them here.


----------



## Loachman (23 Feb 2018)

John Robson: Trudeau's next mind-bogglingly ambitious policy he won't deliver on

The federal Liberal administration intends to assess every policy based on how it will affect everything to do with gender. And after lunch, world peace

John Robson	

February 22, 2018 10:47 AM EST

"Trudeau is the reductio ad absurdum of the illusion that the whole concept of practical difficulties is either a failure of imagination or a plot to thwart social justice. Hence his response to the failure of any high-minded sweeping promise to which no real practical thought was given, is to make an even more sweeping one with even less thought, including his recent third pledge of total transformation of Aboriginal policy in Canada. But this “gender-based policy analysis” is far more astoundingly cosmic."


----------



## Jarnhamar (23 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> I bet the PM wishes that too. I know I do. I live one block from the CN main line in Kingston, and I don't like seeing those long drags of dozens of tanker cars, even at the reduced running speed. IMHO, far far more risky and accident-prone than any properly engineered pipeline would ever be.



I'd be more worried of CN cars full of chlorine.  When it comes in contact with air 1 cup of liquid chlorine will turn in to 300 square feet of gas, so a cracked train car would be some 150'431'100(?) square feet of chlorine gas.
:trainwreck:



As for Trudeau he's an actor. He's just staying in his arcs.  I'm anxiously waiting to see what's in store next for dress-up time, hoping he dresses up like the dog filter from snap chat.


----------



## Kat Stevens (23 Feb 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> I'd be more worried of CN cars full of chlorine.  When it comes in contact with air 1 cup of liquid chlorine will turn in to 300 square feet of gas, so a cracked train car would be some 150'431'100(?) square feet of chlorine gas.
> :trainwreck:
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## mariomike (23 Feb 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> I'd be more worried of CN cars full of chlorine.  When it comes in contact with air 1 cup of liquid chlorine will turn in to 300 square feet of gas, so a cracked train car would be some 150'431'100(?) square feet of chlorine gas.
> :trainwreck:



Remembering Mississauga in 1979. Good thing Mavis and Dundas was sparsely populated - back then. 
The train was eastbound via downtown Toronto.

106-cars of chemicals and explosives including styrene, toluene, propane, caustic soda, and chlorine.

"Death from Above:

It ran off the track, 11-79
While the immigrants slept, there wasn’t much time
The mayor came calling and got ’em outta bed
They packed up their families and headed upwind
A poison cloud, a flaming sky, 200,000 people and no one died
And all before the pocket dial, yeah!”

It was the largest peacetime evacuation in North America until the New Orleans evacuation of 2005.


----------



## Loachman (23 Feb 2018)

http://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/justin-trudeau-may-have-lost-the-foreign-press-and-not-just-fox-news/

Justin Trudeau may have lost the foreign press (and not just Fox News)

It’s hard to miss the change in tone over just the last week, amidst a disastrous visit to India: the Prime Minister’s glow has faded

Murad Hemmadi

February 22, 2018 

"The foreign press does not love Justin Trudeau, not any more."

I feel sorry for Xavier. Once again, he appears to be the only one in these photographs who realizes how they all look, and wishes that it would end quickly.


----------



## pbi (23 Feb 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Remembering Mississauga in 1979. Good thing Mavis and Dundas was sparsely populated - back then.
> The train was eastbound via downtown Toronto....It was the largest peacetime evacuation in North America until the New Orleans evacuation of 2005.


My family and I lived through that. Fortunately a few km north of us. The wreck site was actually quite close to a suburban housing area, and there were businesses and plants along Mavis Rd. Thank God it turned out as it did: it could have been a Lac Megantic.



> I'd be more worried of CN cars full of chlorine.  When it comes in contact with air 1 cup of liquid chlorine will turn in to 300 square feet of gas, so a cracked train car would be some 150'431'100(?) square feet of chlorine gas.



Right...and I don't want that either. and I REALLY don't want a mixed  trainload of nasties, which I see from time to time. But oil comes in various grades, and a good ignition source can get it going fairly easily. Not too long ago, an OPP Sgt I know attended a derailment in which tank cars left the line and ruptured a gas line, which by huge good fortune didn't ignite.


----------



## pbi (23 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> http://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/justin-trudeau-may-have-lost-the-foreign-press-and-not-just-fox-news/
> 
> Justin Trudeau may have lost the foreign press (and not just Fox News)
> 
> It’s hard to miss the change in tone over just the last week, amidst a disastrous visit to India: the Prime Minister’s glow has faded



I was watching CBC this AM (as I do each AM) and he was getting quite a working over. The panelists used words such as "incompetence" and "pointless".

I really don't understand WTF he was trying to do, or who he thought he was appealing to. Perhaps politicians of all stripes would be well advised to stop trying to pander to one particular ethnic group or another: it can backfire.


----------



## Piece of Cake (23 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> Right...and I don't want that either. and I REALLY don't want a mixed  trainload of nasties, which I see from time to time. But oil comes in various grades, and a good ignition source can get it going fairly easily. Not too long ago, an OPP Sgt I know attended a derailment in which tank cars left the line and ruptured a gas line, which by huge good fortune didn't ignite.



Agreed.  Also, Canada already has several pipelines.  All are unsecured, which creates several problems.  Furthermore, with age, pipelines corrode causing leakage. As there is a shift away from fossil fuels, we should be looking at the future of energy, not the past.


----------



## Underway (23 Feb 2018)

Piece of Cake said:
			
		

> Agreed.  Also, Canada already has several pipelines.  All are unsecured, which creates several problems.  Furthermore, with age, pipelines corrode causing leakage. As there is a shift away from fossil fuels, we should be looking at the future of energy, not the past.



Barring a massive breakthrough in solar panels to increase their efficiency in normal operating conditions to past 14%, our future includes oil.  Lots and lots of it.  Pipelines are orders of magnitude better than moving the oil through trains which have far more problems and are far more dangerous to people and the environment.


----------



## Piece of Cake (23 Feb 2018)

Underway said:
			
		

> Barring a massive breakthrough in solar panels to increase their efficiency in normal operating conditions to past 14%, our future includes oil.  Lots and lots of it.  Pipelines are orders of magnitude better than moving the oil through trains which have far more problems and are far more dangerous to people and the environment.



Your statement has merit, as I understand our global need for energy.  However, there are other - read cleaner - options that will take time to develop.  We should be the world leader in promoting cleaner energy, instead of selling one of our non-renewable resources at a discount to other nations.


----------



## Cloud Cover (23 Feb 2018)

So we need lots and lots of hamsters to spin the turbine wheels. That'll work.  Oil derivative combustible fuels will continue to be one of the primary ways to develop energy for mechanical motion for a long, long time. Add in the growing practice of using more plastics than we can recycle and materials derived from oil used in manufacturing, like 3D printing, the fossil fuel industry has a bright future everywhere but Canada.


----------



## Piece of Cake (23 Feb 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> So we need lots and lots of hamsters to spin the turbine wheels. That'll work.  Oil derivative combustible fuels will continue to be one of the primary ways to develop energy for mechanical motion for a long, long time. Add in the growing practice of using more plastics than we can recycle and materials derived from oil used in manufacturing, like 3D printing, the fossil fuel industry has a bright future everywhere but Canada.


----------



## Cloud Cover (23 Feb 2018)

Good luck with that, pipelines have better prospects than any new CANDU reactors.


----------



## Kat Stevens (23 Feb 2018)

And, we can make plastic out of the spent fuel rods. Win/win! Wait, what was that? Okay, never mind.


----------



## Piece of Cake (23 Feb 2018)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> And, we can make plastic out of the spent fuel rods. Win/win! Wait, what was that? Okay, never mind.



Recycling, a new concept!


----------



## Kat Stevens (23 Feb 2018)

Piece of Cake said:
			
		

> Recycling, a new concept!



That requires large amounts of energy. Old concept!


----------



## Piece of Cake (23 Feb 2018)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> That requires large amounts of energy. Old concept!



_Q: Can recycling save energy? 

"Lengthy posts and fully quoted articles are posted here. Link to these large posts in the regular boards."
https://milnet.ca/forums/threads/127472.0.html_


----------



## Rifleman62 (23 Feb 2018)

http://business.financialpost.com/opinion/the-story-of-how-b-c-supported-benefited-from-then-double-crossed-trans-mountain

*The story of how B.C. asked for, benefited from, then double-crossed Trans Mountain* - 23 Feb 18
_Former head of the National Energy Board remembers a time when the province couldn't wait for the pipeline to be built_

"Lengthy posts and fully quoted articles are posted here. Link to these large posts in the regular boards."
https://milnet.ca/forums/threads/127473.0.html


----------



## Piece of Cake (23 Feb 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> So we need lots and lots of hamsters to spin the turbine wheels. That'll work.  Oil derivative combustible fuels will continue to be one of the primary ways to develop energy for mechanical motion for a long, long time. Add in the growing practice of using more plastics than we can recycle and materials derived from oil used in manufacturing, like 3D printing, the fossil fuel industry has a bright future everywhere but Canada.





			
				whiskey601 said:
			
		

> Good luck with that, pipelines have better prospects than any new CANDU reactors.



And our diesel subs are the best in the world. Good old fossil fuel!


----------



## Loachman (23 Feb 2018)

Somebody's feelings were hurt...

https://www.outlookindia.com/website/amp/liberal-canadian-pmo-bars-outlook-from-high-commissions-reception-for-trudeau-ov/308666

Outlook India 

22 February 2018 National 

'Liberal' Canadian PMO Bars Outlook From High Commission’s Reception For Trudeau Over Khalistan Coverage

Outlook, in its February 12, 2018 issue, with a cover "Khalistan-II- Made in Canada" had carried seven articles in a package questioning Canadian cabinet's proximity and appeasement policies towards the Sikh radicals

Outlook Web Bureau

"‘Liberal’ Canadian Prime Minister's Office on Thursday withdrew invitation to High Commissioner dinner for Outlook magazine. 

"Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau feted the world over as the new face of “liberalism” seem to find it difficult to accommodate critical media coverage. An hour-before the high commissioner’s reception cum for dinner for Trudeau the invitation to Outlook was withdrawn.

"An Indian official called up to apologise in withdrawing the invitation at the last minute. But admitted that he was instructed by the Canadian PM’s Office to withdraw the invite because Outlook which had done a cover story on “ Khalistan - II made in Canada” cannot be in guest list to welcome Trudeau."


----------



## jollyjacktar (23 Feb 2018)

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/politics/sarai-trudeau-atwal-meeting-1.4548705

MP Sarai will be in the principal's office next week.  That, would be a hoot to listen to.


----------



## Rifleman62 (23 Feb 2018)

It will probably be: YOU, and YOU alone will take full responsibility, to one and all, for this cock-up and and leave me and Gerald (Butts) completely out of it.


----------



## Good2Golf (23 Feb 2018)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> It will probably be: YOU, and YOU alone will take full responsibility, to one and all, for this cock-up and and leave me and Gerald (Butts) completely out of it.




...don’t forget Katie Telfer. 

Sarai will likely have one of the PMO’s junior minion Starbucks fetchers swing by Sarai’s Office to drop off the “not-to-be-modified-in-any-way” text for him to read.  I bet he even is ordered to squeeze out a tear or two of regret and deep personal shame. op:

Regards 
G2G


----------



## George Wallace (23 Feb 2018)

MARCH IN THE SACRIFICIAL BACKBENCHER!


----------



## Cloud Cover (23 Feb 2018)

Piece of Cake said:
			
		

> And our diesel subs are the best in the world. Good old fossil fuel!



That speaks of the sad state of the world I guess.  They are pretty good running on electric, fairly quiet unless beans were served with brekky.


----------



## suffolkowner (23 Feb 2018)

I tend to agree with ERC's take on the India-Trudeau situation, but does anyone else think this guy Jaspal Atwal should have been flagged as a security risk? Like to our own PM?


----------



## jollyjacktar (23 Feb 2018)

I would agree that the PM is a security risk too.   :nod:


----------



## suffolkowner (23 Feb 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> I would agree that the PM is a security risk too.   :nod:



yes I think he is too sadly


----------



## George Wallace (23 Feb 2018)

suffolkowner said:
			
		

> I tend to agree with ERC's take on the India-Trudeau situation, but does anyone else think this guy Jaspal Atwal should have been flagged as a security risk? Like to our own PM?



Trudeau has known Atwal for years.  There are photos of the two of them together from over a ten year or more period of time.  Atwal, a failed assassin and involved in automobile insurance fraud 9http://nationalpost.com/news/politics/what-we-know-about-jaspal-atwal) has been a Surrey Fleetwood-Port Kells Liberal riding association executive.  (https://bcblue.wordpress.com/2012/03/03/convicted-assassin-sits-on-liberal-party-ridings-executive-board-of-directors/)
I suspected that Trudeau overrode the security advice from his security people when he met with Joshua Boyle.  I am even more convinced that Trudeau overrode the advice of his security people on the Atwal matter.  He, following his usual MO, is not taking any blame, and a 'sacrificial lamb' is being brought forward to absorb all blame.
Can Canada's international reputation get any worse?


----------



## jollyjacktar (23 Feb 2018)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Can Canada's international reputation get any worse?



Yup.  He can be given a second peopledate in 2019.


----------



## Rifleman62 (23 Feb 2018)

> Can Canada's international reputation get any worse?



Waiting for the shoe to drop.


https://www.thespec.com/news-story/2219070-sex-pizza-and-politics-with-justin-trudeau/

*Sex, pizza and politics with Justin Trudeau* - 13 Oct 11

Extract: “The intensity, the excitement of being in the middle of a political campaign — it’s heavy, it’s fun stuff,” started Trudeau. “There’s pizza, sex and all sorts of fun things.”

It was one of several lighter moments in a student town hall session at McMaster Wednesday afternoon, in which the son of former prime minister Pierre Trudeau took questions on student concerns and the future of the country.


----------



## suffolkowner (23 Feb 2018)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Trudeau has known Atwal for years.  There are photos of the two of them together from over a ten year or more period of time.  Atwal, a failed assassin and involved in automobile insurance fraud 9http://nationalpost.com/news/politics/what-we-know-about-jaspal-atwal) has been a Surrey Fleetwood-Port Kells Liberal riding association executive.  (https://bcblue.wordpress.com/2012/03/03/convicted-assassin-sits-on-liberal-party-ridings-executive-board-of-directors/)
> I suspected that Trudeau overrode the security advice from his security people when he met with Joshua Boyle.  I am even more convinced that Trudeau overrode the advice of his security people on the Atwal matter.  He, following his usual MO, is not taking any blame, and a 'sacrificial lamb' is being brought forward to absorb all blame.
> Can Canada's international reputation get any worse?



I guess there's no one to save him from himself


----------



## RangerRay (23 Feb 2018)

I thought I heard of this guy before.  Atwal was not an unknown quantity.

http://nationalpost.com/news/politics/what-we-know-about-jaspal-atwal

*What we know about Jaspal Atwal, the attempted murderer invited to dine with Trudeau*



> But Jaspal Atwal, who was photographed with Sophie Grégoire Trudeau and Infrastructure Minister Amarjeet Sohi at an event in Mumbai on Tuesday, already had something of a history of inserting himself into Canadian Liberal politics before he was invited to the event on Thursday by MP Randeep Sarai.


----------



## FSTO (24 Feb 2018)

I feel that the PMO is the ones who should take all the heat for this. They seem to think they are smarter than everyone else and when their tidy little plans blow up in their face they are unable to deal with the fall out effectively.


----------



## BeyondTheNow (24 Feb 2018)

(Sorry to throw this in the centre of current flow. It’s related, but a little off course.)

This was a good read, especially as its source isn’t the typical media go-to for me. 



> ...The worst part is none of this was necessary. The differences we have with Canada should have been left for the formal discussions. That is where they are best addressed. But if you’ve invited someone to your home it behooves the host to ensure he’s received graciously. Once an impression to the contrary is created, repeated and spread many will believe you’ve treated your guest badly. This is very far removed from Atithi Devo Bhava. I fear the Trudeaus will go home believing they were an exception to this much-touted commitment...



https://m.hindustantimes.com/columns/the-truth-about-the-snub-to-trudeau/story-LEu1KgxNvniVvI7ruJVfNM.html


----------



## Jarnhamar (24 Feb 2018)

Posting this picture less as an attempt at humour and more to make a point.   I think the "heterosexual" one is lame but for the remainder of the pictures it shows the actor-PM's fascination (or obsession) with playing dress up.


----------



## YZT580 (24 Feb 2018)

Did the Indian government actually invite the Trudeau's or was his visit more like 'Oh dear, Aunt Matilda just 'phoned and she is stopping in tonight for an extended visit'?   I have gotten the impression that this was more his idea and he more or less foisted himself upon his hosts:hence his reception


----------



## Kirkhill (24 Feb 2018)

> At the detective’s desk, a story of crime is pieced together from multiple sources, but even then, a charging document is not the truth; it is subject to challenge. In literature, truth is an investigation, not an end point, so the story is an instrument for revealing the complexity of being alive, and wisdom, rather than certainty, is the hope.
> In politics, truth tends to be whatever those holding the bullhorn say it is.



A long, and well worth reading, dissertation on truth, sex, power and victimhood, and religion.  

From the well known hard right organ "The Nation"

https://www.thenation.com/article/what-we-dont-talk-about-when-we-talk-about-metoo/


----------



## Jarnhamar (24 Feb 2018)

Yea nah Trudeau will just arrange for a second cross Canada tour to engage with every day Canadians in town halls, again, and reconnect with everyone. Maybe a pit stop or to at whatever culture he hasn't played dress up with yet.

Nothing to see here (except some selfies) ;D


----------



## Altair (24 Feb 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Yea nah Trudeau will just arrange for a second cross Canada tour to engage with every day Canadians in town halls, again, and reconnect with everyone. Maybe a pit stop or to at whatever culture he hasn't played dress up with yet.
> 
> Nothing to see here (except some selfies) ;D


3rd cross country town hall tour.


----------



## jollyjacktar (24 Feb 2018)

Justin time for Montreal's Just For Laughs Festival.  He'll fit right in.


----------



## Rifleman62 (24 Feb 2018)

> https://globalnews.ca/news/4044543/david-akin-analysis-justin-trudeaus-bengal-bungle/
> 
> ANALYSIS: How Justin Trudeau’s India trip went from bad to ‘Bengal Bungle’ - David Akin - 23 Feb 18
> 
> Extract: 1. And then “worse” turned to “farce” when the PMO trotted out one of the most senior members of the civil service, someone who is one of the handful of bureaucrats privy to literally all the secrets of our national security agencies, to engage in frantic damage control.



According to Twitter https://twitter.com/brianlilley?lang=en



> @BrianLilley is the first to officially report Trudeau's top security official was the one who lied to the media about Atwal.





> When did it become ok for national security director Daniel Jean, to help @justintrudeau politically?



The National Security Advisor (Full title: National Security Advisor to the Prime Minister (French: Conseiller en matière de sécurité nationale auprès du Premier ministre)) is an associate secretary in the Privy Council Office (PCO) responsible for Security and Intelligence. He or she is supported by the Security and Intelligence Secretariat and the International Assessment Staff.

The current National Security Advisor to the Prime Minister is Daniel Jean (previously the deputy minister at Foreign Affairs) appointed May 16, 2016, filling the vacancy left when his predecessor, Richard Fadden, who retired.


http://ottawacitizen.com/news/politics/trudeau-appoints-new-national-security-advisor

*Trudeau's pick for security adviser shows focus on foreign affairs expertise* - 5 May 16

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has picked an experienced deputy minister in foreign affairs rather than a senior security bureaucrat as his new national security adviser. The national security adviser wields much influence. He has the prime minister’s ear on security and intelligence issues, foreign and defence policy and acts as a conduit for conveying the prime minister and cabinet’s directions to the national security community.


----------



## pbi (25 Feb 2018)

Is playing Mr Dress Up the same as "cultural appropriation?"  rly:


----------



## Journeyman (25 Feb 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Justin time for Montreal's Just For Laughs Festival.



 :rofl:

Did you miss the space bar ('Just in'), or was that intentionally brilliant?   ;D


----------



## jollyjacktar (25 Feb 2018)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> :rofl:
> 
> Did you miss the space bar ('Just in'), or was that intentionally brilliant?   ;D



I like puns


----------



## Jarnhamar (25 Feb 2018)

Am I reading this right? The PMs staff tried to say that they didn't screw up but some kind of conspiracy by Indian saboteurs was the reason this failed assassin was invited out for supper?


----------



## SeaKingTacco (25 Feb 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Am I reading this right? The PMs staff tried to say that they didn't screw up but some kind of conspiracy by Indian saboteurs was the reason this failed assassin was invited out for supper?



No. It is even worse than that: they apparently got the National Security Advisor (a public servant) to say that.

It is bad enough for political staff to blame the Indians, but a senior public servant?


----------



## jollyjacktar (25 Feb 2018)

Makes me wonder at how far down they're willing to stoop to try and deflect attention from this mobile clown show the PMO has become.


----------



## Kirkhill (25 Feb 2018)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> No. It is even worse than that: they apparently got the National Security Advisor (a public servant) to say that.
> 
> It is bad enough for political staff to blame the Indians, but a senior public servant?



And not just any Indians - but the Indian Government, or Security Agencies, or super-secret subversive factions within the Indian Government.....

Dale Carnegie is not on the staff.


----------



## Jarnhamar (25 Feb 2018)

I think we're jumping to conclusions here. The Liberal government just isn't going to cohearse a public servant to lie about a foreign ally in order to try and make the Prime Ministers office save face while they're making a series of very minor and not-at-all embarrassing mistakes.

I for one totally believe the story about this secret cabal of Shadowy Indian agents     :Tin-Foil-Hat:


----------



## Rifleman62 (25 Feb 2018)

Did you read Akin's article?

The National Security Advisor:



> This individual, in describing the theory, couched every possibility with words like “maybe” and “possibly,” yet offered no proof or evidence of any allegation and did all of this from behind the cloak of anonymity.


----------



## Journeyman (25 Feb 2018)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> ...couched every possibility with words like “maybe” and “possibly,” yet offered no proof or evidence...


Ah, a Military Intelligence briefing.


----------



## dapaterson (25 Feb 2018)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Ah, a Military Intelligence briefing.



They didn't describe him as "overweight" and "a failure in his three previous occupations" though...


----------



## Jarnhamar (25 Feb 2018)

I don't know about _you people_ but I could sure go for a selfie of the PM dressed up like a detective in a trench coat investigating this caper.


----------



## Old Sweat (25 Feb 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> I don't know about _you people_ but I could sure go for a selfie of the PM dressed up like a detective in a trench coat investigating this caper.



Indeed, looking for a Clue, so.  ;D

Missed my attempt at a pun: Clue, so = Clouseau


----------



## George Wallace (25 Feb 2018)

He may have two clues; but one is most likely lost, while the other one is out looking for it.


----------



## Loachman (26 Feb 2018)

http://www.timescolonist.com/atwal-says-he-bowed-out-of-event-in-india-to-save-trudeau-embarrassment-1.23184805

Atwal says he bowed out of event in India to save Trudeau embarrassment

Amy Smart and Gemma Karstens-Smith / The Canadian Press
February 25, 2018 02:09 PM

"SURREY, B.C. - A man convicted of attempted murder who was invited to a dinner reception with Justin Trudeau in India says he has a friendly relationship with the prime minister, and stayed away to save him from further embarrassment."

"Atwal said he has known Trudeau for years. During one of Trudeau's visits to B.C. in 2008 or 2009, he said the pair sat together in Atwal's Hummer and chatted.

"We know each other. He knows my name, he'll come and say, 'Hey Jas, how you doing?' We have a good relationship I never see any problem," he said in the interview on Saturday. "But now he says, 'Oh Jaspal's not supposed to be here, this and that.' It surprised me."
Trudeau's spokesman, Cameron Ahmad, said the prime minister and Atwal are not friends.


----------



## Cloud Cover (26 Feb 2018)

Kate Purchase is in overdrive and the CBC is fighting hard to regain the image of Mr. Dress Up (http://www.macleans.ca/multimedia/photo/the-mr-dressup-prime-minister/) image by casting the trip as an entire success that was well planned and smoothy executed:
ANALYSIS
What really happened on Trudeau's India trip: Trade concerns overshadowed by wardrobe choices, extremism talk
By Evan Dyer, CBC News Posted: Feb 25, 2018 6:23 AM ET Last Updated: Feb 25, 2018 3:13 PM ET

"Everywhere Trudeau went, roads were lined with welcome billboards, many showing his smiling countenance next to Modi's or local chief ministers. Indian officials expressed bewilderment at the "snub" narrative, a lot of which hinged on the fact that Modi didn't go to the airport.

More on link: http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/india-trudeau-trip-wrap-up-1.4550703


----------



## FSTO (26 Feb 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> Kate Purchase is in overdrive and the CBC is fighting hard to regain the image of Mr. Dress Up (http://www.macleans.ca/multimedia/photo/the-mr-dressup-prime-minister/) image by casting the trip as an entire success that was well planned and smoothy executed:
> ANALYSIS
> What really happened on Trudeau's India trip: Trade concerns overshadowed by wardrobe choices, extremism talk
> By Evan Dyer, CBC News Posted: Feb 25, 2018 6:23 AM ET Last Updated: Feb 25, 2018 3:13 PM ET
> ...



Lost all respect for Evan Dyer after that fluff piece.


----------



## pbi (26 Feb 2018)

I know some folks love slagging the CBC,  but I regularly watch the CBC, listen to it driving to and from work, and read the news website. (I also look at BBC, ABC and even occasionally FOX as sanity checks) I've listened to "As It Happens" for 30 years.

As far as I can tell, if you look broadly across all forms of CBC coverage, the message has come through pretty clearly that this whole India trip thing has been a questionable venture with all sorts of embarrassing aspects. I don't get the impression, at all, that CBC is working for the PMO.

Since Harper appointed a number of the currently sitting board of CBC directors, the CBC is no longer the "Communist Broadcasting Corporation"  it once undoubtedly was (circa early 90s). If you pay close attention, as opposed to cherry-picking, it usually appears pretty objective, which means reporting both good and bad.


----------



## George Wallace (26 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> I know some folks love slagging the CBC,  but I regularly watch the CBC, listen to it driving to and from work, and read the news website. (I also look at BBC, ABC and even occasionally FOX as sanity checks) I've listened to "As It Happens" for 30 years.
> 
> As far as I can tell, if you look broadly across all forms of CBC coverage, the message has come through pretty clearly that this whole India trip thing has been a questionable venture with all sorts of embarrassing aspects. I don't get the impression, at all, that CBC is working for the PMO.
> 
> Since Harper appointed a number of the currently sitting board of CBC directors, the CBC is no longer the "Communist Broadcasting Corporation"  it once undoubtedly was (circa early 90s). If you pay close attention, as opposed to cherry-picking, it usually appears pretty objective, which means reporting both good and bad.



Rex Murphy is proof of that.  He wouldn't be working at CBC if it were still the "Liberal Propaganda Machine".


----------



## Piece of Cake (26 Feb 2018)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Rex Murphy  Don Cherry is proof of that.  He wouldn't be working at CBC if it were still the "Liberal Propaganda Machine". Oh wait...   :rofl:


----------



## Remius (26 Feb 2018)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Rex Murphy is proof of that.  He wouldn't be working at CBC if it were still the "Liberal Propaganda Machine".



Andrew Coyne is also a regular commentator.


----------



## Loachman (26 Feb 2018)

http://www.scmp.com/week-asia/geopolitics/article/2134781/trump-jr-outshines-trudeau-thats-how-bad-india-canada-ties

Trump Jr outshines Trudeau - that’s how bad India-Canada ties are

While US president’s son kept his mouth shut and stuck to business, Canadian PM turned himself into a joke who is either genuinely foolish or is cynically playing to his Sikh vote-bank in Canada

By Vir Sanghvi

26 Feb 2018

"Events have a way of surprising you. When it was announced that Donald Trump Jr.and Justin Trudeau would visit India at roughly the same time, Indians prepared to see what gaffes the younger Trump would commit. Trudeau, on the other hand, was expected to wow India with his charisma and youthful charm.

"It simply hasn’t worked out that way."

"Trudeau’s Liberal Party is popular with Canada’s Sikh community and with those Sikhs who still harbour Khalistani sentiments. India has repeatedly complained about the Liberal Party’s willingness to associate with Sikhs who regard the bombers of the Air India plane as heroes. But Trudeau has not distanced himself from such figures and the Indian government believes that some Sikh legislators still support Khalistan.

"Such foolishness was enough to make sure that no one in a position of authority in India took Trudeau seriously. But things got worse when a photo of Trudeau’s wife Sophie with a man called Jaspal Atwal emerged. The photo was taken at an event in Mumbai where Atwal also posed with Amarjeet Soni, a Canadian minister who was part of Trudeau’s delegation."

"Atwal, a former member of a Khalistan terror group, was convicted by a Canadian court of trying to murder an Indian minister in Vancouver in 1986. And yet, here he was, posing happily with the Canadian leader’s wife. Worse still, it emerged that Atwal had also been invited to the official reception for Trudeau at the Canadian High Commission in Delhi.

"The Atwal incident confirmed everything New Delhi had suspected about the Liberal Party’s links with Khalistani terrorists and an embarrassed _*Trudeau rescinded the invitation which he described as “unfortunate” without actually condemning Atawal’s terrorist background*_.

"Why had the Canadian golden boy disappointed his many admirers and pushed India-Canada relations into the abyss? The short answer appears to be: given a choice between relations with India and more votes from Canadian Sikhs, Trudeau will take votes over foreign policy anytime even if, in doing so, he seems like a cartoonish lightweight. Even Donald Trump Jr outshone him; a turn of events nobody could have predicted."


----------



## Cloud Cover (26 Feb 2018)

Ouch....But I don't think relations have been pushed to the abyss. Maybe floating like garbage on Ganges, but not yet in the abyss. Next time though!


----------



## Loachman (26 Feb 2018)

Video at link:

https://www.spencerfernando.com/2018/02/26/watch-trudeau-says-top-complaint-canadians-youre-not-bringing-enough-immigrants/

WATCH: Trudeau Says Top “Complaint” Of Canadians Is “You’re Not Bringing In Enough Immigrants”

News Spencer Fernando February 26, 2018

"All the polls say otherwise, showing how totally out-of-touch Trudeau is from the Canadian people.

"Justin Trudeau said many dumb and dishonest things on his trip to India.

"Among those dumb and dishonest things was a comment that is totally at odds with all the facts when it comes to what Canadians think about immigration.

"While in Mumbai, Trudeau said that the most common complaint he hears from Canadians is “you’re not bringing in enough immigrants.”

"Of course, we know that the polls say the exact opposite.

"For example, a 2017 poll by Angus Reid found that 57% of Canadians say Canada “should accept fewer immigrants and refugees.”

"Also in 2017, the Association for Canadian Studies found 38% of Canadians said Canada is taking in “too many” immigrants, 41% say we are taking in “about the right number,” while just 10% say Canada is taking in “too few.”"


----------



## Altair (26 Feb 2018)

Down goes Brown once again.


----------



## pbi (26 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> Down goes Brown once again.



At the hands of a fixture of the Tories in Ontario, Randy Hillier no less!! It will be interesting to see what the Commissioner finds, or doesn't.


----------



## Loachman (26 Feb 2018)

Tired out?

Can't stand the anticipated heat?

https://www.spencerfernando.com/2018/02/26/hiding-trudeau-skipping-question-period-take-personal-day-disastrous-india-vacation/

HIDING: Trudeau Skipping Question Period To Take ‘Personal’ Day After Disastrous India Vacation

News Spencer Fernando February 26, 2018

"Apparently, Trudeau’s 8 day long taxpayer-funded vacation in India wasn’t enough.

"Justin Trudeau is hiding from Question Period.

"The PMO issued an advisory saying he is taking a ‘personal’ day:"


----------



## jollyjacktar (26 Feb 2018)

Maybe too much dancing the bahangra to the amusement of the world has tuckered him out. Or jumping to conclusions about being set up by the Indian government, all the exercise would tire anyone out.  Poor guy... :nod:


----------



## Jarnhamar (26 Feb 2018)

He's had secret meetings with a terrorist, a shady religious convert prisoner turn criminal, an assassin and convicted criminal. 

Who the heck can he be meeting with now?


----------



## beirnini (26 Feb 2018)

> *Trudeau invests in Confederate Soldier’s uniform for next visit to White House*
> 
> [...]Trudeau plans to accessorize with an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle, a blank copy of the bible, and a pair of Confederate flag socks, which he claims were “a gift.”[...]



 ;D

I'm guessing a Klan outfit would've overdone it.


----------



## Loachman (26 Feb 2018)

beirnini said:
			
		

> I'm guessing a Klan outfit would've overdone it.



"“After all, when in Rome… you dress in a complete replica of papal vestments,” she added."


----------



## Bird_Gunner45 (26 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> "“After all, when in Rome… you dress in a complete replica of papal vestments,” she added."



Perhaps Trudeau saw his predecessor?

Trudeau was over the top, but lets not pretend like he's the first PM to dress up.


----------



## Breacher (26 Feb 2018)

Bird_Gunner45 said:
			
		

> Perhaps Trudeau saw his predecessor?
> 
> Trudeau was over the top, but lets not pretend like he's the first PM to dress up.



Context makes all the difference. In the first image, PM Harper was being honoured by the blood tribe.
http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/calgary/harper-honoured-by-alberta-s-blood-tribe-1.1088181

As for the second image, at the link you will find numerous images of his trip to India. In only one image is he wearing Indian cultural attire (and then only the headdress). I'm willing to give him the benefit of a doubt and say he was being respectful.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/in-pictures-stephen-harper-in-india/article4958699/

In the third image, PM Harper, a Calgary MP, was dressed in cowboy attire as is the custom for many Albertans, for the Calgary Stampede.
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2012/07/06/photos_stephen_harper_at_the_calgary_stampede_1.html

I don't see a valid comparison between PM Harper and PM Trudeau's behaviour.


----------



## dapaterson (26 Feb 2018)

Every politician panders to voters and potential voters.

But for another take on the trip to India, America's favourite Briton has this to say: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IUDdUMaJ5D4&feature=youtu.be


----------



## Bird_Gunner45 (26 Feb 2018)

Breacher said:
			
		

> Context makes all the difference. In the first image, PM Harper was being honoured by the blood tribe.
> http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/calgary/harper-honoured-by-alberta-s-blood-tribe-1.1088181
> 
> As for the second image, at the link you will find numerous images of his trip to India. In only one image is he wearing Indian cultural attire (and then only the headdress). I'm willing to give him the benefit of a doubt and say he was being respectful.
> ...



There wasn't a comparison being made. Trudeau was over the top, but the costumes was hardly the biggest issue with his trip. The point was that Harper also partook in costume wearing as have most PMs so it's not a unique incident like some would make it out to be. In fact, it detracts from the fact that the PM was unable to make inroads in India and may have potentially hurt relations with the Atwal issue. Costumes are a side show.


----------



## Altair (27 Feb 2018)

http://nationalpost.com/news/politics/scheer-says-tories-will-recognize-jerusalem-as-israels-capital-if-elected

If PM trudeau continues to **** up his brand and finds a way to fumble the election away to the conservatives Canada will be next to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel. 



> Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer says if his party forms government in 2019, it will follow Donald Trump’s lead and recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.
> 
> Scheer’s declaration comes in the form of a pledge posted to the Conservative party website designed to gather signatures from members of the public.
> 
> “Canada’s Conservatives led by Andrew Scheer will recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital when we form government in 2019,” the pledge says, describing the party as “a strong voice for Israel and the Canadian Jewish community.”


 And like I said before,  stop being negative nancies and come out with actual reasons why Canadians should vote for you,  and look at that,  some actual policy. 

Looks good on them.  They should do it more often.


----------



## Breacher (27 Feb 2018)

Bird_Gunner45 said:
			
		

> There wasn't a comparison being made. Trudeau was over the top, but the costumes was hardly the biggest issue with his trip. The point was that Harper also partook in costume wearing as have most PMs so it's not a unique incident like some would make it out to be. In fact, it detracts from the fact that the PM was unable to make inroads in India and may have potentially hurt relations with the Atwal issue. Costumes are a side show.



That is your opinion. I respectfully disagree.


----------



## Good2Golf (27 Feb 2018)

Bird_Gunner45 said:
			
		

> There wasn’t a comparison being made.........The point was that Harper also partook in costume wearing as have most PMs so it's not a unique incident like some would make it out to be.



Yeah...what’s that word for when someone performs a juxtaposition of one to another in a variety of similar contexts?  Oh wait, it’s called a....comparison. 

G2G


----------



## George Wallace (27 Feb 2018)

Bird_Gunner45 said:
			
		

> ........ The point was that Harper also partook in costume wearing as have most PMs so it's not a unique incident like some would make it out to be.



Yes.  He did.  Much like many of us have for a Mess Dinner.   ;D  As part of the 'group' he did at times partake in wearing a prescribed costume.
Trudeau, and family, turned their 'vacation' to India into a circus act.  They were doing that all on their own; not as part of a 'State function'.


----------



## Remius (27 Feb 2018)

Breacher said:
			
		

> That is your opinion. I respectfully disagree.



So costumes are the biggest take away for you from this gong show? Sorry no.  Bird_Gunner is correct.  it detracts from the more serious issue of screwing up relations with a potential trading partner not to mention a serious security breach and error in judgement.

But some people just want to chew on the bone that is thrown at them rather than the actual meat they are trying to hide.


----------



## Loachman (27 Feb 2018)

There was a comment from one Indian commentator to the effect that "nobody of importance in India takes him seriously", based upon his costume choices and poses. So, yes, even before the Atwal incident, he had severely compromised his secondary reason for being there.

His stupid fashion choices did not detract from his other failures. They set the stage for the others, and reinforced his overall weakness.

And it's not only the Indian government that takes him less seriously than it previously did because of this clown-like performance (if any government ever did).


----------



## Jarnhamar (27 Feb 2018)

Trudeau's fascination with playing dress up and acting isn't the main take away from his performance in India but it's a great segue into his priorities and what he's all about.  Into the main show, if you will  ;D

Comparing Trudeau's dress-up with Harper? Not even close.

It actually doesn't bother me that much. Trudeau is a drama teacher so he's rolling with what he knows in his comfort zone. Canadians elected a drama teacher so this is what they get.


----------



## jollyjacktar (27 Feb 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> So costumes are the biggest take away for you from this gong show? Sorry no.  Bird_Gunner is correct.  it detracts from the more serious issue of screwing up relations with a potential trading partner not to mention a serious security breach and error in judgement.
> 
> But some people just want to chew on the bone that is thrown at them rather than the actual meat they are trying to hide.



I disagree.  By turning this trip into a National Lampoon's Indian Vacation comedy, he dicked around for 90% plus of the time with the wife and kids.  This "Hey everybody! It's a party!!!" attitude, led to dragging along every Indo/Canadian on team Red, who in turn dragged in the convicted arsehole that made Indian heads explode.  It's no wonder they don't take us seriously with the Canadian Kardashians showing up on vacation.   

http://thechronicleherald.ca/sites/default/files/bm_cartoon/CH-deAdder-27_02_2018-MD.jpg


----------



## Remius (27 Feb 2018)

The problem with Trudeau critics is that they always attack superficial things like his costumes like his hair, his socks like the fact he's a drama teacher etc etc.  No wonder he'll get elected again.  No one seems to attack his policies his judgement etc etc.  The opposition better start getting it together or electors aren't going to buy the hair or costume stuff just like they didn't buy it last time. 

Scheer finally did indeed do that but it's being drowned out with shiny stuff that is clearly distracting from the more serious things.

TBH I really think that he might be doing this all on purpose to keep people focused on those trivial things and people are falling for it.


----------



## Cloud Cover (27 Feb 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> TBH I really think that he might be doing this all on purpose to keep people focused on those trivial things and people are falling for it.



... and even if not on purpose, at least the outcome will be the same. Sigh.


----------



## Furniture (27 Feb 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> The problem with Trudeau critics is that they always attack superficial things like his costumes like his hair, his socks like the fact he's a drama teacher etc etc.  No wonder he'll get elected again.  No one seems to attack his policies his judgement etc etc.  The opposition better start getting it together or electors aren't going to buy the hair or costume stuff just like they didn't buy it last time.
> 
> Scheer finally did indeed do that but it's being drowned out with shiny stuff that is clearly distracting from the more serious things.
> 
> TBH I really think that he might be doing this all on purpose to keep people focused on those trivial things and people are falling for it.



I wouldn't say his detractors are focused on the fluff, I'd say the media is and that leads it to be the "news" you hear about. People comment on it frequently because it's the media narrative surrounding the man. Policy and serious matters aren't even considered by the average voter until the election comes around, and one could make a strong argument that even at election time most people don't care about policy.


----------



## MarkOttawa (27 Feb 2018)

Justin Trudeau's excellent Indian adventure:

1) CP:



> Trudeau backs official who said Indian government factions sabotaged trip
> 
> Justin Trudeau is standing by a senior government official who suggested factions within the Indian government were involved in sabotaging the prime minister's visit to India last week.
> 
> ...



2) _Times of India_--India's foreign intelligence agency--the Research and Analysis Wing, RAW (nice cover name, what?), is known to be active in Canada with regard to Khalistanis amongst other things:



> SAD: Govt agencies conspired to eclipse Canadian PM Trudeau's India visit
> 
> ALANDHAR: BJP's alliance partner in the Centre [federal gov't New Delhi] and the state [Punjab, recently in coalition with BJP but lost most recent state election], Shiromani Akali Dal [a Sikh party] has now alleged that the Indian intelligence agencies had hatched a conspiracy to ruin Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's visit to India. The party has also accused the BJP and the Congress of playing a part in this.
> 
> ...



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## Breacher (27 Feb 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> So costumes are the biggest take away for you from this gong show? Sorry no.  Bird_Gunner is correct.  it detracts from the more serious issue of screwing up relations with a potential trading partner not to mention a serious security breach and error in judgement.
> 
> But some people just want to chew on the bone that is thrown at them rather than the actual meat they are trying to hide.



Sigh. I guess I should have provided more detail on my thoughts. I will attempt to rectify that now.

In his rebuttal, BG45 claims to be making no comparisons. In order for me to validate his statement “let’s not pretend he was the first PM to dress up”, I have to compare PM Trudeau’s performance to that of his predecessors. BG45 then provides examples to assist in making a comparison. I’m a thumperhead, so maybe I’m missing something, but I don’t know what else to call it other than a comparison. I wanted see if BG45’s examples supported his point of view. This is where I have the problem. The photos he posted are without context and that makes them pretty much meaningless. I attempted to put them into context by providing the links and after doing so I felt that the representations in the photos didn’t qualify as “dressing up” or “costume wearing” (this is the point I was trying to make). Here’s why:

In the first image, PM Harper is seen wearing a ceremonial headdress. This was no doubt given to him as an honour from the Blood Tribe. To put it in soldier terms, it would be like being presented the MMM at Rideau Hall by the GG. To categorize it as “dress up” is in my mind, being insensitive to First Nations culture. IMHO, it is not dress up.

In the second series of images, there is one image of PM Harper wearing headdress and a business suit. I wasn’t there and so I do not know the circumstances. However, I can surmise that he was asked by his hosts to wear the headdress or he was advised by his staff that wearing it was the appropriate cultural or religious custom for the circumstance. I could be wrong. If so, I still don’t see wearing this one cultural item as dressing up.

In the third image, PM Harper is dressed in cowboy attire to attend the Calgary Stampede. PM Harper is from Calgary. His riding was in Calgary. The Calgary Stampede is a big deal to Calgarians. Dressing in cowboy attire to attend Stampede functions is the custom for many Calgarians. It would be like an Indian in India dressing up for an Indian wedding in Indian clothes. So maybe this image does in some way support BG45’s assertion, but I feel if it does, the support is on pretty shaky ground.

"So costumes are the biggest take away for you from this gong show?"

I don’t know where you are getting that from. I never said that. If you want to know my feelings on it, here they are. The “costumes” are all part and parcel of the whole debacle. They are not a separate entity. The perceived snub, the dress up, the photo ops, the lack of a meaningful workload, the terrorist sympathizer/convicted attempted murderer invite, the Canadian history flub, the blaming of the Indian government… did I miss anything? It all contributed to this fiasco. And no, I'm not chewing any bones here.

Anyways, I’m starting to ramble so I will end it here. I hope I made myself better understood.


----------



## pbi (27 Feb 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> The problem with Trudeau critics is that they always attack superficial things like his costumes like his hair, his socks like the fact he's a drama teacher etc etc.  No wonder he'll get elected again.  No one seems to attack his policies his judgement etc etc.  The opposition better start getting it together or electors aren't going to buy the hair or costume stuff just like they didn't buy it last time.
> 
> Scheer finally did indeed do that but it's being drowned out with shiny stuff that is clearly distracting from the more serious things.
> 
> TBH I really think that he might be doing this all on purpose to keep people focused on those trivial things and people are falling for it.



I agree that there are people who will trash The Younger no matter what he does or says. They may hate the idea of a Liberal Govt, or of another Trudeau in office, or God knows what. They are thoroughly PO'd, and bit prone to ranting.

But, that should not be allowed to overshadow the concerns of those people who have thought about this more deeply, and who have genuinely felt misgivings about this PM's behaviour.

I am certainly one of those people, and even more so because I voted for his Govt, and I do believe that in some ways his father was a statesman and not without some gravitas (twirling about behind HM the Queen not included...). The Younger is NOT his father.

I am increasingly concerned about what I see as his apparent lack of mental discipline or of much wisdom.This debacle in India, along with such silly things as the summer jobs Inquisition and the dreadful idea about the small business taxation regime, suggest to me that he lacks practicality.

I though carefully before I voted, and it was not without some doubts that after a lifetime of voting Tory, I went Liberal. I do not want my vote to have been wasted.


----------



## Jarnhamar (27 Feb 2018)

Maybe Trudeau should stop flying around on these little "work" vacation trips until the Phoenix debacle is fixed.


----------



## Loachman (27 Feb 2018)

A large number of voters base their choices on shallow impressions of candidates rather than serious consideration of candidates' actual abilities (or lack thereof) and detailed understanding of key issues. Name and hair and "dreaminess" compared to stodgy, old, control-freak Stephen Harper was a prime factor for many.

Wannabe-murderers hanging around during sensitive visits, budgets that don't balance (especially by themselves), major trade negotiations, defence matters, etcetera bore them. Bright colours and sparkles have far more interest for these people.

Seeing The Sun King almost-universally slammed for ridiculous costumes, "cultural appropriations", and peoplekinds will have more effect on them than anything else. Realization that he is all flash and no bang will turn off many.

Peacockiness is far from his most serious flaw, but it is the most visible one, and, like the gaudy tailfeathers, attracts the most attention.

We are seeing screw-up after screw-up added to the pile. Each example sews more doubt in more people's minds. Eventually, a tipping point will be reached.


----------



## jollyjacktar (27 Feb 2018)

Amen.   :nod:   or should that be Apeople.


----------



## Furniture (27 Feb 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Amen.   :nod:   or should that be Apeople.


Genuine L O L when I read that one...  :rofl:


----------



## OldSolduer (27 Feb 2018)

He’s a lightweight amateur in a world full of MMA cage fighters who don’t obey the rules....


----------



## Bird_Gunner45 (27 Feb 2018)

Breacher said:
			
		

> Sigh. I guess I should have provided more detail on my thoughts. I will attempt to rectify that now.
> 
> In his rebuttal, BG45 claims to be making no comparisons. In order for me to validate his statement “let’s not pretend he was the first PM to dress up”, I have to compare PM Trudeau’s performance to that of his predecessors. BG45 then provides examples to assist in making a comparison. I’m a thumperhead, so maybe I’m missing something, but I don’t know what else to call it other than a comparison. I wanted see if BG45’s examples supported his point of view. This is where I have the problem. The photos he posted are without context and that makes them pretty much meaningless. I attempted to put them into context by providing the links and after doing so I felt that the representations in the photos didn’t qualify as “dressing up” or “costume wearing” (this is the point I was trying to make). Here’s why:
> 
> ...



you're missing the larger point though. Focusing on costumes is like sitting in a rocking chair a la Van Wilder- it gives you something to do but it wont get you anywhere. Yes, Trudeau went over the top, cartoonishly committing cultural appropriation, which ironically most left-wing SJWs, which he claims to be, hate. However, while easy to point out, it's larger irrelevant other than in how it impacts Indian-Canadian relations. Had PMJT shown up in India and increased business and strategic relations than the costumes would have been irrelevant as the larger goal would have been met. Heck, even if he just had a couple of good meetings with PM Modi that served no other purpose than to just touch base than the costumes wouldn't have mattered. 

The Atwal incident is the bigger story- it either indicates gross incompetence by members of the LPC around Trudeau or a concerted effort by the LPC to thumb their noses at India for the gain of a few Sikh voters in Vancouver and Toronto. Ultimately neither option is good for Canadian-Indian relations, which if we dont want to rely solely on China once the US bows out of world affairs if they maintain their current trajectory, we need to improve. The costumes are irrelevant in this just as they were for Harper when he donned them (admittedly less ridiculously by multitudes).


----------



## Breacher (27 Feb 2018)

Bird_Gunner45 said:
			
		

> you're missing the larger point though. Focusing on costumes is like sitting in a rocking chair a la Van Wilder- it gives you something to do but it wont get you anywhere. Yes, Trudeau went over the top, cartoonishly committing cultural appropriation, which ironically most left-wing SJWs, which he claims to be, hate. However, while easy to point out, it's larger irrelevant other than in how it impacts Indian-Canadian relations. Had PMJT shown up in India and increased business and strategic relations than the costumes would have been irrelevant as the larger goal would have been met. Heck, even if he just had a couple of good meetings with PM Modi that served no other purpose than to just touch base than the costumes wouldn't have mattered.
> 
> The Atwal incident is the bigger story- it either indicates gross incompetence by members of the LPC around Trudeau or a concerted effort by the LPC to thumb their noses at India for the gain of a few Sikh voters in Vancouver and Toronto. Ultimately neither option is good for Canadian-Indian relations, which if we dont want to rely solely on China once the US bows out of world affairs if they maintain their current trajectory, we need to improve. The costumes are irrelevant in this just as they were for Harper when he donned them (admittedly less ridiculously by multitudes).



I am missing nothing. You seem to be the one focusing on costumes as you keep coming back to it. Please re-read the end of my post. I have stated my opinion on the whole fiasco there. The costumes is just a part of it. I simply don't agree that it should be outright dismissed as a distraction.


----------



## Furniture (27 Feb 2018)

Bird_Gunner45 said:
			
		

> you're missing the larger point though. Focusing on costumes is like sitting in a rocking chair a la Van Wilder- it gives you something to do but it wont get you anywhere. Yes, Trudeau went over the top, cartoonishly committing cultural appropriation, which ironically most left-wing SJWs, which he claims to be, hate. However, while easy to point out, it's larger irrelevant other than in how it impacts Indian-Canadian relations. Had PMJT shown up in India and increased business and strategic relations than the costumes would have been irrelevant as the larger goal would have been met. Heck, even if he just had a couple of good meetings with PM Modi that served no other purpose than to just touch base than the costumes wouldn't have mattered.



The costumes are in and of themselves an issue though, the Indian press mentioned them and their apparent lack of amusement with them... When a "World Leader" shows up in your country dressed as a caricature of your people, and continues to do it for days that's an issue. He didn't improve relations, he actively ruined relations through both costume and actions regarding a convicted attempted murderer... In my experience the Canadian Embasay/Commision staff are switched on to local politics and culture, I doubt any of them were consulted in this debacle. 

When we hosted a High Commission event in Mumbai this past summer we oddly enough didn't dress in costumes(apart from uniform)...


----------



## Journeyman (28 Feb 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> TBH I really think that he might be doing this all on purpose to keep people focused on those trivial things and people are falling for it.


...



^^^ Sorry, words fail me.


----------



## Remius (28 Feb 2018)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> ...
> 
> 
> 
> ^^^ Sorry, words fail me.



And yet this thread and in fact a good number of people on this site focus on all of those trivial things.  He is accused of having little substance yet a lot of the criticism of him also seems to be of the same caliber.


----------



## Journeyman (28 Feb 2018)

And you seem to be suggesting that PMJT is such a brilliant, in-depth thinker that he pre-emptively decided it would be a great plan to actively appear like some Bollywood cross-dresser throughout his taxpayer-funded family vacation, just so people would lose track of his abysmal business efforts and international security awareness while in India.

I'll take "far-fetched" for $500 Alex.


----------



## Altair (28 Feb 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> And yet this thread and in fact a good number of people on this site focus on all of those trivial things.  He is accused of having little substance yet a lot of the criticism of him also seems to be of the same caliber.


Nice hair has morphed into nice clothes. 

If at first you don't succeed,  try again.


----------



## jollyjacktar (28 Feb 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> And yet this thread and in fact a good number of people on this site focus on all of those trivial things.  He is accused of having little substance yet a lot of the criticism of him also seems to be of the same caliber.



Don't kid yourself.  We're well aware that he is fucking things up left, right and centre and costing us dearly.  My grandchildren will be paying for his budget not balancing itself.  Failing at the international level as demonstrated in Asia and Europe.

That he likes to act like Kim Kardashian and Mr. Dress Up only adds fuel to our anger and embarrassment as Canadians.


----------



## ballz (28 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> Nice hair has morphed into nice clothes.
> 
> If at first you don't succeed,  try again.



At this point I think the sum of criticisms regarding PM Trudeau's severe lack of humility have succeeded. I am surprised more and more every day by the people I am acquainted with who are criticizing him. When my 70 yr old paternal grandmother from NL is sharing memes about you, you've definitely made an impression.

If the CPC had a manikin with a nice clean suit they'd probably have a good shot at a majority gov't next year... they'd win the leadership debates, that's for sure. As it stands they have Andrew Scheer so I'm not going to be shocked if they get a minority.


----------



## Rifleman62 (28 Feb 2018)

Remius please state five qualities that Trudeau has that qualifies "him" as a leader, and a PM of G7 country?

As for the debates, look for a tiny earpeice in Trudeau's ear.


----------



## Jarnhamar (28 Feb 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> And yet this thread and in fact a good number of people on this site focus on all of those trivial things.  He is accused of having little substance yet a lot of the criticism of him also seems to be of the same caliber.



Trivial criticism of behavior that put off a country of 1'349'000'000?
Criticizing his penchant for dressing up, selfies and painfully staged photo ops is hardly "little substance".


----------



## George Wallace (28 Feb 2018)

Jimmy Jones missed a whole generation of followers.


----------



## Altair (28 Feb 2018)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Jimmy Jones missed a whole generation of followers.


He was a little before my time, but he was a very good singer.

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2741325/


----------



## mariomike (28 Feb 2018)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Jimmy Jones missed a whole generation of followers.


----------



## Halifax Tar (28 Feb 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> A large number of voters base their choices on shallow impressions of candidates rather than serious consideration of candidates' actual abilities (or lack thereof) and detailed understanding of key issues. Name and hair and "dreaminess" compared to stodgy, old, control-freak Stephen Harper was a prime factor for many.



I generally share your opinion.  I think the media had allot to do with it by the way they framed Harper.  Its funny people considered him a diabolical evil, it seemed, at points during the campaign.  But their emotion, I found, was based in perception and not facts.  Now when I challenge them on Harper they cannot name a thing he did that was bad or wrong.  Sheeple vote in our leaders, and its a GD shame.


----------



## pbi (28 Feb 2018)

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> Sheeple vote in our leaders, and its a GD shame.



Was Harper voted in by "sheeple"?


----------



## George Wallace (28 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> He was a little before my time, but he was a very good singer.
> 
> http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2741325/



Wrong Jimmy Jones.

See Mariomike's post.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (28 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> He was a little before my time, but he was a very good singer.
> 
> http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2741325/



I believe you will find, Altair, the George was referring to the Reverend Jim Jones and his friendly band of flower people who committed group suicide in Jonestown.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (28 Feb 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> Was Harper voted in by "sheeple"?



In a sense, yes.

If you remember, Paul Martin actually had little or nothing to do with Adscam and was widely respected as being honest and competent. None of that mattered when the pitchforks came out for the Liberals.

Keeping in mind that a federal election in Canada is actually over 300 local elections....


----------



## George Wallace (28 Feb 2018)

LOL!

I never truly knew the extent to this extravagance or fantasy:

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/justin-trudeau-the-mr-dressup-prime-minister/ar-BBJx6h8?li=AAadgLE&ocid=spartanntp

Perhaps Kate Purchase is not the right person for the job:

http://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/kate-purchase-justin-trudeau-communications-director/


----------



## Furniture (28 Feb 2018)

Paul Martin also helped orchestrate the coup based on Adscam that placed him on top of the block when the axe fell. When you intentionally torpedo your own party to take the leadership it shouldn't come as a surprise when the opposition parties take advantage it.


----------



## Altair (28 Feb 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> I believe you will find, Altair, the George was referring to the Reverend Jim Jones and his friendly band of flower people who committed group suicide in Jonestown.


Oh. That's rather more depressing.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (28 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> Oh. That's rather more depressing.



Quite.


----------



## Good2Golf (28 Feb 2018)

WeatherdoG said:
			
		

> Paul Martin also helped orchestrate the coup based on Adscam that placed him on top of the block when the axe fell. When you intentionally torpedo your own party to take the leadership it shouldn't come as a surprise when the opposition parties take advantage it.



A very interesting take, and certainly not one I've ever heard before.  A 'Coup' you say?  Hmmmmm.  Most political pundits had assessed that Chretien stayed on well past his best-before date, and that his eventual handover to Paul Jr. had more than a few poison pills (eg. CH-148 vice CH-149 Round #2) meant for Jr. not to forget that 'Tit Gars still held the power and won the longevity battle between JC and PM Sr.  I don't for a minute believe that JC did anything other than leave at a moment entirely of his choosing.

:2c:

G2G


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (28 Feb 2018)

But, Good2Golf, it helps you leaving when you still have numerous boxes of monogramed golf balls with a Canadian flag, your name and "Prime Minister" printed on them.  

Bet you don't have any of those ;D


----------



## Good2Golf (28 Feb 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> But, Good2Golf, it helps you leaving when you still have numerous boxes of monogramed golf balls with a Canadian flag, your name and "Prime Minister" printed on them.
> 
> Bet you don't have any of those ;D



I had one of those, and then accidentally Mulligan'd it during actual use...worked pretty well right up to the water hazard!  :rofl:


----------



## Furniture (28 Feb 2018)

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> A very interesting take, and certainly not one I've ever heard before.  A 'Coup' you say?  Hmmmmm.  Most political pundits had assessed that Chretien stayed on well past his best-before date, and that his eventual handover to Paul Jr. had more than a few poison pills (eg. CH-148 vice CH-149 Round #2) meant for Jr. not to forget that 'Tit Gars still held the power and won the longevity battle between JC and PM Sr.  I don't for a minute believe that JC did anything other than leave at a moment entirely of his choosing.
> 
> :2c:
> 
> G2G



Coup was perhaps a poor choice of words, better described as a willing participant in a civil war that left him a pyrrhic victory at best. He did "win" in at least claiming a job his father never managed to attain.


----------



## Jarnhamar (28 Feb 2018)

So I read the budget was rolled out and the word "gender" appears in the budget 358 times in 367 pages. And the words feminism or feminist 24 times. 

That's exciting right? 

So are companies going to have to conform to some kind of feminist something in or another? 

Maybe countries that want to do business with Canada have to pass GBA+ first?  That'd be cool.


----------



## Altair (28 Feb 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> So I read the budget was rolled out and the word "gender" appears in the budget 358 times in 367 pages. And the words feminism or feminist 24 times.
> 
> That's exciting right?
> 
> ...


women make up 50 percent of the electorate. A pretty big group to be courting


----------



## FJAG (28 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> women make up 50 percent of the electorate. A pretty big group to be courting



Last time I looked, men made up the other 50 percent. That's a pretty big group to throw under the bus.

 :stirpot:


----------



## Good2Golf (28 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> women make up 50 percent of the electorate. A pretty big group to be courting



Ah, so women are equally responsible as men for the mess things are in at the moment, then?


----------



## Altair (28 Feb 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> Last time I looked, men made up the other 50 percent. That's a pretty big group to throw under the bus.
> 
> :stirpot:


I don't think trying to help women equates to keeping men down.


----------



## Piece of Cake (28 Feb 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> So I read the budget was rolled out and the word "gender" appears in the budget 358 times in 367 pages. And the words feminism or feminist 24 times.



I must have missed the class that explained der, die, das, as being all feminine.


----------



## jollyjacktar (28 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> I don't think trying to help women equates to keeping men down.



If he's busy courting them, he'll be leaving us at the side of the road.


----------



## OldSolduer (28 Feb 2018)

Competency and not gender should be the rule. Oh the gnashing of teeth and the howls of outrage I foresee.


----------



## jollyjacktar (28 Feb 2018)

Pleasing to see the Bloc(heads) in total disarray.

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/politics/bloc-quebecois-ouellet-1.4555185


----------



## jollyjacktar (28 Feb 2018)

Caroline Mulroney appears to be in trouble after the debate tonight.

http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/canada/toronto/caroline-mulroney-ontario-pc-leadership-1.4554179


----------



## Altair (28 Feb 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> If he's busy courting them, he'll be leaving us at the side of the road.


It's not a sum zero game. 

The military is a perfect example of this. 13K ruck march,  if someone is lagging behind and I help them keep up,  I am not being left behind or at the side of the road. Its not like they will finish and I will not.  We both make it. 

Gender pay equality,  equal pay for equal work.  Not women making more than men,  women making as much as men for the same amount of work.  

Increasing female work participation,  especially with the workforce getting older,  could help economic growth and ease the demographic crunch. Not leaving men behind,  helping women catch up. 

Helping women with business loans and help for starting small businesses.  According to some its harder for women than men to raise capital needed to begin a small business,  and this will help female entrepreneurs get off the ground.  Not sure what the numbers behind this is,  but again,  not looking to displace men here 

If this is about making sure every female Canadian is on a level playing field as every male Canadian,  that's fine by me. We are all Canadians and we are all in this together and we should all strive for equality between the genders,  not one above or below another.


----------



## jollyjacktar (28 Feb 2018)

Funny, you mentioning the military.  No real news of that in the budget from what l saw.

As for zero sums or otherwise.  This particular PM doesn't multi task well.  He focuses more or less in one direction to the detriment of other things.


----------



## FJAG (28 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> I don't think trying to help women equates to keeping men down.



Not so much keep men down as not treating Canadians and Canada equitably or seriously.

Since JT came to power I've come to the conclusion that the Liberals have a very narrow agenda to suck up to various interest groups that they think that they can exploit for votes at the expense of the country as a whole. This last budget clearly speaks to the fact that they will throw money at perceived problems and friction points that have come up in the press in order to curry favour with those groups rather than balance the budget or deal with national interests as a whole.

I see the failure to address the NAFTA renegotiation with an internal fallback plan a major shortcoming.

Similarly the rate of corporate tax needed an adjustment to follow the US reductions to keep Canadian companies competitive in North America.

The reduction in infrastructure spending is problematic.

The failure to follow a structured plan to balance the budget is problematic.

The idea of growing the middle class by creating pay equity and increasing the number of women in the workplace is, with respect, a red herring. First you need to create jobs otherwise all that you are doing is restructuring pay scales within public unions or artificially raising minimum wages which essentially lead to more taxes and inflation.

I've come to the realization that unless you are a special interest group with a loud voice then the Liberals won't hear you.

 :2c:


----------



## QV (28 Feb 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> It's not a sum zero game.
> 
> The military is a perfect example of this. 13K ruck march,  if someone is lagging behind and I help them keep up,  I am not being left behind or at the side of the road. Its not like they will finish and I will not.  We both make it.



That depends.  If by “help” you mean words of encouragement then sure.  If you have to carry their rifle or ruck for them then we have a problem.  That is the minimum standard everyone should pass.  If they can’t do it they are bringing the team down.  Carrying there kit and dragging them across the finish line helps nobody. How many people are you going to accept in your platoon that need help carrying their own kit?  See the problem?  Nobody “makes it” in that scenario.  What’s next?  Shooting a few rounds into their target for them during the PWT because they suck a little at that too?


----------



## Altair (1 Mar 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Funny, you mentioning the military.  No real news of that in the budget from what l saw.
> 
> As for zero sums or ootherise.  This particular PM doesn't multi task well.  He focuses more or less in one direction to the detriment of other things.


Yup,  military got the shaft.  Again. 

I noted 3 initiatives that would help women gain equal footing with men,  and help the economy in turn. 

These initiatives sound reasonable,  do they not?


----------



## jollyjacktar (1 Mar 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> Yup,  military got the shaft.  Again.
> 
> I noted 3 initiatives that would help women gain equal footing with men,  and help the economy in turn.
> 
> These initiatives sound reasonable,  do they not?



They're already equal in the military.

Just because they say something doesn't mean it will pan out.  The budget won't be balancing itself.  My grandkids will still be paying for these Trudeau years.  Not a good thing.  And l don't have any grandkids yet.

He promises the moon and the sun and rarely delivers.  Phoenix is a boondoggle.  The Cons built it, yes, but despite being advised not to, the Liberals switched it on and so far have ruined many lives, credit scores and burned upwards of a billion dollars...


----------



## Altair (1 Mar 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> They're already equal in the military.
> 
> Just because they say something doesn't mean it will pan out.  The budget won't be balancing itself.  My grandkids will still be paying for these Trudeau years.  Not a good thing.  And l don't have any grandkids yet.
> 
> He promises the moon and the sun and rarely delivers.  Phoenix is a boondoggle.  The Cons built it, yes, but despite being advised not to, the Liberals switched it on and so far have ruined many lives, credit scores and burned upwards of a billion dollars...


Naturally,  not everything they plan will work out,  and yes,  the  budget isn't perfect. 

That said,  you did make a point about the gender part of the budget and on that point,  I was simply trying to say striving for gender equality and helping to bring women up to the level of men is a worthy goal.  whether they reach it or not is up in the air,  but the fact that they are trying is something that a lot of people,  a lot of women will take notice of. And helping women does not equal keeping men down,  the same way that helping someone who has fallen doesn't mean taking their place. Its trying to make sure everyone is successful based on their merit,  not their gender. 

I wouldn't be mocking it quite as nonchalantly as you seem to be doing,  its good policy,  good economically and good for all Canadians.  Conservative,  liberal,  NDP,  Bloc,  ex Bloc,  the one green lady party,  there is no reason why all parties cannot agree that there is work to be done on this front and all parties,  nomatter who is in power shouldn't be striving for this.


----------



## jollyjacktar (1 Mar 2018)

I'm not mocking it at all, it is a worthy goal.  What l am mocking is your contention he won't let other things slide.  I'm not the only one either.  He's too busy kissing up to a few select groups, eyeing the next election.  That didn't work out too well for him in India, now did it?


----------



## Cloud Cover (1 Mar 2018)

-" I was simply trying to say striving for gender equality and helping to bring women up to the level of men is a worthy goal.  whether they reach it or not is up in the air,.."

Disagree. I'm no feminist, but I am a pragmatist and it's 2018 and that equality model needs to be better defined and then it must be the end state at any cost, and any cost is what they are willing to pay. I find it hard to see things any other way, I remember looking at recruiting brochures years back that spec'd pay based on gender, family and marital status etc.   Decades have gone by, and while some equity has been achieved, parity in terms of recognition of rewards and acknowledgement of equal role responsibility (it's a two way street) has not been achieved and that is unacceptable.


----------



## Good2Golf (1 Mar 2018)

Isn't it ironic that one of the fastest ways for women to gain pay equity with men is to join the Canadian Armed Forces?  I didn't see anything in the budget to support DND in attracting women towards that 100%, no-questions-asked pay equity...   :waiting:

:2c:

Regards
G2G


----------



## Altair (1 Mar 2018)

Good2Golf said:
			
		

> Isn't it ironic that one of the fastest ways for women to gain pay equity with men is to join the Canadian Armed Forces?  I didn't see anything in the budget to support DND in attracting women towards that 100%, no-questions-asked pay equity...   :waiting:
> 
> :2c:
> 
> ...


Forces can't hire every single woman in Canada. 

Isn't our money due to role out after the next election?


----------



## Jarnhamar (1 Mar 2018)

Are there actual jobs in Canada where women are getting paid less than men for doing the same job?


----------



## McG (1 Mar 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Are there actual jobs in Canada where women are getting paid less than men for doing the same job?


News media is rolling with two examples that are claimed to be the case right now.

One is a police force where civilian office workers (who happen to be mostly women) feel they are owed the same pay as police office workers (who happen to be mostly men) in similar jobs.  The other example is urban mail carriers (who are mostly male) are making more than rural and country mail carriers (who are more likely to be female).

None of the coverage that I have seen or read gives enough information to form an informed opinion.


----------



## George Wallace (1 Mar 2018)

QV said:
			
		

> That depends.  If by “help” you mean words of encouragement then sure.  If you have to carry their rifle or ruck for them then we have a problem.  That is the minimum standard everyone should pass.  If they can’t do it they are bringing the team down.  Carrying there kit and dragging them across the finish line helps nobody. How many people are you going to accept in your platoon that need help carrying their own kit?  See the problem?  Nobody “makes it” in that scenario.  What’s next?  Shooting a few rounds into their target for them during the PWT because they suck a little at that too?



Unfortunately, this is the wrong attitude.  It is a TEAM.  You, however, are concentrating solely on yourself as an individual.  Individuals who are not team members in a team lead the whole team to failure in many cases.  
In any military operation the team has to stay together.  Your suggestion that you leave a person behind, not only increases the likelihood that you will lose that person, but then the remainder of your team is short members in the fight.....a big handicap in a firefight.
On the civilian side, this 'Mcdonald's School of Thinking' is what is leading us in a downward spiral, as people rush in to make their money fast as an individual, and then get out fast with the cash and personal profit.....No thought to the long term goal of 'team' profit.....No thought of the welfare of others......No thought in politics of 'nation building'.....


----------



## SeaKingTacco (1 Mar 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Are there actual jobs in Canada where women are getting paid less than men for doing the same job?



As I understand it (and I may be wrong based on what I heard on CBC and am certainly willing to be corrected) , what the Liberals want to legislate in federally regulated industries is not two people in the exact same job getting the same pay (what we, obviously, already have in the CF) but a system whereby two people in two different jobs get paid equally because both their work is equally important to society.

Maybe not the best example (but the only one I could think of because airlines are federally regulated) is that, possibly, the government will now decide that flight attendants should receive the same pay as pilots because their work crewing the aircraft is of equal value.

How this all plays out, practically, is beyond me.


----------



## Jarnhamar (1 Mar 2018)

MCG said:
			
		

> News media is rolling with two examples that are claimed to be the case right now.
> 
> One is a police force where civilian office workers (who happen to be mostly women) feel they are owed the same pay as police office workers (who happen to be mostly men) in similar jobs.  The other example is urban mail carriers (who are mostly male) are making more than rural and country mail carriers (who are more likely to be female).
> 
> None of the coverage that I have seen or read gives enough information to form an informed opinion.



I don't want to spin this into a male vs female thing. Women should make the same as men for doing the same job, full stop.  Similar jobs? Well that's not the same job (right?).  During the G20 summit some Police officers, which included females, were making something sick like $800 a day they said with overtime and all that when corporals, who at that moment in time were doing the same security task, were making standard corporals pay like $120 a day or whatever.

I picked a male dominated field and my house boss picked a female dominated one. She made $20'000 more than me last year (and 5 of those months I was away from my family).

The mail carrier thing is an interesting point but at first glance that seems to be a matter of urban vs rural rather than male vs female. It would be a story if male mail carriers in the country made more money than female mail carriers.


----------



## pbi (1 Mar 2018)

MCG said:
			
		

> News media is rolling with two examples that are claimed to be the case right now.
> 
> One is a police force where civilian office workers (who happen to be mostly women) feel they are owed the same pay as police office workers (who happen to be mostly men) in similar jobs.  The other example is urban mail carriers (who are mostly male) are making more than rural and country mail carriers (who are more likely to be female).
> 
> None of the coverage that I have seen or read gives enough information to form an informed opinion.



My impression from coverage so far is not that this is a major problem in government jobs (where pay rates tend to be set by various regulations and are thus usually more transparent, and unions are almost always involved), but more in private businesses that are not so tightly regulated and have more freedom to manage how they compensate employees. Or don't compensate employees.

For me, this is a no-brainer. If you have two employees doing the same job, and all other factors (certified skills and qualifications, seniority, performance pay, etc) are equal, then you pay them equally. It's common sense and the decent way to treat the people who work for you.  Male/female should have nothing to do with it.


----------



## Jarnhamar (1 Mar 2018)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> Maybe not the best example (but the only one I could think of because airlines are federally regulated) is that, possibly, the government will now decide that flight attendants should receive the same pay as pilots because their work crewing the aircraft is of equal value.
> 
> How this all plays out, practically, is beyond me.


Ah, seen.


----------



## Jarnhamar (1 Mar 2018)

The budget is still light on critical infrastructure. It's a public relations budget.

And sorry but is there a point where we will realizing constantly throwing more money at first Nations problems isn't going to fix the issues and we need a new game plan?

Trudeau needs to hire me, clearly I have all the answers eh  ;D


----------



## SeaKingTacco (1 Mar 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Ah, seen.



I have only a tenuous grasp on what this Government is shooting for here, so take what I have said with a grain of salt.

Obviously, if there still exist cases in Canada today of two workers side by side doing the same job but getting different pay because of sex, that needs to be fixed.

If the goal for the government is to decide what jobs are of equivalent value to society and force pay equity on that basis, I am not sure how that is practically possible.


----------



## pbi (1 Mar 2018)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> ...If the goal for the government is to decide what jobs are of equivalent value to society and force pay equity on that basis, I am not sure how that is practically possible.



I agree with that. It sounds like a swamp that could employ bureaucrats and Royal Commissions from now until...until....until the Ontario Tories sort out their act.


----------



## McG (1 Mar 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> The mail carrier thing is an interesting point but at first glance that seems to be a matter of urban vs rural rather than male vs female. It would be a story if male mail carriers in the country made more money than female mail carriers.


From the articles I saw, the difference was because the urban carriers were unionized years earlier, they were able to establish better pay for themselves and that disparity now endures as a systemic sexual discrimination. The article would have you understand that delivering mail is the same work and the same value regardless of where it is done, but is that true?  Do urban and rural carriers carry the same loads over the same distances? Do they deliver the same volume of mail, or the same value of mail (and how do you measure mail value: by item, by mass, by dollar value attached to business conducted through the mail, or something else?)? Do they work same hours?  Face same hazards? Does either location struggle more than the other to attract capable employees?  I don’t know.


----------



## jollyjacktar (1 Mar 2018)

Rural carriers use their vehicles to carry the mail to the boxes.


----------



## mariomike (1 Mar 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Are there actual jobs in Canada where women are getting paid less than men for doing the same job?



I don't know if it was ever resolved, but I remember this,

QUOTE

In the case of Reid et al. v. Vancouver Police Board there was a claim by the mostly female dispatchers of the Vancouver Police Department that the 40% pay difference between them and the mostly male dispatchers at the Vancouver Fire Department was discrimination. The latter group was employed by the City of Vancouver while the former group was employed by the Vancouver Police Board. The Tribunal and ultimately the Court of Appeal agreed they were separate employers even though the City of Vancouver had final responsibility to pay for the employees of the Police Board. In the result, the claim was dismissed.
http://www.mccarthy.ca/pubs/2006_Labour_Conference_Materials.pdf

END QUOTE


----------



## ModlrMike (1 Mar 2018)

Apples to oranges. The comparison is really only valid if it's within the same workforce. Your example is no different than male janitors at ABC Co being paid more than female janitors at XYZ Co.


----------



## mariomike (1 Mar 2018)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Your example is no different than male janitors at ABC Co being paid more than female janitors at XYZ Co.



I'm not a lawyer. 

My example was decided by the Supreme Court of Canada ( Docket #31171 ).
https://www.scc-csc.ca/case-dossier/info/dock-regi-eng.aspx?cas=31171


----------



## Altair (1 Mar 2018)

QV said:
			
		

> That depends.  If by “help” you mean words of encouragement then sure.  If you have to carry their rifle or ruck for then we have a problem.  That is the minimum standard everyone should pass.  If they can’t do it they are bringing the team down.  Carrying there kit and dragging them across the finish line helps nobody. How many people are you going to accept in your platoon that need help carrying their own kit?  See the problem?  Nobody “makes it” in that scenario.  What’s next?  Shooting a few rounds into their target for them during the PWT because they suck a little at that too?


I've never carried someone's kit in a ruck march.  I've stayed with them(men and women both) and offer encouragement,  urge them to keep up, maybe offer some of my water. 

They still have to do the hard work putting one foot in front of the next,  but it can be easier when you're not dropping off and being left behind by themselves.


----------



## pbi (1 Mar 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> I've never carried someone's kit in a ruck march.  I've stayed with them(men and women both) and offer encouragement,  urge them to keep up, maybe offer some of my water.
> 
> They still have to do the hard work putting one foot in front of the next,  but it can be easier when you're not dropping off and being left behind by themselves.



I agree with Altair here: leaving soldiers behind is not good leadership, in my opinion. Apparently, neither is leaving Marines:


> http://www.usmc-mccs.org/articles/commandant-we-never-leave-a-marine-behind/



Going through Inf School, I remember more than once that we carried the rifles and packs of exhausted course mates, after a few days of stumbling through the swamps of Gagetown. Sometimes we did it on our own, sometimes the DS told us to. The point drilled into us was that nobody gets left behind, because that doesn't help the team, either.

I get QV's point about a common standard, but it has to be applied with common sense and sometimes some compassion. That could easily be "you" falling behind.


----------



## Jarnhamar (1 Mar 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> I agree with Altair here: leaving soldiers behind is not good leadership, in my opinion. Apparently, neither is leaving Marines:
> Going through Inf School, I remember more than once that we carried the rifles and packs of exhausted course mates, after a few days of stumbling through the swamps of Gagetown. Sometimes we did it on our own, sometimes the DS told us to. The point drilled into us was that nobody gets left behind, because that doesn't help the team, either.
> 
> I get QV's point about a common standard, but it has to be applied with common sense and sometimes some compassion. That could easily be "you" falling behind.


But the 13KM BFT is an individual test. If someone essentially has to be motivated (be it jacking up or happy thoughts) for 13 kilometers what happens when the soldier has to perform to the standard they just "passed" and people aren't around or able to push them?

Get what you're both saying but there is a difference, IMO, between fitness standards and something like a platoon on a forced march with heavy weapons etc..
I think we see some shitty MCpls and 2LTs because course mates carry them, in various ways, through courses.


----------



## Cloud Cover (1 Mar 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> I'm not a lawyer.
> 
> My example was decided by the Supreme Court of Canada ( Docket #31171 ).
> https://www.scc-csc.ca/case-dossier/info/dock-regi-eng.aspx?cas=31171


The SCC offered no opinion of their own and denied the plaintiff's leave to appeal the 2-1 decision of the BCCA, which had earlier set aside a trial judge's order made in judicial review proceedings relating to a decision of the British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal. The main issue was one of symmetry between employers based on the ultimate source of funding for the paycheque (City of Vancouver), which the BCHRT ruled to be of no consequence to the matter.  An employer is an employer, regardless of source of funding for employment. This makes sense, for example look at the payment of nurses in nursing homes and hospitals. They are usually much different.

In contradistinction, Mr. Trudeau and Mr. Morneau appear to be espousing a policy that all departments of the federal government are ultimately a single employer, which is probably correct assuming that there is only one pension plan, one pay scale, one benefit plan, one collective agreement, one common standard of employment etc. etc. But alas, that assumption is incorrect.  They have to do better.


----------



## mariomike (1 Mar 2018)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Your example is no different than male janitors at ABC Co being paid more than female janitors at XYZ Co.





			
				whiskey601 said:
			
		

> An employer is an employer, regardless of source of funding for employment.



I was not offering a legal opinion, as I am not a lawyer.

My reply was to this question,



			
				Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Are there actual jobs in Canada where women are getting paid less than men for doing the same job?



The question was about jobs. Not employers.

In this case, it was argued that dispatching police and fire, in / for the same city ( Vancouver ), were similar jobs.


----------



## Cloud Cover (1 Mar 2018)

You pointed to a case that was ostensibly about jobs, in fact there was actually common ground that the jobs were comparable and the wages were not. The main issue of whether one employer could pay less than the other employer for highly comparable work did not turn on gender. The process never got that far because the City was able to establish they were not the single employer and that the City, and the two departments were all separate employers in their own right. The fact that one employer apparently valuated the work of dispatchers at a much higher level than the other employer suggests a problem perhaps rooted in something other than gender discrimination.


----------



## mariomike (1 Mar 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> You pointed to a case that was ostensibly about jobs, in fact there was actually common ground that the jobs were comparable and the wages were not.



My reply was to this question,



			
				Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Are there actual jobs in Canada where women are getting paid less than men for  doing the same job?



"In provincial jurisdictions, employers must give men and women equal pay for similar or
substantially similar work. In the federal jurisdiction, employers must give equal pay for work of
equal value."
http://www.mccarthy.ca/pubs/2006_Labour_Conference_Materials.pdf

As this was a municipal jurisdiction,

"The latter group was employed by the City of Vancouver while the former group was employed by the Vancouver Police Board. The Tribunal and ultimately the Court of Appeal agreed they were separate employers even though the City of Vancouver had final responsibility to pay for the employees of the Police Board."

This was Vancouver. The situation in Toronto was virtually identical. So, it was watched closely as the case went to the Supreme Court of Canada.

Interestingly, after 1998, Paramedic and Fire dispatchers could transfer between each others Communications Divisions. 
But, not with ( the lower paying ) City Police Communications.


----------



## Underway (1 Mar 2018)

Overall the budget was kinda meh.  The money thrown at gender issues is really not that much despite their branding.  They actually got grudging respect from the Canadian taxpayers federation from not increasing spending to GDP ratio and actually shrinking it to Harper levels (13-14% IRRC), though the CTF were not happy about the deficit in general.  The money given to these "gender" programs is not budgeted to increase at all.  So spending will actually shrink.  This will put the gov't in a position to potentially go into an election year with that potential to come close to balancing the budget.  Of course if they spend it all on pharmacare then that just blows up.  

Gender analysis should be done for all gov't programs/contracts.  I'm surprised it took them so long to implement this.  Even the IMF does this.  It's pretty common in governments and international organizations.  It of course all depends on how its applied. Applying gender standards that are too rigorous to contracts over $1 million will shut out a lot of defence contractors and engineering firms. 

Overall though nothing really changed from the last budget to this one except the money going to infrastructure that couldn't be spent goes to the "Liberal client cults".

If the federal gov't wants to really get serious about gender pay gap then they have to implement a serious and expensive gov't daycare plan.  The largest differences in pay come from missing work for children as women are the primary caregivers most of the time.  This is very clear in the research and in the results from places like Quebec and Sweeden who have implemented these policies.

Overall I originally hated the budget but then after looking at the numbers it really didn't change anything from last years.


----------



## jollyjacktar (1 Mar 2018)

Ralph Goodale being hammered by the Press about the Justin Bourne Identity crisis.

op:

https://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/video?clipId=1337949


----------



## Rifleman62 (1 Mar 2018)

Never leave a person behind, yes, but the person always caries their own personal wpn.


----------



## George Wallace (1 Mar 2018)

TRANSPARENCY

When the Trudeau Government came into power, they did away with all the legislation on Transparency that the Harper Government had brought in.  Now we see the Liberals doing this:



> According to the report by Elizabeth Thompson, “Confidential information from Canadian taxpayers could soon be shared with police and authorities in three dozen countries around the world, under measures included in Finance Minister Bill Morneau’s latest budget. In an inconspicuous section tucked into a small 78-page annex to the budget, the government says it wants to give police and tax authorities new powers to fight tax evasion and advance international investigations into serious crimes, ranging from drug trafficking and money laundering to terrorism.”



http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/tax-evasion-privacy-crime-1.4554901

OK JUSTIN!  Which way do you want it?  Transparency or NO Transparency?


----------



## Altair (1 Mar 2018)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> Never leave a person behind, yes, but the person always caries their own personal wpn.


100 percent. They can carry their own kit as well. 

I believe these things are about the mental overcoming the physical.  If I can help someone mentally they will do the physical.


----------



## Brad Sallows (1 Mar 2018)

>I don't think trying to help women equates to keeping men down.

Unless this government has discovered a process for ensuring all policy changes are Pareto improvements, some people will be worse off so that others can be better off.

Two people with the same status and performance should be paid at the same rates.  But if you told me one was a uniformed police officer and the other a civilian, I would not object if the uniformed officer was subject to more liabilities of employment - reassignable to duties the civilian is not - and paid more therefore.

And since the usual mistake has been made on the sub-topic of "women in STEM" - not understanding that as women have more choices about what to do, fewer choose STEM fields - I lack faith in the initiatives of the federal government, and the provincial government here in BC.


----------



## FJAG (1 Mar 2018)

:cheers:


----------



## Altair (2 Mar 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> :cheers:


Political cartoons thread?


----------



## pbi (2 Mar 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> 100 percent. They can carry their own kit as well.
> 
> I believe these things are about the mental overcoming the physical.  If I can help someone mentally they will do the physical.


Jarnhamar made a good point about a distinction between a fitness test and other strenuous physical activities: it leads to a question.

If you must be able to carry your full load during a BFT, or you aren't meeting the standard required for real operations, then why might it be acceptable during real ops, or during training for ops, that you carry buddy's ruck for a while, instead of leaving him to straggle and eventually fall out? 

I'm asking a question, not making a rhetorical statement.


----------



## Altair (2 Mar 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> Jarnhamar made a good point about a distinction between a fitness test and other strenuous physical activities: it leads to a question.
> 
> If you must be able to carry your full load during a BFT, or you aren't meeting the standard required for real operations, then why might it be acceptable during real ops, or during training for ops, that you carry buddy's ruck for a while, instead of leaving him to straggle and eventually fall out?
> 
> I'm asking a question, not making a rhetorical statement.


A good question.

A soldier needs to be able to meet the physical requirements to be in the army. A simple concept. 

Because once a soldier has passed the physical requirements, then during training or a real op they can be aided, and more importantly, be the one aiding others. A soldier who cannot meet the physical requirements will always need someone to carry their kit, while a soldier who meets the physical requirements may only occasionally need assistance, or could be the one aiding others.


----------



## FSTO (2 Mar 2018)

So getting back to politics....

I have never seen Ralph Goodale unable to out-talk the question asked of him. He must be furious that he has been put in this position.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/goodale-grilled-about-atwal-affair-on-parliament-hill-1.3824648

This lack of message management shown by the PMO is becoming the enduring legacy of the Trudeau government.


----------



## George Wallace (2 Mar 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> Because once a soldier has passed the physical requirements, then during training or a real op they can be aided, and more importantly, be the one aiding others. A soldier who cannot meet the physical requirements will always need someone to carry their kit, while a soldier who meets the physical requirements may only occasionally need assistance, or could be the one aiding others.



That is probably the better way of putting it.


----------



## George Wallace (2 Mar 2018)

FSTO said:
			
		

> So getting back to politics....
> 
> I have never seen Ralph Goodale unable to out-talk the question asked of him. He must be furious that he has been put in this position.
> https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/goodale-grilled-about-atwal-affair-on-parliament-hill-1.3824648
> ...



This is turning out to be quite the fiasco.  I have a suspicion that the Civil Servant in question has very little actual experience in Security and Intelligence and has done the lateral transfers up the Public Service ladder to arrive in his position.  His 'speculation' and the way that the Trudeau Government has been shifting the blame away from the PM in multiple directions is turning this into a disgraceful insight into the way Trudeau's PMO is running things.


----------



## Remius (2 Mar 2018)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> This is turning out to be quite the fiasco.  I have a suspicion that the Civil Servant in question has very little actual experience in Security and Intelligence and has done the lateral transfers up the Public Service ladder to arrive in his position.  His 'speculation' and the way that the Trudeau Government has been shifting the blame away from the PM in multiple directions is turning this into a disgraceful insight into the way Trudeau's PMO is running things.



The civil servant in question was actually Daniel Jean, the PM's NSA. Not some middle guy.

Which raises even more questions about the PMO as this sort of thing is incredibly odd.  There must have been a lot of political pressure on M. Jean to do this.

If the conspiracy theory is to be believed then why would an MP take the blame and if the MP is at fault then why the conspiracy theory about rogue agents?  Either way they all look like buffoons.  And in trying failing to do damage control they are further pissing off India.

Glad we aren't focused on costumes this time...


----------



## George Wallace (2 Mar 2018)

Remius said:
			
		

> The civil servant in question was actually Daniel Jean, the PM's NSA. Not some middle guy.



Being the PM's NSA doesn't exactly have to mean that he has the credentials to actually be such an advisor.  He is filling the job as an appointment.


----------



## Rifleman62 (2 Mar 2018)

George Wallace; I have a suspicion that the Civil Servant in question has very little actual experience in Security and Intelligence and has done the lateral transfers up the Public Service ladder to arrive in his position.

He doesn't. Posted 24 Feb 18



> http://ottawacitizen.com/news/politics/trudeau-appoints-new-national-security-advisor
> 
> Trudeau's pick for security adviser shows focus on foreign affairs expertise - 5 May 16
> 
> Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has picked an experienced deputy minister in foreign affairs rather than a senior security bureaucrat as his new national security adviser. The national security adviser wields much influence. He has the prime minister’s ear on security and intelligence issues, foreign and defence policy and acts as a conduit for conveying the prime minister and cabinet’s directions to the national security community.


----------



## Rifleman62 (2 Mar 2018)

From SDA: http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/


https://www.producer.com/2018/03/india-hikes-chickpea-duty-2/

*India hikes chickpea duty again* - 1 Mar 18

Extract:WINNIPEG (CNS) — The Indian government has raised the import tariff for chickpeas from 40 percent to 60 percent. This is the second time India has raised the tariff. Published in the Gazette of India on March 1, the government said the tariff is to be imposed immediately, due to circumstances that make it necessary to take immediate action.

The tariffs were placed in order to support Indian farmers who faced lower commodity prices following large world crops of pulses. The Indian government has previously said it wants to reach self-sufficiency for pulses, but many analysts have said that isn’t possible as India relies on variable monsoon rains for its growing season.

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau visited from Feb. 18 to 24, where he reached an agreement with Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on fumigation issues that Canadian pulses had faced upon on import into the country. The release announcing the agreement didn’t mention import tariffs. Last year Canada exported 10,000 tonnes of chickpeas to India, according to Statistics Canada.


----------



## Remius (2 Mar 2018)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Being the PM's NSA doesn't exactly have to mean that he has the credentials to actually be such an advisor.  He is filling the job as an appointment.



No it doesn't but it means that you need to be able to navigate political waters like this and push back when you are being asked to things that are clearly political in nature.  Especially with his experience with Global Affairs you would think that he would have advised against this course of action.  And maybe he did.

That's why this is so odd. 

My suspicion as mentioned is that the PMO put a lot of pressure on him to do this and to make sure that he was the one to do the briefing to add whatever credence to this theory.


----------



## Good2Golf (2 Mar 2018)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> George Wallace; I have a suspicion that the Civil Servant in question has very little actual experience in Security and Intelligence and has done the lateral transfers up the Public Service ladder to arrive in his position.
> 
> He doesn't. Posted 24 Feb 18



As opposed to someone like Dick Fadden.  Fadden, as many will remember, rankled the PM(O) with his insistence that foreign agencies (Chinese in particular) had worked their way into various levels of the Canadian Federal Government...cue Daniel Jean's entry into the picture as Canada's NSIA.

Regards
G2G


----------



## Retired AF Guy (2 Mar 2018)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> George Wallace; I have a suspicion that the Civil Servant in question has very little actual experience in Security and Intelligence and has done the lateral transfers up the Public Service ladder to arrive in his position.
> 
> He doesn't. Posted 24 Feb 18



His background is in immigration.



> Ottawa, Ontario
> May 5, 2016
> 
> Education
> ...



Link


----------



## Jarnhamar (2 Mar 2018)

I think the Civil Servant in question was given a sword and told to fall on it- for the good of the emperor.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (2 Mar 2018)

You people seem surprised that a unicorn loving PM, who thinks all international "wolves" circling Canada can be dealt with through being nice and using diplomacy to arrive at a peaceful resolution by compromise reached in good faith by all party ... and being nice, would appoint a career diplomat of the same type as his National Security Advisor instead of appointing someone from an actual security background that would speak the truth of the matter to him instead.

Why on earth would he want someone who knows what he/she is talking about and scare him with the fact that people out there are out to get us? 

Just sayin'  op:

BTW, here's an interesting angle on that civil servant being fed to the dogs (journalists): Considering the amount of time between "spotting" Mr. Atwal and the actual trotting out of the NSIA, there are two possibilities here. First, the Intelligence services of Canada knew before the trip that some faction of the Indian government were out to make Trudeau look bad - in which case the PM security services should have looked more carefully at everything before anything took place; or, second possibility: they looked into it only after Mr. Atwal was spotted by the press - in which case, Canada just revealed that it has incredibly well placed sources within the Indian government because that was amazingly fast work to obtain such info and confirm it that quickly - and revealing that is definitely NOT in our national interest if its the case.


----------



## YZT580 (2 Mar 2018)

One other option (Occam's razor) the PMO panicked and went looking for any remotely plausible lie to feed the public.


----------



## suffolkowner (3 Mar 2018)

https://globalnews.ca/news/4058984/justin-trudeau-india-trip-ipsos-poll/

the bloom is coming off the Liberals even in Ontario although maybe Wynne is dragging him down as well


----------



## Altair (3 Mar 2018)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> From SDA: http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/
> 
> 
> https://www.producer.com/2018/03/india-hikes-chickpea-duty-2/
> ...


No worries. 

Industry group says most Canadian chickpeas exempt from India's tariff increase: http://nationalpost.com/news/politics/trudeau-says-indias-chickpea-tariff-hike-is-unrelated-to-his-botched-trip-and-he-might-be-right


> Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s recent trip to India may have caused a diplomatic row, but he insists it had nothing to do with India’s decision to hike tariffs on chickpeas this week — and he has good reason for saying so.
> 
> Canada’s industry group for chickpea growers says the type of chickpea Canada specializes in is in fact exempt from the most recent tariff increase.
> 
> “Ninety-five per cent of the chickpeas grown in Canada are kabuli variety,” said Madeleine Goodwin, head of communications for Pulse Canada. “Agriculture Canada has informed us that kabuli chickpeas are exempt from today’s tariff increase.”


----------



## Rifleman62 (3 Mar 2018)

I saw the report you just posted. I wondered why The Western Producer didn't mention that fact. 



> “Agriculture Canada has informed us that kabuli chickpeas are exempt from today’s tariff increase.”



Thus I will remain skeptical as this government is not transparent nor honest.


----------



## Old Sweat (3 Mar 2018)

Surely our government would not be so infantile as to believe lying would turn the tariffs into a non-issue, oh, wait . . .


----------



## Altair (3 Mar 2018)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> I saw the report you just posted. I wondered why The Western Producer didn't mention that fact.
> 
> Thus I will remain skeptical as this government is not transparent nor honest.


Fake news eh?


----------



## Altair (3 Mar 2018)

https://www.ctvnews.ca/business/it-s-not-us-it-s-them-why-canada-has-nothing-to-do-with-india-s-new-chickpea-tariff-1.3826385



> India’s new chickpea tariff was presented by Conservatives Friday as another consequence of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s bungled trip to India. But industry insiders say the global trade measure has a built-in exemption for the specific type of chickpeas Canada exports to India.
> 
> To understand the issue, it’s important to understand that there are several types of chickpeas. In Canada, 95 per cent of our exported chickpeas to India are kabuli chickpeas, according to Gordon Bacon, CEO of Pulse Canada, a group that represents chickpea farmers.
> 
> ...


Yes, lets suggest that it was the prime ministers trip to india that made india raise tariffs on 98 percent of the other sources of Chickpea imports.


----------



## jollyjacktar (3 Mar 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> https://www.ctvnews.ca/business/it-s-not-us-it-s-them-why-canada-has-nothing-to-do-with-india-s-new-chickpea-tariff-1.3826385
> Yes, lets suggest that it was the prime ministers trip to india that made india raise tariffs on 98 percent of the other sources of Chickpea imports.



You said it first.


----------



## Altair (3 Mar 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> You said it first.


no i didn't



> Instead, Conservative House Leader Candice Bergen specifically blamed Trudeau’s recent trade trip to India


----------



## Rifleman62 (3 Mar 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> Fake news eh?



No, it's not Fake News. It is the government stating that the tariffs will not apply to Cdn producers. Whether that is true or not remains to be seen.

Fake News is a event/non -event/incident/story/etc fabricated by the news media.


----------



## Retired AF Guy (3 Mar 2018)

The plot thickens!



> B.C. Liberal MP now says he didn’t invite Atwal
> 
> By Kelsey Johnson. Published on Mar 3, 2018 5:18pm
> 
> ...



Rest of article here.


----------



## jollyjacktar (3 Mar 2018)

Oh, there's definitely some thickness involved in these Member's of Parliament.


----------



## ModlrMike (3 Mar 2018)

Rick Mercer's take on the issue:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IN4cCNNDHA4


----------



## jollyjacktar (3 Mar 2018)

And Mark Critch of This Hour Has 22 Minutes.

https://youtu.be/BbmHVnA0JLg


----------



## dapaterson (5 Mar 2018)

In the "Shocked. Shocked!" department, noted political hot potato Jaspal Atwal posted online images of his security passes to parliament hill... as a visitor of Conservative MPs Devinder Shory, Parm Gill and Bal Gosal.

https://twitter.com/PMLaurier/status/970762630616018944


----------



## Fishbone Jones (6 Mar 2018)

........and even Warren Kinsella chimes in and takes the PM to the woodshed. You can't get much further left and liberal than Kinsella.

Apologies if posted elsewhere.

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10156310197768945&id=510623944&ref=bookmarks


----------



## Journeyman (6 Mar 2018)

recceguy said:
			
		

> ...and even Warren Kinsella chimes in...


Now _that_  was funny!   :nod:


----------



## YZT580 (6 Mar 2018)

What is sad is that it will all be forgotten and forgiven in two years and dedicated liberals will vote on mass for he and his party.


----------



## pbi (6 Mar 2018)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> What is sad is that it will all be forgotten and forgiven in two years and dedicated liberals will vote on mass for he and his party.



You assume. Liberals have been tossed out before: it all depends on what comes next, and how many people they piss off. Buggering up the economy would be a swamp for them. (And they see that too, which is no doubt why they have consulted Tory expertise in their attempts to defend a Tory NAFTA policy against Trump)

There are swing voters of various types (Red Tories like me, for example) who are thinking more and more each day that if the Tories can get a reasonable platform together, and generate some more confidence in their leader, we might just vote PC (again ;D)


----------



## RangerRay (6 Mar 2018)

recceguy said:
			
		

> ........and even Warren Kinsella chimes in and takes the PM to the woodshed. You can't get much further left and liberal than Kinsella.
> 
> Apologies if posted elsewhere.
> 
> https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10156310197768945&id=510623944&ref=bookmarks



He is a frequent guest on "Charles Adler Tonight" on Corus talk radio stations in Western Canada and Ontario.  Since I started listening frequently last fall (when Morneau was rolling out the changes to small business taxes), Kinsella has been very critical of the Liberals.  I haven't seen Kinsella this critical of the Grits since his old boss, Chretien, was pushed out by Martin's caucus putsch.


----------



## pbi (6 Mar 2018)

RangerRay said:
			
		

> I haven't seen Kinsella this critical of the Grits since his old boss, Chretien, was pushed out by Martin's caucus putsch.



Damn those people who just won't fit into stereotypes!! ;D


----------



## pbi (6 Mar 2018)

So, now for something (slightly..) different.
A while back I suggested that the real "left wing" in Canada. who are opposed to everything on principle, at some point shade off into Marxists and Anarchists.

Well, here they are in all their glory:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/hamilton/locke-street-riot-1.4564035

The usual rhetoric. Their target (ironically) seems to have been the small businesses of people who might be bumper-stickered as "left wingers" because they support various social causes, or  try to run ethically based business, or use organic products or whatever. 

Well, as usual, the real "left wingers" (as opposed to the left of centres) have no time for that sort of soppy rubbish! Smash those cowardly gentrified lace curtain socialists!! 

Just as "real" right-wingers have no time for "cuckservatives".

It's idiots like these, and the people on their side of the centre who refuse to disavow and condemn them(left or right), who are making reasonable political discourse more and more difficult.


----------



## jollyjacktar (6 Mar 2018)

And inaction on the side of authorities who let them run amok without swooping and scooping them up.


----------



## pbi (6 Mar 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> And inaction on the side of authorities who let them run amok without swooping and scooping them up.



Actually, if you read the Inspector's account, he decided (probably wisely) that the two constables on the scene wouldn't achieve much and might be at risk on their own. He pulled them back. He then triggered a much larger deployment, but it sounds like by the time that was getting traction, the anarchists had already started dispersing. 

If people don't apply for a parade permit, you can't be sure a march or assembly will happen, so it's pretty hard to justify deploying too many resources "just in case". That said, given the nature of the folks gathering at the Anarchist Book Show (how would _*that *_work, anyway...? ??? ), some more uniforms handy  might have been a good idea.


----------



## Cloud Cover (6 Mar 2018)

CBC conducts own investigation into Coulton Boushie death:  _RCMP 'sloppy' and 'negligent' in investigating Colten Boushie's death, say independent experts_

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/rcmp-sloppy-and-negligent-in-investigating-boushie-death-say-independent-experts-1.4564050

The only sentence that is relevant to the whole thing is of course, just about at the end of the article: "The experts CBC consulted agreed that errors were made, but did not conclude it would have changed the outcome of the trial."

The Crown has until March 12 to appeal, and with the political crap storm and probable violence that will occur if they don't, we can expect an appeal likely on a technical or evidentiary matter, and not the charge to the jury.


----------



## Cloud Cover (6 Mar 2018)

pbi: I tend to agree especially on the apparent need to vandalize and destroy, and while the quote below is no excuse, it is also stands for a proposition that some people with core marxist beliefs are at work, and marxists are only vandals until they take power, at which point ruthless control and discipline are used against people to preserve power over property. As Mr. Sallows once pointed out, the best way to deal with the left is to let the extreme left take over for a while:  

"When someone decides to be a capitalist, making money through their investments rather than through their labour, their position relative to changes in the city becomes fundamentally different. Gentrification, as an example: when rents go up, it means they make more money (rather than lose their home); when prices go up and rich people move in, it means a chance to sell luxury goods (while we work for minimum wage); when more police and surveillance come in, it secures your investment (while we get harassed and pushed out)," the post reads.

I wonder if this is just the beginning of an upsurge of very radical, very violent  urban issue where any excuse will do...


----------



## pbi (6 Mar 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> pbi: I tend to agree especially on the apparent need to vandalize and destroy, and while the quote below is no excuse, it is also stands for a proposition that some people with core marxist beliefs are at work, and marxists are only vandals until they take power, at which point ruthless control and discipline are used against people to preserve power over property. As Mr. Sallows once pointed out, the best way to deal with the left is to let the extreme left take over for a while:
> 
> "When someone decides to be a capitalist, making money through their investments rather than through their labour, their position relative to changes in the city becomes fundamentally different. Gentrification, as an example: when rents go up, it means they make more money (rather than lose their home); when prices go up and rich people move in, it means a chance to sell luxury goods (while we work for minimum wage); when more police and surveillance come in, it secures your investment (while we get harassed and pushed out)," the post reads.
> 
> I wonder if this is just the beginning of an upsurge of very radical, very violent  urban issue where any excuse will do...



IMHO "gentrification" is an over used term and beloved of people who are too shiftless to do anything other than whine about somebody else's success. I would much, much rather see a neighbourhood where small business (even left of centre small business!!!) thrive, with cleaned up streets and parks, and tidied-up homes where people show some pride of ownership and sense of community, than a run down, garbage strewn, addict infested s****hole where you need six locks on your door.

Now, that doesn't mean I automatically support soaring rents, huge condos all over the place, and shops nobody can afford to go to. (My daughter rents in a recovering neighbourhhod in Kingston and I don't want to see her driven out). This is what these far-left sorts are trying to conjure up when they use the term "gentrification".

I think we have already seen urban violence by the far left such as Black Bloc, etc. Fortunately I think that they represent a very small minority of Canadians, just as their opposite numbers (or is that "equivalents") on the far right are a tiny group (in Canada, at least.

These people no more represent me (or anybody else) because I have some left of centre ideas, than La Meute or StormFront represents me because I have some right of centre ideas.


----------



## FSTO (6 Mar 2018)

RangerRay said:
			
		

> He is a frequent guest on "Charles Adler Tonight" on Corus talk radio stations in Western Canada and Ontario.  Since I started listening frequently last fall (when Morneau was rolling out the changes to small business taxes), Kinsella has been very critical of the Liberals.  I haven't seen Kinsella this critical of the Grits since his old boss, Chretien, was pushed out by Martin's caucus putsch.



His little rant about JT's tour of stupidity reminded me of his dad's own Don Quixote moment!
http://www.cbc.ca/archives/entry/trudeaus-push-for-cold-war-peace


----------



## jollyjacktar (6 Mar 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> Actually, if you read the Inspector's account, he decided (probably wisely) that the two constables on the scene wouldn't achieve much and might be at risk on their own. He pulled them back. He then triggered a much larger deployment, but it sounds like by the time that was getting traction, the anarchists had already started dispersing.
> 
> If people don't apply for a parade permit, you can't be sure a march or assembly will happen, so it's pretty hard to justify deploying too many resources "just in case". That said, given the nature of the folks gathering at the Anarchist Book Show (how would _*that *_work, anyway...? ??? ), some more uniforms handy  might have been a good idea.



There's an Anarchist Bookstore in Montreal.  I've seen it.  Who knew there were that many colouring book and crayon sets out there about their lifestyle.

I would have expected it should have been possible for a better response as I'm sure they were at it for a while to get their 15 minutes of fame on TV as l saw.


----------



## pbi (6 Mar 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> There's an Anarchist Bookstore in Montreal.  I've seen it.  Who knew there were that many colouring book and crayon sets out there about their lifestyle.
> 
> I would have expected it should have been possible for a better response as I'm sure they were at it for a while to get their 15 minutes of fame on TV as l saw.



Colouring books? Anarchists would never stay between the lines. And everything would be in black and red.


----------



## Jarnhamar (6 Mar 2018)

Kingston sounds lovely this time of year.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/27891/watch-sjw-protesters-besiege-jordan-peterson-talk-james-barrett


----------



## jollyjacktar (6 Mar 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> Colouring books? Anarchists would never stay between the lines. And everything would be in black and red.



I don't think they're intelligent enough for anything more advanced past Dick and Jane books.


----------



## pbi (7 Mar 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Kingston sounds lovely this time of year.
> 
> https://www.dailywire.com/news/27891/watch-sjw-protesters-besiege-jordan-peterson-talk-james-barrett



This was on campus so largely invisible to most of the population. On the way home from work yesterday, I was listening to CBC covering the story. They gave air time to on individual who defended the right of the Professor to speak (and of the University to give him the space), but they also interviewed a woman who was against Peterson. Ok-fair enough to cover both sides.

She trotted out accusations of hate, marginalization, fear, incitement of violence, etc. Her argument seemed to centre around the idea that if the student body hear speakers like Johnson,  numbers of them will immediately be inspired to harrass and attack LGBTQ students on campus. She classified his presentation as "hate speech".

The interviewer asked her some good questions, such as "who, then, should be allowed to decide what speech is allowed?" and "doesn't Johnson have a right to express his opinion also?". Her answers (after some logical gymnastics) were both basically that people like Johnson should be shut down.

Now, I've never heard Johnson speak, and I'm only partially informed on his stance. I don't know what he said in Kingston. If he incited people to break the law or to commit violence, that is against the law. If he actively incited hatred, by saying that LGBTQ people are bad or dangerous or not deserving of rights only because of their sexual orientation, then that is also wrong. I have two gay adult children, and a good friend has a trans adult child. I don't want them hurt, or treated stupidly, by anybody.

But, if all Johnson did was say that he doesn't want to use certain types of pronouns, or he disagrees with the movement to change the language, or he thinks free speech is being stifled, then I say let him speak freely, and safely. Let him be challenged and debated: not heckled, shouted down or threatened.

Is that not the whole idea behind the free exchange of ideas which should characterize a unversity? Kudos to Queen's for letting him speak. Next time, allow a forum for civilized debate and let's see how that goes.


----------



## FSTO (7 Mar 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> This was on campus so largely invisible to most of the population. On the way home from work yesterday, I was listening to CBC covering the story. They gave air time to on individual who defended the right of the Professor to speak (and of the University to give him the space), but they also interviewed a woman who was against Peterson. Ok-fair enough to cover both sides.
> 
> She trotted out accusations of hate, marginalization, fear, incitement of violence, etc. Her argument seemed to centre around the idea that if the student body hear speakers like Johnson,  numbers of them will immediately be inspired to harrass and attack LGBTQ students on campus. She classified his presentation as "hate speech".
> 
> ...



Have a listen to this and you can form your own opinion.

http://podcasts.joerogan.net/podcasts/jordan-peterson-3


----------



## Jarnhamar (7 Mar 2018)

[quote author=pbi] 

Now, I've never heard Johnson speak, and I'm only partially informed on his stance. I don't know what he said in Kingston. If he incited people to break the law or to commit violence, that is against the law. If he actively incited hatred, by saying that LGBTQ people are bad or dangerous or not deserving of rights only because of their sexual orientation, then that is also wrong. I have two gay adult children, and a good friend has a trans adult child. I don't want them hurt, or treated stupidly, by anybody.

But, if all Johnson did was say that he doesn't want to use certain types of pronouns, or he disagrees with the movement to change the language, or he thinks free speech is being stifled, then I say let him speak freely, and safely. Let him be challenged and debated: not heckled, shouted down or threatened.

[/quote]

As someone who voted Liberal and sorta left wing (maybe?) it would be really interesting if you listened to some of his speeches and see if you agree with him or if you think he's inciting hate.  I've listened to a few of his speeches and I've never heard anything hateful or spiteful. The whole premise Ive seen is that he feels the government shouldn't try to force him to use made up pronouns, or especially face legal consequences if he doesn't.

See if he deserves people smashing on windows or, as we see in other videos, getting removed from his speech and trashing video and sound equipment on the way out.


----------



## pbi (7 Mar 2018)

FSTO said:
			
		

> Have a listen to this and you can form your own opinion.
> 
> http://podcasts.joerogan.net/podcasts/jordan-peterson-3



Thanks. I will do that as soon as I get a chance. Looks like it's two hours long. The first few bits of what I heard sound reasonable enough. Cheers.


----------



## pbi (7 Mar 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> As someone who voted Liberal and sorta left wing (maybe?) it would be really interesting if you listened to some of his speeches and see if you agree with him or if you think he's inciting hate.  I've listened to a few of his speeches and I've never heard anything hateful or spiteful. The whole premise Ive seen is that he feels the government shouldn't try to force him to use made up pronouns, or especially face legal consequences if he doesn't.
> 
> See if he deserves people smashing on windows or, as we see in other videos, getting removed from his speech and trashing video and sound equipment on the way out.



AAAHH!!! you're bumper-stickering me!!

OK...just kidding 

As noted, I will better inform myself.  I expect that he is not the devil that some these far-left types are making him out to be. I agree completely about the stupid disruptive behaviour.


----------



## FSTO (7 Mar 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> Thanks. I will do that as soon as I get a chance. Looks like it's two hours long. The first few bits of what I heard sound reasonable enough. Cheers.



I listen to Rogan when I walk to work. All his podcasts are at least 2hrs long and his guest range from Alex Jones (he got him drunk) to some hard core lefties. You get to really find out about a person when they are chatting for a long time. Thats why I hate the 5 min panel shows.


----------



## Journeyman (7 Mar 2018)

There's _always_  a silver lining.
Dick Fadden also spoke at Queen's yesterday -- talking about threats to Canada, security, intelligence... all those nasty, oppressive things.  anic:   

But the rent-an-offended mob was too focused on Peterson to notice.   ;D


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (7 Mar 2018)

Do you know if Dick's speech is available online? I would love to see if he addressed the PM's drawing a top civil servant to the press just to CYA.


----------



## Good2Golf (7 Mar 2018)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> There's _always_  a silver lining.
> Dick Fadden also spoke at Queen's yesterday -- talking about threats to Canada, security, intelligence... all those nasty, oppressive things.  anic:
> 
> But the rent-an-offended mob was too focused on Peterson to notice.   ;D



Was Daniel Jean in the audience taking notes?


----------



## Journeyman (7 Mar 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> Do you know if Dick's speech is available online? I would love to see if he addressed the PM's drawing a top civil servant to the press just to CYA.


It's not.  He seemed to have 6-8 bullet points that he wanted to address, then took questions.  

There was no mention of, or attendance by, Daniel Jean.


----------



## ballz (7 Mar 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> She trotted out accusations of hate, marginalization, fear, incitement of violence, etc. Her argument seemed to centre around the idea that if the student body hear speakers like Johnson,  numbers of them will immediately be inspired to harrass and attack LGBTQ students on campus. She classified his presentation as "hate speech".



Indeed. That is exactly what the radical wings do... the left-wing, however, seems to be very successful at it for some reason. It's amazing how many people think this is what Jordan Petersen is and does based only on what they've heard the crazies shouting. It's actually quite amazing that they can could defame him given how what he says isn't even very controversial.



			
				pbi said:
			
		

> Now, I've never heard Johnson speak, and I'm only partially informed on his stance. I don't know what he said in Kingston. If he incited people to break the law or to commit violence, that is against the law. If he actively incited hatred, by saying that LGBTQ people are bad or dangerous or not deserving of rights only because of their sexual orientation, then that is also wrong. I have two gay adult children, and a good friend has a trans adult child. I don't want them hurt, or treated stupidly, by anybody.
> 
> But, if all Johnson did was say that he doesn't want to use certain types of pronouns, or he disagrees with the movement to change the language, or he thinks free speech is being stifled, then I say let him speak freely, and safely. Let him be challenged and debated: not heckled, shouted down or threatened.
> 
> Is that not the whole idea behind the free exchange of ideas which should characterize a unversity? Kudos to Queen's for letting him speak. Next time, allow a forum for civilized debate and let's see how that goes.



There is some confusion about the pronoun issue. Petersen *never* had a trans student in his class whom he refused to call by certain pronouns. That simply did not happen. The university administration had pushed out direction, due to the legal advice they received regarding new legislation, that alternate pronouns should/will be used. It is the compelled use of certain language that he fought against. Which is telling... it wasn't good enough that he said, if asked in a cordial manner, he would probably use the pronouns... he must support the government in compelling people's language or else he's *insert bumper sticker label here*.

But now, due to the nature of these conversations, he's branched off into other topics such as gender equality, economic inequality, etc... And those are much more interesting than the pronoun issue. He's a clinical psychologist and from that offers a lot of really interesting perspectives backed up by very interesting data in those fields.

The ironic thing about it all is, he has made it very clear he thinks "alt-right" ideologies are just awful and claims to have pulled thousands of disillusioned young men away from going down that road (both through his profession and now through his... new activities). Meanwhile, the radical left-wing people trying to assassinate his character by framing him as a Nazi are driving more and more disillusioned young men towards radical right-wing ideologies every day.


----------



## ModlrMike (7 Mar 2018)

ballz said:
			
		

> It is the compelled use of certain language that he fought against. Which is telling... it wasn't good enough that he said, if asked in a cordial manner, he would probably use the pronouns... he must support the government in compelling people's language or else he's *insert bumper sticker label here*



We're going to tell you how to speak, and we'll punish you if you don't. 

Sounds pretty Orwellian to me. 1984 anyone?


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (7 Mar 2018)

Doubleplusgood post, ModlrMike.  :nod:


----------



## FJAG (7 Mar 2018)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> We're going to tell you how to speak, and we'll punish you if you don't.
> 
> Sounds pretty Orwellian to me. 1984 anyone?



The Ontario Human Rights Commission's position on this issue is currently set out on their web page here:

http://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/questions-and-answers-about-gender-identity-and-pronouns

Note that the OHRC includes "gender identity" and "gender expression" as protected rights.  The powers under the OHRC are:



> Infringement prohibited
> 9 No person shall infringe or do, directly or indirectly, anything that infringes a right under this Part.  R.S.O. 1990, c. H.19, s. 9
> 
> . . .
> ...


----------



## Cloud Cover (7 Mar 2018)

ballz said:
			
		

> The ironic thing about it all is, he has made it very clear he thinks "alt-right" ideologies are just awful and claims to have pulled thousands of disillusioned young men away from going down that road (both through his profession and now through his... new activities). Meanwhile, the radical left-wing people trying to assassinate his character by framing him as a Nazi are driving more and more disillusioned young men towards radical right-wing ideologies every day.


100% and, there is now even an upstart cottage industry for therapists helping young white men counselling them that it is ok be white, and they have nothing to be ashamed or guilty for.
In this rat race life that has been created by technology and instant flash mob rage, more and more people just want to power down and live a quiet life and get along with everyone. Not very many would be happy if they were fully aware that there are people out in the world looking to collect a pay cheque by exploiting the OHRC, and I am hoping the HRT's are alive to that sort of behaviour.


----------



## Good2Golf (7 Mar 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> Thanks. I will do that as soon as I get a chance. Looks like it's two hours long. The first few bits of what I heard sound reasonable enough. Cheers.



pbi, perhaps a shorter example showing Jordan's unedited responses to Cathy Newman regarding his response to transsexual support activists (re: the use of trans pronoun, issue):  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iEJ1QHu-KEQ

For those interested, an interesting post-interview analysis/self-analysis with Petersen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXkLaZLSzgM

I think you will find that agreement with Petersen or not, he is a very logical and non-personalizing debater.

Regards,
G2G


----------



## Cloud Cover (7 Mar 2018)

Lots of valuable court time being used up by these issues: 
http://canlii.ca/t/h3qw7


----------



## FJAG (7 Mar 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> Lots of valuable court time being used up by these issues:
> http://canlii.ca/t/h3qw7


An interesting case. Good judge. Solid decision.

 :cheers:


----------



## Cloud Cover (7 Mar 2018)

That poor judge. I can't imagine having to deal with that day in and day out.  I agree it was a solid decision, especially the awarding of costs.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (7 Mar 2018)

That Case does not illustrate your point Whiskey601.

It is a Motion to change child custody's case and one factual point amongst many others to demonstrate that the mother is not properly caring for or capable of caring for the development of the child whose custody is at issue is the fact that she (not the child) claims that to refer to the child in a "misgendered" way is the cause of the child misbehaviour at school. Those type of motions always end up having many types of human behaviour that can only be described as "petty" used as evidence against one person or the other. It does not make the matter overall a waste of valuable court time, especially if it ends up in a decision that is in the best interest of the child.

The judge concluded that, in view of all the facts, it is in fact the mother who is the problem for that child, and gives the full custody to the father from now on.

I can tell you that, it is a lot more difficult for fathers to get full custody of children than for mothers (an interesting factual situation that is rarely alluded to by "equal-rights" and "social justice" warriors), so her behaviour must have been (and if you read the whole case, is) pretty fu...-up to get that result.



			
				FJAG said:
			
		

> The Ontario Human Rights Commission's position on this issue is currently set out on their web page here:
> 
> http://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/questions-and-answers-about-gender-identity-and-pronouns
> 
> Note that the OHRC includes "gender identity" and "gender expression" as protected rights.  The powers under the OHRC are:


  

And that, FJAG, is the reason that certain people from Western Canada (we won't name him - OK, its Ezra Levant ;D) have referred to the various provincial human rights commission's investigators as the "Thought Police" and the Commission themselves as "Kangaroo courts".

It is amazing how many people fail to grasp that you cannot have a society that has, simultaneously, freedom of speech and a right to protected feelings and self-respect (whatever that second one, self-respect, could possibly be since, if it is "self" then it is internalized and hearing comments from the someone else should not affect it - such external comment if it would affect the respect for a person in the public in general would affect dignity, not self-respect))


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (7 Mar 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> That poor judge. I can't imagine having to deal with that day in and day out.  I agree it was a solid decision, especially the awarding of costs.



The awarding of costs as was done is the normal standard for Ontario courts. Nothing to see here.


----------



## Cloud Cover (7 Mar 2018)

Which point- I said that valuable court time was being used up, not that the issue itself shouldn't have been heard. The gender pronoun and gender identification issues are rapidly adding to the complexity of some family law cases.  The Applicant (father) of course had an uphill battle, but the ongoing actions and the apparent toxic attitude of the "agender, non-binary Transgender" respondent who agreed to be referred to as "mother" surely made it easier for him to help out his child.   Of course costs are awarded every day. The motions judge limited the Respondent to 3 pages as a response to a Applicant's bill of costs including any offer to settle, and although brevity is preferred for those submissions that particular restriction in this case is not within the normal standard for Ontario courts and is a very strong hint that the court had heard enough of the matter. 
  
I'm not going to litigate the fricking thing with you. I just posted it as an example of the complexity. 

edit: added "toxic"


----------



## Jarnhamar (7 Mar 2018)

> 1. An order directing the party who infringed the right to pay monetary compensation to the party whose right was infringed for loss arising out of the infringement, including compensation for injury to dignity, feelings and self-respect.
> 
> 2. An order directing the party who infringed the right to make restitution to the party whose right was infringed, other than through monetary compensation, for loss arising out of the infringement, including restitution for injury to dignity, feelings and self-respect.



So can I get restitution for someone calling me a Nazi and hurting my feelings?


----------



## Journeyman (7 Mar 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> So can I get restitution for someone calling me a Nazi and hurting my feelings?


It's only hurtful because we'll never have the Nazi's degree of governmental support and defence spending.   ;D


Note: it's a joke.   Nazi = bad.   :nod:


----------



## Jarnhamar (7 Mar 2018)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> Note: it's a joke.   Nazi = bad.   :nod:



I shouldn't mention my great uncle in the Fallschirmjäger airforce attacking the Greek and Allied forces on Crete enemies.

But a nice settlement sure would pay for some sweet riding gear....with skulls.


----------



## Journeyman (7 Mar 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> But a nice settlement sure would pay for some sweet riding gear....with skulls.


Excellent.   ;D


----------



## Jarnhamar (7 Mar 2018)

https://globalnews.ca/news/4066542/woman-arrested-window-damaged-following-protest-at-queens-over-controversial-lecture/



> During the protest, a stained glass window at the historic building was smashed.  A 38-year-old Kingston woman was arrested and is facing a number of charges including mischief, assault police and carrying a concealed weapon.
> 
> According to police, the suspect, who is not a student, broke the window while standing on a ledge banging on it.  She then fled but was picked up not far from the demonstration by plainclothes officers.  Once handcuffed, police say the woman became violent and began kicking at one officer.  Police say the suspect also tried to kick out the window of a police cruiser.



Swipe left on this one fellas


----------



## ModlrMike (7 Mar 2018)

At the risk of sending this thread down the free speech rabbit hole, this should be interesting:

https://www.munkdebates.com/The-Debates/Political-Correctness


----------



## ballz (7 Mar 2018)

Well since we're on the topic... a black female Member of Parliament recently tried to marginalize a white man's opinion prior to telling him to be quiet...

https://globalnews.ca/news/4066282/maxime-bernier-liberal-mp-twitter-barb/

Seeing the error of her ways, she admitting telling him to be quiet was "not cool" in the weakest apology ever, while not batting an eyelash at the fact that she tried to marginalize his opinion due him being a white male ("check your privilege").

Max did the right there here by calling a spade a spade and not accepting that weaksauce apology.


----------



## YZT580 (7 Mar 2018)

Max is far closer to the concept of equality than she will ever be.  A world where everyone is colourblind.  No wonder is refused the meeting: they are on opposite sides of a very wide divide.


----------



## Altair (7 Mar 2018)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> Max is far closer to the concept of equality than she will ever be.  A world where everyone is colourblind.  No wonder is refused the meeting: they are on opposite sides of a very wide divide.


I wish max was leader.


----------



## FJAG (7 Mar 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> . . .
> 
> And that, FJAG, is the reason that certain people from Western Canada (we won't name him - OK, its Ezra Levant ;D) have referred to the various provincial human rights commission's investigators as the "Thought Police" and the Commission themselves as "Kangaroo courts".
> 
> . . .



Human Rights commissions are generally curious things which generally reflect the attitude of the prevailing legislature. When I was appointed to the Manitoba Human Rights Commission as a hearing officer it was by a Conservative Minister of Justice. When the NDP were voted in I dutifully tendered my resignation and, after a lengthy delay, it was dutifully accepted by the new Minister.

One thing was that while at the time all of the hearing officers were of the conservative persuasion, the permanent staff (which does much of the vetting and even pre hearing negotiations of the case) were fairly much of a kinder, gentler, more socialist bent.

In the end though it's the legislation that governs. As a hearing officer you have to follow the law as written and (to an extent) as decided by prior court or tribunal decisions. The trend is that the legislation continues to expand and makes more and more personal characteristics subject to protection. In my humble opinion, one needs to remember that there is absolutely nothing to stop a white male from seeking protection under the act. The last time I looked, white was a colour, European was a place of origin and ancestry, Caucasian a race and male a sex.

 :cheers:


----------



## Altair (8 Mar 2018)

John Ivison: Trudeau's blunder-filled India trip sinks Liberals in the polls: http://nationalpost.com/news/politics/john-ivison-trudeaus-blunder-filled-india-trip-sinks-liberals-in-the-polls



> On Wednesday Abacus Data released a huge poll of 4,023 Canadians that found Liberal support has dipped to 36 per cent, the lowest the company has measured since the 2015 election. The Conservatives were on 33 per cent, followed by the NDP on 18 per cent. Most of the Liberals slippage occurred in Ontario and, given the static impressions of Conservative leader Andrew Scheer and NDP leader Jagmeet Singh, it suggests the Liberal dip in support was self-inflicted — and linked to the Prime Minister’s trip to India.
> 
> The most telling statistic was the graph tracking Trudeau’s personal popularity, which has dipped from 47 per cent to 39 per cent in the last month, just as negative impressions have grown from 31 per cent to 38 per cent. In other words, as many people who have a positive view of Trudeau have a negative view.
> 
> ...



Funny that it could be a trip to India that sinks the LPC. 

Maybe stay home next time? 

He's losing young people,  people who will either vote NDP or greens or just stay home. 

As long as the Conservatives don't touch legal weed they will ditch the liberals en mass and that makes for a easy win for scheer.


----------



## Lumber (8 Mar 2018)

I don't know... We were talking about this at work today. I have feeling for the parties and their platforms themselves which are different from the leaders that would lead the executive. Right now, I feel like even though Trudeau is losing popularity, the liberal party and their 337 other MPs are more enticing as a whole than Andrew Sheer and the CPC.

I like the CPC more than Trudeau (right now), but I like the liberal party way more than I like Sheer.

This may be a silly way of looking at things, but then again Politics is silly business.


----------



## ModlrMike (8 Mar 2018)

Lumber said:
			
		

> ... the liberal party and their 337 other MPs ...



You do realize that there are only 338 total seats in the house?


----------



## Lumber (8 Mar 2018)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> You do realize that there are only 338 total seats in the house?



Yes... 

Sorry, I meant total candidates. Elected MPs and everyone else who ran but didn't win.


----------



## Altair (8 Mar 2018)

Lumber said:
			
		

> I don't know... We were talking about this at work today. I have feeling for the parties and their platforms themselves which are different from the leaders that would lead the executive. Right now, I feel like even though Trudeau is losing popularity, the liberal party and their 337 other MPs are more enticing as a whole than Andrew Sheer and the CPC.
> 
> I like the CPC more than Trudeau (right now), but I like the liberal party way more than I like Sheer.
> 
> This may be a silly way of looking at things, but then again Politics is silly business.


Yes, but how many people vote for the leader versus their individual MP?


----------



## jollyjacktar (8 Mar 2018)

With any luck Mr. Dressup will be moving to Stornaway in 19.  Or better still, Montreal.


----------



## pbi (8 Mar 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> Yes, but how many people vote for the leader versus their individual MP?



Good question. As I mentioned earlier, my reasons for going Liberal in the last Federal election had very little or nothing to do with Trudeau. I was never really certain about him from the get-go, but my other reasons outweighed that. 

Now, I'm not so sure anymore, at all. He continues to disappoint and demonstrate lack of depth.

No doubt personalities of leaders have a big effect in voting: I think we live in an age of very superficial thinking, where image and noise are more important for many people than serious critical thinking about issues. An attractive, attention-grabbing leader can attract votes, even if there is little or no substance behind them. A less flashy leader may have the best judgement and the soundest policies but still not stand a chance.


----------



## Journeyman (8 Mar 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> .....my reasons for going Liberal in the last Federal election had very little or nothing to do with Trudeau.


Interesting. We're in the same riding, and our Liberal candidate/member was a _much_  better choice than the other options, yet I cast my vote solely against his party because of Trudeau. I feel vindicated on an almost daily basis.



> I think we live in an age of very superficial thinking, where image and noise are more important for many people than serious critical thinking about issues.


  Often, superficial to the point of absence when discussing politics/economics.  Pavlov, and his dog, should have been political theorists.


----------



## Jarnhamar (8 Mar 2018)

[quote author=Journeyman]
Interesting. We're in the same riding, and our Liberal candidate/member was a _much_  better choice than the other options, yet I cast my vote solely against his party because of Trudeau. I feel vindicated on an almost daily basis.
[/quote]

Myself as well. My local liberal candidate was a really cool guy, pro firearms, wanted a smart and thoughtful approach to immigration and a few other key points for me. Liked him a lot. More than the Conservative candidate. I couldn't justify voting for him if it meant Trudeau getting elected though.


----------



## Remius (8 Mar 2018)

So the shine is coming of the PM (much sooner than I thought I must admit) and the polls seem to be reflecting that.  Still plenty of time to get through it or to make it worse.  Given the PMOs lacklustre ability to manage damage control and poor judgement calls I think it will actually get worse.

That being said, I never thought that Scheer stood a chance and to be frank I still believe Trudeau will win the next election (likely a minority though).

But...

What would happen if Mr. Scheer wins or even if he manages to get the Trudeau Liberals into a weak minority situation?  I can't see him stepping down even in the latter scenario.  This would certainly foil the plans of many conservatives who were waiting in the wings thinking that Scheer would lose and step down.


----------



## FJAG (8 Mar 2018)

Just to complete my prior post on the Ontario Human Rights Code, the Canadian Human Rights Code and the Criminal Code in their most recent amendment (assented to June 19th, 2017) added "gender identity or expression" to it's list of prohibited grounds and hate crimes: 



> An Act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Criminal Code
> S.C. 2017, c. 13
> 
> Assented to 2017-06-19
> ...



 :cheers:


----------



## Lumber (8 Mar 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> Just to complete my prior post on the Ontario Human Rights Code, the Canadian Human Rights Code and the Criminal Code in their most recent amendment (assented to June 19th, 2017) added "gender identity or expression" to it's list of prohibited grounds and hate crimes:
> 
> :cheers:



Right, that's pretty clear, you can't discriminate against someone based on their gender identity or expression, and I'm behind that 100%.

Is it considered discriminatory, though, to refuse to use someone's preferred pronoun? 

Rude; yes. That's like the course instructor choosing to call you Sally because he doesn't want to have to pronounce Zalachenko every time you F*** up. Is that considered discriminatory? 

I'm not making a point, I'm legitimately asking. If someone informed me, after calling them "Sir" that they preferred to be call "Mx", I'd oblige. If the guy I was standing next to said "screw that, you look like a Sir, I'm calling you Sir", I'd call that guy and asshole and think less of him, but I'm not convinced, _yet_, that that should be a human rights violation.


----------



## Good2Golf (8 Mar 2018)

...or, use the person's name, not a pronoun.


----------



## Loachman (8 Mar 2018)

"It" - The original gender-neutral pronoun.


----------



## pbi (8 Mar 2018)

Lumber said:
			
		

> Right, that's pretty clear, you can't discriminate against someone based on their gender identity or expression, and I'm behind that 100%.
> 
> Is it considered discriminatory, though, to refuse to use someone's preferred pronoun?
> 
> ...



Good question. Hopefully, it can be left as a matter of  politeness and consideration, and maybe even logic. 

To a certain extent, I can see  the concern transgender people might have. I see it like this. If your name was Bob, but you decide to have it legally changed to "Bill", why would people persist in calling you Bob?  Wouldn't you be right to insist on being called by your correct name, since that's how you want to identify yourself? 

In the same way, if people once knew you as male and called you "he/him", but you made the decision to change your gender identity to female (because that's what you really believed you were), doesn't it follow that people should call you "she/her"?

I guess it gets a bit more confusing for people who consider themselves gender neutral, but it seems common decency to me that you refer to people in the way they prefer.


----------



## McG (8 Mar 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> I don't want to spin this into a male vs female thing. Women should make the same as men for doing the same job, full stop.  Similar jobs? Well that's not the same job (right?).  During the G20 summit some Police officers, which included females, were making something sick like $800 a day they said with overtime and all that when corporals, who at that moment in time were doing the same security task, were making standard corporals pay like $120 a day or whatever.
> 
> I picked a male dominated field and my house boss picked a female dominated one. She made $20'000 more than me last year (and 5 of those months I was away from my family).
> 
> The mail carrier thing is an interesting point but at first glance that seems to be a matter of urban vs rural rather than male vs female. It would be a story if male mail carriers in the country made more money than female mail carriers.


Here is the article: http://www.macleans.ca/society/why-do-men-make-more-money-than-women/


----------



## kratz (8 Mar 2018)

I can work with common decency, allowing my own freedoms of speech.

I did flip when I heard of being forced / compelled to use terms that I never heard of,
nor understand. Why? 

The direction laws and policy are headed see the pendulum swinging too far in one direction.


----------



## mariomike (8 Mar 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> An attractive, attention-grabbing leader can attract votes, even if there is little or no substance behind them. A less flashy leader may have the best judgement and the soundest policies but still not stand a chance.




Reminds of something I read, 

“It's seduction, Pete. He'll back the country into a corner with his charm, like it's a woman. When America sees that it's a choice between Jack and twitchy old Dick Nixon, who do you think they'll get between the sheets with?” 

James Ellroy.

Perhaps a similar political phenomenon exists in Canada?


----------



## ModlrMike (8 Mar 2018)

India... the trip that keeps on giving:

Gatecrashers and a run on the Crown Royal: The other screw-ups on Trudeau’s India trip



> The National Post has also learned that Surrey, B.C., MP Randeep Sarai and Winnipeg MP Kevin Lamoureux posed for pictures with a former Punjab state cabinet minister who is under investigation for his role in an international drug cartel. (Sarai, recall, is already embroiled in controversy for his role in convicted terrorist Jaspal Atwal attending events on the trip.)


----------



## jollyjacktar (8 Mar 2018)

Comedy Central of the North.... :


----------



## Loachman (8 Mar 2018)

http://business.financialpost.com/opinion/ted-morton-the-trudeau-liberals-are-campaigning-on-strangling-our-oil-industry

Ted Morton: The Trudeau Liberals are campaigning on strangling our oil industry

When you replace the National Energy Board with a new agency named the Impact Assessment Agency, the message is clear: environmental impact is replacing economic benefit as Canada’s primary policy focus 

March 6, 2018 6:30 AM EST

Last Updated March 6, 2018 6:30 AM EST

"Last month, we learned from Scotiabank that lack of export pipeline capacity and the resulting discount on Canadian oil will cost the Canadian economy $15.6 billion a year, or nearly $43 million a day. That loss affects provincial and federal revenues as much as corporate income. We are all losing.

"Also last month came the unveiling of the Trudeau government’s new suite of policies for reviewing and approving major energy infrastructure projects, such as oil and gas pipelines.

"So is there anything in the new rules that will address our $43-million-a-day leak to our Southern neighbour? Unfortunately, the answer appears to be no. The new process appears to further increase uncertainty for future pipeline proponents and investors.

"At the symbolic level, the messaging is problematic. When you replace an agency named the National Energy Board (NEB) with a new agency named the Impact Assessment Agency (IAA), the message is clear: environmental impact is replacing economic benefit as Canada’s primary policy focus when it comes to new energy projects.

"The details are equally discouraging. The proposed changes broaden the number of criteria that a new pipeline must meet. These now include not just climate change and enhanced Aboriginal consultation, but also _*“the intersection of sex and gender with other identity factors.” *_For a pipeline?"


----------



## Loachman (8 Mar 2018)

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-trudeau-is-an-insult-to-feminism-and-to-seriousness/

Trudeau is an insult to feminism – and to seriousness

Margaret Wente 

Published March 5, 2018

Updated 1 day ago

"After that, he came home to introduce his relentlessly female-friendly budget (the one that made 358 references to “gender”). The best that can be said is that nobody minded it too much. Few of the females I know seemed particularly grateful for the extra-special treatment. Like the Indians, they just felt condescended to. “I’m sick of gender politics,” one friend groused to me. “What matters is that we can’t get anything in Asia right.”

"But pandering is what Mr. Trudeau does best. He wants to be more feminist than the feminists and more Bollywood than Shah Rukh Khan. The trouble is that he’s trying way too hard. So he just comes off as opportunistic and condescending. 

"Both the India trip and the budget - both of which should be routine affairs – have exposed the worst defects of Mr. Trudeau and his team. They are all politics and no policy; all play-acting and no substance. Just last year the international media were styling Mr. Trudeau as “the free world’s best hope,” as Rolling Stone breathlessly put it. Now, he’s Mr. Dressup. The scornful headlines from the global media were nothing short of epic. “Trudeau’s India trip is a total disaster - and he has only himself to blame,” went one headline in The Washington Post. 

"We have some hard lessons to learn. The India trip exposed Mr. Trudeau and his team as shallow, fundamentally unserious, and seriously incompetent. The budget document was far less harmful; it merely checked off all the usual social-justice boxes. In addition to a new paternity leave, it included more money for female entrepreneurs, $23-million for new multiculturalism programs and a national anti-racism plan, $214-million to remove racial barriers, promote gender equality, and combat homophobia and transphobia, and other funding for “racialized and immigrant women.”

"Somehow I doubt that the magic incantation of the word “gender” is enough to win the hearts of middle-class women.

"What’s interesting here is not the amounts of money, which are relatively small, but the world view, which comes straight from a gender-studies course. Women as a gender need special help because they are automatically oppressed, and “racialized” women need even more special help. Instead of being individuals with different preferences, goals, beliefs, and interests, all Canadians are defined by our inherent traits of gender, ethnicity, class, race and sexual orientation, and are arranged in a sort of hierarchy of oppression. This appears to be the intellectual framework of Mr. Trudeau’s brain trust. 

"The Liberals have a long and robust tradition of pandering to ethnic voters. Now they have divided everyone but white men into minority groups. It’s all about identity politics now. The fight for a colour- and gender-blind society has been replaced by a vision that sees nothing but.

"But people – even women – may be getting tired of it. Maybe people – even women – have higher priorities than being pandered to. A startling new Ipsos poll, taken shortly after Mr. Trudeau’s disastrous India trip, found that the Liberals would get only 33 per cent of the vote if an election were held today − versus 38 per cent for the Conservatives. The Liberal strategy has been to drive a gender wedge between women and the Conservatives. But now they and the Conservatives are tied among women. Meanwhile, the gender gap among male voters has reached a startling 9 percentage points in favour of the Conservatives. 

"One opinion poll doesn’t mean much on its own. But somehow I doubt that the magic incantation of the word “gender” is enough to win the hearts of middle-class women. Women, after all, want what men want: leadership in tough times, a steady hand and seriousness of purpose at the top, someone who will not make a complete hash of things that should be relatively easy to pull off. Because if he screws up something simple, what happens when the going gets rough?"


----------



## Loachman (8 Mar 2018)

http://nationalpost.com/opinion/rex-murphy-perhaps-justin-trudeaus-india-trip-could-have-been-salvaged-with-some-elephants

Rex Murphy: Perhaps Justin Trudeau's India trip could have been salvaged with some elephants?

It’ll be a cold day in Delhi before the Indian government shuts down the Taj Mahal for a Canadian dignitary again

"There were a number of first-class opportunities missed on the Prime Minister’s costume tour of the great democratic state of India. The merest child, let alone the wizened sages of the PMO, could have told them that there should have been elephants, with Justin and Sophie doing yoga stands inside the howdah. How much more striking is a namaste from the back of a shrieking pachyderm.

"Most likely his planners were just careless, or what is the same thing, not up on their Kipling, as they very well should be.

"Well, he’s back in Canada now, but as with every good vacation, the memory lingers on. So much indeed, that in this week of Canada’s first full feminist budget (almost scoured clean, as Andrew Coyne has noted of, well, economics) it was the trip not the budget that summoned the eyes and ears of every Canadian.

"Now while debacle, mess, embarrassment, disgrace, waste, stupidity and gaucherie have earned their standing as descriptors of the eight-day folly, the term “odd” has not quite got the exercise it seriously deserves. Above all, the trip was just plain old-fashioned odd - odd, not as opposite to even, but as kissing cousin to weird."


----------



## George Wallace (8 Mar 2018)

Saw Trudeau's video promoting Woman's day.  All I could think of was Max Headroom.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gF9XGtPhWLY


----------



## ballz (8 Mar 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> Good question. Hopefully, it can be left as a matter of  politeness and consideration, and maybe even logic.
> 
> To a certain extent, I can see  the concern transgender people might have. I see it like this. If your name was Bob, but you decide to have it legally changed to "Bill", why would people persist in calling you Bob?  Wouldn't you be right to insist on being called by your correct name, since that's how you want to identify yourself?
> 
> ...



It is common decency, but that's it and that's all. We can't make every action that does not follow common decency illegal. And to not follow common decency to be a human rights violation? The idea is ludicrous. The test is very easy.... is someone committing violence towards someone by not following their pronouns? No? Then the appropriate response is not violence (forcible confinement). This is why the radical left has come up with terms like "microaggression" and tries to say that these things cause "harm," to people.... because aggression is violence, and harm is the result of violence, so therefore, the appropriate response to it is violence. They are literally trying to control language to make the use of violence against deniers legitimate.

Dr. Petersen has already said he'd use someone's preferred pronouns if they asked in a courteous manner. On the TVO clip, he was asked what pronoun he would use for the transgender woman on the panel if she were his student and he said, "she." The transgender woman, by the way, was on Dr. Petersen's side about almost everything (this is important since the left claims to be the official voice of transgender people which is just not the case). I also asked a transgender acquaintance of mine and she is completely on Dr. Petersen's side.

But that's not enough. He is transphobic, vile, Nazi, etc etc etc.... simply for daring to:
1. not support compelling others to do so through force; and 
2. for disagreeing that there are more than 2 genders.

On point #2, they still teach in genetics classes there are two biological sexes, male and female. There are anomalies, of course, there are also people born with 9 fingers but we teach that humans have 10 fingers. However, the humanities professors will literally tell people that the science faculty abandoned that idea decades ago. The opening statement of one of Petersen's adversaries on the TVO special was, "Basically, it's not correct that there is such a thing as biological sex." And on the idea of cis-normative perspective / gender binary (that there are male and female)... "it's not my view I just know that for over 50 years scientist have shown that that's not true." Here is the now infamous TVO clip where he makes this claim (recommend watching the whole thing but the numpty starts making these points @ 10:40) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kasiov0ytEc

If you watch the whole thing you will hear him talk about how Jordan Petersen "abuses" students, etc... again... an attempt to frame Petersen as using violence and therefore violence (locking him up in cage) is a legitimate reaction.

EDIT: I think this is worth a thread split at this point since this is much more than a Politics 2018 issue and I think others also want to continue discussing it.


----------



## Jarnhamar (9 Mar 2018)

> "The details are equally discouraging. The proposed changes broaden the number of criteria that a new pipeline must meet. These now include not just climate change and enhanced Aboriginal consultation, but also “the intersection of sex and gender with other identity factors.” For a pipeline?"




If we don't do a proper study we might install a pipeline that identifies as an oiler tanker, how embarrassing would that be.  I'd like to ensure I'm using the proper pronoun when addressing the pipeline too.


----------



## Loachman (9 Mar 2018)

https://www.spencerfernando.com/2018/03/08/priorities-trudeau-says-veterans-asking-can-afford-give-2018-budget-hikes-foreign-aid-spending-2-billion/

PRIORITIES: Trudeau Says Veterans Are “Asking For More Than We Can Afford To Give,” But His 2018 Budget Hikes Foreign Aid Spending By $2 BILLION

Spencer Fernando March 8, 2018

If our country can’t afford to help those who sacrificed everything for us, how can we afford to send billions more in taxpayers money overseas?


----------



## McG (9 Mar 2018)

He’s funding the social causes that matter to him.


----------



## Eaglelord17 (9 Mar 2018)

ballz said:
			
		

> Dr. Petersen has already said he'd use someone's preferred pronouns if they asked in a courteous manner. On the TVO clip, he was asked what pronoun he would use for the transgender woman on the panel if she were his student and he said, "she." The transgender woman, by the way, was on Dr. Petersen's side about almost everything (this is important since the left claims to be the official voice of transgender people which is just not the case). I also asked a transgender acquaintance of mine and she is completely on Dr. Petersen's side.



I think this is a big part of the issue. The reality is everyone has a different opinion about everything no matter your race, skin colour, gender, sex, etc. Identity politics is the belief that because you are 'X' then your beliefs must be 'X'. You can definitely see a correlation between certain groups and certain beliefs, but in no way is it standard. If you believe that is the case then the reality is you actually might be racist/sexist. 

The irony of all these 'tolerant' groups is they actually are the racist/sexist ones who actively attack anyone who is in their minds 'intolerant'. Talks about things like institutionalized racism when they literally are creating it in the education system shows how far as a society we are going from values such as equality.


----------



## pbi (9 Mar 2018)

ballz said:
			
		

> It is common decency, but that's it and that's all. We can't make every action that does not follow common decency illegal. And to not follow common decency to be a human rights violation? The idea is ludicrous. The test is very easy.... is someone committing violence towards someone by not following their pronouns? No? Then the appropriate response is not violence (forcible confinement). This is why the radical left has come up with terms like "microaggression" and tries to say that these things cause "harm," to people.... because aggression is violence, and harm is the result of violence, so therefore, the appropriate response to it is violence. They are literally trying to control language to make the use of violence against deniers legitimate....



I agree with you. And, as we have both noted, we both know people in the LGBTQ community, whom we treat well and decently, so I doubt we are LGBTQ-phobic.

As a caveat, though, I would say that you can "harm" a person without violence: denying them a job, not promoting them, or firing them solely on the basis of who they are, is harmful as far as I can see. But that isn't actually the point here.

I tend to group these far-left types in the same boat as the "cultural appropriation" crew: worrying about things that actually don't matter all that much, and  at the same time by their antics actually undermining good and useful intentions to see that all people are treated fairly.


----------



## Jarnhamar (9 Mar 2018)

Sorry but this whole pronoun stuff is ridiculous. There's two genders and a very smile minority of people who want to make up their own. If someone wants to base their whole life around being called MR or Zer or Der then that's great for them. I don't exactly see the lot of these people as major productive members in our society but they're Canadian so call people by whatever they want to be called by.  

It's crazy that I can face legal action for calling Zer Smith Mr Smith by accident but Gerald Butts can call Canadians Nazis and get away with it.


The Alt-Left are actively using violence to censor and shut down free speech running around screaming everyone is a nazi facist and anything they disagree with is hate speech.  
It's great to read the faculty in Kingston didn't shut down Peterson's speech and the school actually stood up to these lunatics.


----------



## Loachman (9 Mar 2018)

My pronoun, should any of them ever ask, will be "Master".

Back to Trudeau...

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-india-trump-tariffs-analysis-wherry-1.4565696

How contending with Trump might help Trudeau move past the India debacle

Prime Minister contends with tariff threats after an embarrassing trip abroad

By Aaron Wherry, CBC News  Posted: Mar 08, 2018 4:00 AM ET| Last Updated: Mar 08, 2018 4:00 AM ET

Trudeau has no ability to "contend with" President Trump whatsoever; it is very much the latter in the position of power.

I didn't find the article to be of much interest, but was particularly amused by a comment from one Jill Jenkins: "Best meme yet....Re-electing Trudeau would be like backing up the Titanic and hitting the iceberg again..."


----------



## Remius (9 Mar 2018)

Master,

Of course Trump has a position of power.  When they say contend It is along the lines of how he will cope with or deal with the issue that is Donald Trump.  Right now the Liberals look like they handled the Tariff issue or at least Chrysta Frieland did.  Trudeau wants to be the anti trump. And that will play well with some people. 

This Tariff thing was a lucky break for Trudeau.  No worries, I’m sure there will be more gaffes to come.


----------



## ballz (9 Mar 2018)

pbi said:
			
		

> As a caveat, though, I would say that you can "harm" a person without violence: denying them a job, not promoting them, or firing them solely on the basis of who they are, is harmful as far as I can see. But that isn't actually the point here.



Well, freedom of association would take us down a whole other tangent, which is one I would very much enjoy because my thoughts on freedom of association vs discrimination are not quite defined down to a nuanced level yet.

But with regards to freedom of speech, there is no strong argument to made that offending someone is harming them.



			
				pbi said:
			
		

> I tend to group these far-left types in the same boat as the "cultural appropriation" crew: worrying about things that actually don't matter all that much, and  at the same time by their antics actually undermining good and useful intentions to see that all people are treated fairly.



Agreed. They are poison.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (14 Mar 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> If we don't do a proper study we might install a pipeline that identifies as an oiler tanker, how embarrassing would that be.  I'd like to ensure I'm using the proper pronoun when addressing the pipeline too.



I would suggest a pipeline that identifies as a train, a very long train....


----------



## a_majoor (14 Mar 2018)

WRT the pronoun thing, there are two ways to take this:

1. Someone is trying to force us to play a game of "Heads I win, Tails you lose". Since there is no objective criteria (and the person trying to force their views on you can change their position on a whim), you are trapped in a rigged game. I see no reason to be forced into a lose lose position just to satisfy the needs of some jackass to play power games.

2. The person is mentally ill, and needs help. Unfortunately, pandering to mental illness isn't offering help, and indeed could end up being more damaging in the long run.

Professor Peterson offers a clear way of dealing with the issue in a non confrontational manner (but if you read his book, he also points out that the biological division into two sexes is over a _billion_ years old, long before there were multicellular animals, and many of the neurological responses in the human brain can be mapped on lobster brains, which developed over 250 million years ago, long before there were dinosaurs, so things like sex, gender and sexual roles have been hard wired into life and existence for unimaginable amounts of time. 

These things are not "constructs" at all, but more like the geological plates the continents sit atop of. To deny reality is to descend into madness.


----------



## jollyjacktar (14 Mar 2018)

Thucydides said:
			
		

> These things are not "constructs" at all, but more like the geological plates the continents sit atop of. To deny reality is to descend into madness.



Or the looney left, SJW, ❄ mindset.  I would include the looney right, as they're just as looney but they seem to agree on traditional pronouns/assignment.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (14 Mar 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Or the looney left, SJW, ❄ mindset.  I would include the looney right, as they're just as looney but they seem to agree on traditional pronouns/assignment.



The looney right uses the 'royal' we and third person though. :rofl:


----------



## pbi (14 Mar 2018)

ballz said:
			
		

> ..But with regards to freedom of speech, there is no strong argument to made that offending someone is harming them...



IMHO this lies at the heart of the issue. If we all have an inalienable  right not to be offended, there is no meaningful possibility of free speech. Unless you are just talking about the weather (and even then...), you are at risk of offending somebody. Any meaningful statement of principles, beliefs, convictions or even of impressions can be offensive to somebody. Just look at what happens on this site!

The point of fine judgement lies in determining where "offending" ends, and "threatening" starts. For example:

"_X community are responsible for their own misfortunes because they don't condemn Y actions by their members_". That might be offensive to members of "X" community.

But "_X community are a filthy cancer on our society and an immediate danger! We must eradicate them and drive them out our country now! All of them!_!" is clearly threatening, and possibly bordering on criminal.

But those are black and white examples which are easy to judge. If we agree that "snowflakes" and "lefties" have no inherent right not to be offended by the expressions of people to the right of them on the spectrum, (and I do) then that must extend to everybody. So, just because you are offended by somebody saying something unpatriotic, or attacking the military, or marching in a leather thong in a Pride Parade, doesn't give you the right to shut them down.

A problem we can all see, (and I lay this largely on those at the more left end of things) is that the clear meaning of the words "violence" and "harm" have been debased almost to the point of meaninglessness, like the words  "racism", "hero" and "elites".


----------



## Fishbone Jones (14 Mar 2018)

I've never attended a Pride Parade and it's a Crown Royal bag, not a leather thong. rly:


----------



## pbi (14 Mar 2018)

recceguy said:
			
		

> I've never attended a Pride Parade and it's a Crown Royal bag, not a leather thong. rly:



OK that image is actually no better... :-X


----------



## Fishbone Jones (14 Mar 2018)

Seriously though, a person should have the right to their opinion, on anything to anyone.

The caveat though is that you need to be prepared to accept the consequences. Whether HRC or a punch in the face.

If I complained, as a kid, that someone was calling me names, I was told 'sticks and stones will break my bones, but names will never hurt me, and to suck it up and ignore it. Or put an end to it myself.


----------



## Loachman (15 Mar 2018)

https://www.spencerfernando.com/2018/03/15/appalling-trudeau-government-no-plan-theyre-spending-186-7-billion-infrastructure-money/

APPALLING: Trudeau Government Has NO PLAN For How They’re Spending $186.7 BILLION In Infrastructure Money

Spencer Fernando March 15, 2018

"Parliamentary Budget Officer says the government is not providing the details needed on how so much money is planned to be spent.

"The Trudeau Liberals have made a big deal about their “historic investments” in infrastructure.

"Now however, the Parliamentary Budget Officer says the Trudeau government has no plan on how to spend a whopping $186.7 BILLION in proposed infrastructure money.

"As noted by the CP, “Parliamentary budget officer Jean-Denis Frechette says the Liberals don’t yet have a plan for how the federal government will spend $186.7 billion in infrastructure money over the next 12 years.”"


----------



## Loachman (15 Mar 2018)

https://www.spencerfernando.com/2018/03/15/unity-is-our-strength/

Unity Is Our Strength

Spencer Fernando March 15, 2018

"Canadians must be united around core values and a shared historic legacy, and we must not let our nation become a platform for the fights and grievances of foreign lands.

"A nation without unity is not really a nation at all. It’s simply a collection of people who happen to share the same territory.

"Unfortunately, that is increasingly what Canada is becoming."


----------



## Jed (15 Mar 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> https://www.spencerfernando.com/2018/03/15/unity-is-our-strength/
> 
> Unity Is Our Strength
> 
> ...



This seems to be about 180 degrees different from  this Liberal Majority government who purport that "Diversity is our Strength"


----------



## Loachman (15 Mar 2018)

Yes.

Mr Fernando is no more a Trudeau fan than I am.


----------



## Loachman (16 Mar 2018)

Andrew Scheer 2019 Campaign Ad #2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nfqnWM6FTM


----------



## Brad Sallows (16 Mar 2018)

The fuss about gender identity pronouns is just a variation of "face" games: one group trying to set the terms by which another group will kowtow/engage.

The pronouns are third person.  It isn't usual for people in a conversation to refer to parties present in the third person.  Parties not present at a conversation have no right or privilege to dictate how they are referenced, including no authority to forbid name-calling.


----------



## larry Strong (16 Mar 2018)

So he just finished a 8 day holiday in India and now he's off again.................

http://nationalpost.com/news/politics/as-trudeau-vacations-in-florida-details-are-once-again-scarce




Cheers
Larry

Edited to remove personal attack


----------



## PPCLI Guy (16 Mar 2018)

Larry Strong said:
			
		

> So he just finished a 8 day holiday in India and now he's off again.................
> 
> http://nationalpost.com/news/politics/as-trudeau-vacations-in-florida-details-are-once-again-scarce
> 
> ...



Since when is a state visit (ie India) a vacation?


----------



## PuckChaser (16 Mar 2018)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> Since when is a state visit (ie India) a vacation?


When you only spend 1 day actually doing state business.


----------



## jollyjacktar (16 Mar 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> When you only spend 1 day actually doing state business.


1/2 a day.  

What will he dress up like this time?


----------



## PPCLI Guy (16 Mar 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> 1/2 a day.
> 
> What will he dress up like this time?



Really.  This doesn't look like 1/2 of a day to me. Apologies in advance for introducing facts into the opinion bukake-fest



Itinerary for Friday, February 23, 2018 Ottawa, Ontario - February 22, 2018
Note: All times local

Itinerary for the Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, for Friday, February 23, 2018:

New Delhi, India

9 a.m. The Prime Minister will attend an official greeting ceremony.

Rashtrapati Bhavan (Presidential Palace)

Note for media:

Open coverage
9:30 a.m. The Prime Minister will participate in a wreath laying ceremony. 

Raj Ghat (Gandhi Memorial)

Note for media:

Open coverage
10:15 a.m. The Prime Minister will meet with the Minister of External Affairs of India, Sushma Swaraj.

Taj Diplomatic Enclave Hotel

Note for media:

Pooled photo opportunity at the beginning of the meeting
12 p.m. The Prime Minister will meet with the Prime Minister of India, Narendra Modi. 

Hyderabad House

Closed to media

12:30 p.m. The Prime Minister, the Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development, Navdeep Bains, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Chrystia Freeland, the Minister of Defence, Harjit Sajjan, the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities, Amarjeet Sohi, the Minister of Science and Minister of Sport and Persons with Disabilities, Kirsty Duncan, and the Minister of Small Business and Tourism, Bardish Chagger will hold an expanded bilateral meeting with the Prime Minister of India.

Conference Room, Main Floor
Hyderabad House

Note for media:

Pooled photo opportunity at the beginning of the meeting
1:15 p.m. The Prime Minister will participate in an exchange of agreements ceremony with the Prime Minister of India and will deliver remarks.

Ballroom, 2nd Floor
Hyderabad House

Note for media:

Open coverage
2:45 p.m. The Prime Minister will participate in a roundtable with Chief Executive Officers.

Taj Diplomatic Enclave Hotel

Note for media:

Pooled photo opportunity at the beginning of the meeting
5 p.m. The Prime Minister will meet with the President of India, Ram Nath Kovind.

Morning Room, Ground Floor
Rashtrapi Bhavan (Presidential Palace)

Note for media:

Pooled photo opportunity at the beginning of the meeting
6:30 p.m. The Prime Minister will hold a media availability.

Nizwan Room, 1st Floor
Taj Diplomatic Enclave Hotel

Note for media:

Open coverage

Itinerary for Thursday, February 22, 2018 Ottawa, Ontario - February 21, 2018
Note: All times local

Itinerary for the Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, for Thursday, February 22, 2018:

New Delhi, India

9:30 a.m. The Prime Minister and Ms. Grégoire Trudeau will visit the Jama Masjid Mosque.

Jama Masjid Mosque

Note for media:

Open coverage and pooled photo opportunity

10 a.m. The Prime Minister and Ms. Grégoire Trudeau will visit the Sacred Heart Church.

Sacred Heart Church

Note for media:

Pooled photo opportunity

11:30 a.m. The Prime Minister and Ms. Grégoire Trudeau will visit a cricket pitch.

Note for media:

Open coverage

3 p.m. The Prime Minister will deliver remarks at the Canada-India Business Summit.

Taj Diplomatic Enclave Hotel

Note for media:

Open coverage

Itinerary for Wednesday, February 21, 2018 Ottawa, Ontario - February 20, 2018
Note: All times local

Itinerary for the Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, for Wednesday, February 21, 2018:

Amritsar, India

11:20 a.m. The Prime Minister and Ms. Grégoire Trudeau will visit the Sri Harmandir Sahib (Golden Temple). 

Sri Harmandir Sahib (Golden Temple)

Note for media:

Pooled photo opportunity
12:45 p.m. The Prime Minister and Ms. Grégoire Trudeau will visit the Partition Museum. 

Partition Museum

Note for media:

Pooled photo opportunity
1:50 p.m. The Prime Minister will meet with the Chief Minister of Punjab, Amarinder Singh.  

Taj Swarna Hotel

Note for media:

Pooled photo opportunity at the beginning of the meeting
Delhi, India

4:45 p.m. The Prime Minister will hold a media availability.  

Nizwan Room, 1st Floor
Taj Diplomatic Enclave

Note for media:

Open coverage

Itinerary for Wednesday, February 21, 2018 Ottawa, Ontario - February 20, 2018
Note: All times local

Itinerary for the Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, for Wednesday, February 21, 2018:

Amritsar, India

11:20 a.m. The Prime Minister and Ms. Grégoire Trudeau will visit the Sri Harmandir Sahib (Golden Temple). 

Sri Harmandir Sahib (Golden Temple)

Note for media:

Pooled photo opportunity
12:45 p.m. The Prime Minister and Ms. Grégoire Trudeau will visit the Partition Museum. 

Partition Museum

Note for media:

Pooled photo opportunity
1:50 p.m. The Prime Minister will meet with the Chief Minister of Punjab, Amarinder Singh.  

Taj Swarna Hotel

Note for media:

Pooled photo opportunity at the beginning of the meeting
Delhi, India

4:45 p.m. The Prime Minister will hold a media availability.  

Nizwan Room, 1st Floor
Taj Diplomatic Enclave

Note for media:

Open coverage

Itinerary for Monday, February 19, 2018 Ottawa, Ontario - February 18, 2018
Note: All times local

Itinerary for the Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, for Monday, February 19, 2018:

Ahmedabad, India

10:05 a.m. The Prime Minister and Ms. Grégoire Trudeau will arrive in Ahmedabad, India.

Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport

Note for media:

Photo opportunity upon arrival
10:45 a.m. The Prime Minister and Ms. Grégoire Trudeau will visit the Sabarmati Ashram.

Gandhi Ashram

Note for media:

Open coverage and pooled photo opportunity
11:45 a.m. The Prime Minister and Ms. Grégoire Trudeau will visit the Swaminarayan Akshardham Temple.

Akshardham Temple

Note for media:

Open coverage and pooled photo opportunity
3 p.m. The Prime Minister will participate in an armchair discussion on education and investment opportunities at the Indian Institute of Management. 

Indian Institute of Management

Note for media:

Open coverage
4:45 p.m. The Prime Minister will meet with the Chief Minister of Gujarat, Shri Vijay Rupani.

Boardroom, Ground Floor
Gujarat State Aviation Infrastructure Company Ltd (GUJSAIL)
Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport

Note for media:

Pooled photo opportunity at the beginning of the meeting
Mumbai, India

6:30 p.m. The Prime Minister and Ms. Grégoire Trudeau will arrive in Mumbai, India.

Chhatrapati Shivaji International Airport

Note for media:

Photo opportunity upon arrival
7:50 p.m. The Prime Minister will hold a media availability.

Chambers Lawn
Taj Mahal Palace

Note for media:

Open coverage

Ottawa, Ontario - February 17, 2018
Note: All times local

Itinerary for the Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, for Sunday, February 18, 2018:

Agra, India

9:50 a.m. The Prime Minister and Ms. Grégoire Trudeau will arrive in Agra, India.

Agra Airport

Note for media:

Photo opportunity upon arrival
10:40 a.m. The Prime Minister and Ms. Grégoire Trudeau will visit the Taj Mahal.

Taj Mahal

Note for media:

Open coverage and pooled photo opportunity
New Delhi, India

5 p.m. The Prime Minister will participate in a roundtable discussion with civil society leaders.

Taj Diplomatic Enclave Hotel

Note for media:

Pooled photo opportunity



Itinerary for Saturday, February 17, 2018 Ottawa, Ontario - February 16, 2018
Note: All times local

Itinerary for the Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, for Saturday, February 17, 2018:

New Delhi, India

3:50 p.m. The Prime Minister and Ms. Grégoire Trudeau will arrive in New Delhi, India.

Indira Ghandi International Airport

Note for media:

Photo opportunity upon arrival


----------



## Cloud Cover (16 Mar 2018)

Most frequently used phrase: “Pooled Photo Opportunity”.  I am willing to give the guy a break, but in reality he took a photo op vacation with his family and cloaked it under the guise of conducting business. Guess what, except for Indo-Canadians, experience informs Canadian businesses that they want as little to with India as possible. Despite its huge population, the fact is that India is a corrupt nationalistic country that insists on eventual domestication of all business conducted between that country and its trading partners.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (17 Mar 2018)

Sounds like a pretty full schedule. Not only meetings, but I'll bet the pre meeting brief, coaching and coordinating also takes a shit load of time.

Kinda makes you wonder where he found the time for selfies and dancing. If it wasn't a vacation, why were Sophie and the kids along on such a busy trip? Why should we be paying for them?  I also would like to know who paid for the costumes. Or why he brought a convicted terrorist on a business trip. If it was business, why was the trade minister left at home? Given the deal our PM got, that sounded like another mistake he, alone, is responsible for.

The fight between him and Jagmeet Singh for the Sikh terrorist vote should be interesting.


----------



## Jarnhamar (17 Mar 2018)

[quote author=recceguy]  If it was business, why was the trade minister left at home? [/QUOTE] 

What? Really? 




> The fight between him and Jagmeet Singh for the Sikh terrorist vote should be interesting.


Yea that's kinda weird. Well to me it is. To politicians probably not.


----------



## ModlrMike (17 Mar 2018)

recceguy said:
			
		

> The fight between him and Jagmeet Singh for the Sikh terrorist vote should be interesting.



Mr Singh seems to be trying to distance himself from that group on one hand, but on the other appears to be hedging his bets:

NDP leader says Canada should declare anti-Sikh violence in 1984 a genocide


----------



## Journeyman (18 Mar 2018)

ModlrMike said:
			
		

> Mr Singh seems to be trying to distance himself from that group on one hand, but on the other appears to be hedging his bets:
> 
> NDP leader says Canada should declare anti-Sikh violence in 1984 a genocide


In the article cited, Singh presumes to speak for India's Hindu majority by stating that he "believes labelling the event a genocide will help bring peace between Hindus and Sikhs."  There's no explanation of how or why that peace may come about; I figure it's more likely to cheer up the Sikhs -- particularly giving additional ammo for the separatists -- while infuriating the Hindus, and adding more to their current anti-Canadian sentiment.


If there's no objection from the author, I'd recommend a recent blog post from E.R. Campbell, entitled "Stay out of separatists’ beds or get out of national politics."  

(Obviously if you'd prefer not to have the link here, let me know and I'll remove it immediately)


----------



## Kat Stevens (18 Mar 2018)

If what happened in India was a genocide, it was a pretty piss poor attempt at one. That word gets tossed around pretty liberally (see what I did there?  8) ) these days.


----------



## Loachman (18 Mar 2018)

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/saskatchewan-alberta-bc-pipeline-trans-mountain-expansion-1.4580650

Saskatchewan would support Alberta's decision to turn off oil taps

Premier Moe says Saskatchewan won't help source oil for Canada if Alberta decides to cut supply

By Elise von Scheel, CBC News Posted: Mar 17, 2018 4:00 AM ET Last Updated: Mar 17, 2018 4:00 AM ET

Saskatchewan Premier Scott Moe says he'll stand by Alberta if the province decides to restrict oil exports to pressure British Columbia to abandon its opposition to the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion project.

Moe said he would "absolutely" encourage Rachel Notley, his Alberta counterpart, to cut off domestic exports of its oil.

"If the fuel tanks start to run dry because Premier Notley has turned the tap off, it won't be Saskatchewan filling them up," the premier told CBC Radio's The House.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (18 Mar 2018)

It will be the NE and SE of BC that suffers, Vancouver already gets most of it's feedstock from the US. The NW will be able to get fuel & oil from Alaska and truck/rail to the Prince George. those are the only 2 refineries. Also not sure how much legal clout the government has to interfere with fuel and oil sales?


----------



## Fishbone Jones (18 Mar 2018)

On the sunny side of thing, BC won't have to give Trudeau so much carbon tax.


----------



## Breacher (19 Mar 2018)

Colin P said:
			
		

> It will be the NE and SE of BC that suffers, Vancouver already gets most of it's feedstock from the US. The NW will be able to get fuel & oil from Alaska and truck/rail to the Prince George. those are the only 2 refineries. Also not sure how much legal clout the government has to interfere with fuel and oil sales?



It's not my area of expertise, but this article states 90% of Vancouver's oil comes from AB.

http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/how-alberta-could-sow-gas-price-armageddon-in-vancouver


----------



## Halifax Tar (19 Mar 2018)

*Scheer’s delight? If an election were held tomorrow, CPC could have a shot at majority government*

Majority of Canadians disapprove of Justin Trudeau for the first time since he became Prime Minister


March 19, 2018 –  The passage of time appears to have done nothing to soothe Canadian voters irritated with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau since his highly criticized passage to India last month.

This, combined with a simmering unease among the electorate over the federal government’s deficit spending has, for the first time, driven Trudeau’s disapproval rating north of 50 per cent.

Link:
http://angusreid.org/federal-issues-march2018/


----------



## Altair (19 Mar 2018)

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> *Scheer’s delight? If an election were held tomorrow, CPC could have a shot at majority government*
> 
> Majority of Canadians disapprove of Justin Trudeau for the first time since he became Prime Minister
> 
> ...


If Trudeau has lost Ontario, he's lost his job. Doesn't matter how much he runs the table in Quebec, he's cooked.

Time for them to hit the reset on what they are doing, and try to fix what isn't working, but they have not been good at that since the one year mark of their government in my opinion. They have destroyed their one asset, the likability of the PM with his stupid trips and stupid costumes and stupid scandals about stupid vacations.

Now that the world has turned on Trudeau, the only thing they can stand on is their record, and unless they have a complete turn around in the next year, they don't have much to stand on there.


----------



## Halifax Tar (19 Mar 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> If Trudeau has lost Ontario, he's lost his job. Doesn't matter how much he runs the table in Quebec, he's cooked.
> 
> Time for them to hit the reset on what they are doing, and try to fix what isn't working, but they have not been good at that since the one year mark of their government in my opinion. They have destroyed their one asset, the likability of the PM with his stupid trips and stupid costumes and stupid scandals about stupid vacations.
> 
> Now that the world has turned on Trudeau, the only thing they can stand on is their record, and unless they have a complete turn around in the next year, they don't have much to stand on there.



Still lots of time for "events dear boy" until the next election. 

I have to say Scheer has surprised me so far.  I think he may be more of an opponent for Trudeau than many imagined.


----------



## Altair (19 Mar 2018)

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> Still lots of time for "events dear boy" until the next election.
> 
> I have to say Scheer has surprised me so far.  I think he may be more of an opponent for Trudeau than many imagined.


Sure.

Except that a good many Canadian don't know who he is. And if Trudeau and the liberals were not shooting themselves in the foot all day long every day, Scheer would continue to be an afterthought.

Trudeau is suffering from the same phenomenon that brought him into power. The overwhelming urge among the electorate to throw the bums out. 

There is still time for a reset, to take stock of what is working, what isn't, and how to improve in the next year and a bit, and events could happen that destroy his opponents, but I don't see any sign of that, nor do I see a government that realizes that it is making things worse.


----------



## Remius (19 Mar 2018)

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> Still lots of time for "events dear boy" until the next election.
> 
> I have to say Scheer has surprised me so far.  I think he may be more of an opponent for Trudeau than many imagined.



To be honest I think that Trudeau may be more of an opponent for Trudeau than many imagined...


----------



## ModlrMike (19 Mar 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> Except that a good many Canadian don't know who he is. And if Trudeau and the liberals were not shooting themselves in the foot all day long every day, Scheer would continue to be an afterthought.



Pretend inferiority and encourage his arrogance.
           - Sun Tzu


----------



## FJAG (21 Mar 2018)

"Service Canada moves away from calling Canadians Mr., Mrs., or Miss"

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/service-canada-gender-neutral-1.4585629

 :facepalm:


----------



## jollyjacktar (21 Mar 2018)

It's a great day for Peoplekind everywhere.  They might as well, they have trouble delivering satisfactory services anyhow.  They're driving down the highway to irrelevancy it would seem.


----------



## Loachman (21 Mar 2018)

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/03/20/trudeau-approval-rating-trump-right-wing-parties-surge-canada/

Justin Trudeau Approval Rating Now Below President Trump as Right Wing Parties Surge In Canada

by Chris Tomlinson20 Mar 20181448
  
The popularity of Canadian Liberal Party Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is on a steady decline as his approval ratings have fallen below U.S. President Trump in polls as right-wing parties surge across the country.

Data from polling firm Angus Reid shows that 56 per cent of Canadians now disapprove of Prime Minister Trudeau while only 40 per cent approve, while polling firm Rassmussen shows U.S. President Donald Trump with a 47 per cent approval rating.


----------



## jollyjacktar (21 Mar 2018)

Has there been any other PM in the past who has beaten this dismal record of performance in his first time at bat and survived party scrutiny?  Or is he being a pathfinder and blazing a new trail of selfie glory?  Kind of like a meteor flashing in the night sky.


----------



## dimsum (21 Mar 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> http://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/03/20/trudeau-approval-rating-trump-right-wing-parties-surge-canada/
> 
> Justin Trudeau Approval Rating Now Below President Trump as Right Wing Parties Surge In Canada
> 
> ...



I'm immediately wary of the stats when the source is Breitbart, a site with definitely no bias.    :

But, PMJT has dipped below 50% in the approval ratings.  Not sure about Trump.


----------



## Altair (21 Mar 2018)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> I'm immediately wary of the stats when the source is Breitbart, a site with definitely no bias.    :
> 
> But, PMJT has dipped below 50% in the approval ratings.  Not sure about Trump.


https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/08/politics/trump-marist-poll-approval-rating-march/index.html



> A new Marist poll puts President Donald Trump's job approval rating at 42%, his highest in that poll since he took office.
> 
> The poll, which was conducted Monday and Tuesday, found that some 50% disapproved of the President's job performance.





> Marist's polling is a slightly more positive assessment of Trump's job performance than other recent polls using the same methodology, though only by a few points.
> A Quinnipiac University poll released Wednesday pegged the number at 38% approval with 56% disapproving among registered voters, and a Monmouth University poll of adults put it at 39% approval, with 54% disapproving. Gallup's most recent weekly read on the President stands at 39% approval with 55% disapproval.


----------



## OldSolduer (21 Mar 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Has there been any other PM in the past who has beaten this dismal record of performance in his first time at bat and survived party scrutiny?  Or is he being a pathfinder and blazing a new trail of selfie glory?  Kind of like a meteor flashing in the night sky.



I’ve been around a few years....just a couple... but even JTs father wasn’t as narcissistic as JT himself. Nice socks though....


----------



## McG (21 Mar 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> ... as Right Wing Parties Surge In Canada


Parties? Plural? Is this a deliberate inaccuracy?


----------



## Journeyman (21 Mar 2018)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> I'm immediately wary of the stats when the source is Breitbart, a site with definitely no bias.    :


When presented with an opportunity to praise Trump and trash Trudeau in one fell swoop, credible statistics is a minor concern.


Mind you, as noted in a previous post, credibility itself is of no concern for some people.  :nod:


----------



## Fishbone Jones (21 Mar 2018)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> I'm immediately wary of the stats when the source is Breitbart, a site with definitely no bias.    :
> 
> But, PMJT has dipped below 50% in the approval ratings.  Not sure about Trump.



Breitbart used data from Canadian polling firm Angus-Reid and shows no bias. They simply explain the A-R polling numbers without blame or cause. There is no commentary in it. Simply new stats and historical data. The Breitbart staff were neutral in assessment. No right. No left. That was my reading of it.


----------



## Loachman (21 Mar 2018)

The US poll used by Breitbart is the Rassmussen one, generally the one most favourable to President Trump and therefore the most natural one to use for the purpose of the article quoted.

As (almost) all polls consistently underrated him during the US election campaign, I expect them to continue doing so.


----------



## Loachman (21 Mar 2018)

http://www.kelownadailycourier.ca/news/national_news/article_5c984ed6-420d-5d56-9817-8967c3eff3f2.html

Liberals offer details of try-out with man at centre of Facebook data controversy  

Liberals offer details of Wylie pilot project 

Mar 21, 2018 Updated 14 min ago

OTTAWA - Federal Liberals are sharing details about a pilot project undertaken for their caucus research bureau by the Canadian data scientist at the centre of an international uproar over allegations that Facebook users' data was inappropriately harvested for political gain.

Christopher Wylie came forward in recent days with accusations that a voter-profiling company improperly collected private information from some 50 million Facebook users in order to help seal 2016 victories for Donald Trump's presidential campaign in the U.S. and in the U.K.'s Brexit referendum.


----------



## Loachman (21 Mar 2018)

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-former-top-canadian-security-officials-join-call-for-ottawa-to-nix/

Former top Canadian security officials warn Ottawa to sever links with China’s Huawei

Robert Fife  and Steven Chase 

OTTAWA 

Published 2 days ago

Updated 2 days ago

Three former directors of Canada’s key national security agencies are urging the federal government to heed the warnings of U.S. intelligence services and cut Canadian ties with Huawei, the giant Chinese smartphone and telecom equipment maker.

Ward Elcock, John Adams and Richard Fadden are weighing in on the matter after the heads of the CIA, FBI, National Security Agency and the Defence Intelligence Agency recently told the U.S. Senate intelligence committee that Huawei poses a cybersecurity threat to American customers. U.S. spymasters say Huawei’s smartphones and networking equipment could be used to conduct undetected espionage, especially the next, advanced generation of 5G technology.

Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale told The Globe and Mail in a statement on Friday that Huawei is being monitored and does not pose a risk to Canada’s cybersecurity.

But Mr. Elcock, a former CSIS director, deputy minister of National Defence, and Security and Intelligence Deputy Clerk of the Privy Council, said he shares U.S. concerns about Huawei, which was founded by a former engineer in the People’s Liberation Army and has been accused of acting as an arm of Beijing.

“I have a pretty good idea of how signal-intelligence agencies work and the rules under which they work and their various operations and … I would not want to see Huawei equipment being incorporated into a 5G network in Canada,” Mr. Elcock told The Globe. Signals intelligence is the monitoring and interception of predominantly foreign communications by national security agencies.


----------



## Loachman (21 Mar 2018)

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-environment-minister-catherine-mckenna-says-pipeline-fight-puts/

Environment minister Catherine McKenna says pipeline fight puts national climate plan in peril

Justine Hunter 

VICTORIA 

Published March 18, 2018

Updated 2 days ago

Federal Environment Minister Catherine McKenna, faced with the threat of a growing number of Canadian provinces balking at her government’s climate action plan, is pleading for a truce in the pipeline dispute between the B.C. and Alberta governments.

Continued support for Kinder Morgan Canada Inc.’s pipeline-expansion project was the trade-off Ottawa made to bring the Alberta NDP government on board for a national price on carbon.

Now, with B.C.’s NDP government seeking to block the pipeline, Ms. McKenna sees the potential for Alberta’s crucial support unravelling.
The Globe and Mail

“We are now in a situation where we have two progressive governments, NDP governments, who believe in climate change ... and _*we could lose our climate plan*_ because you have other politicians who are waiting in the wings who don’t believe in climate change, who don’t believe in climate action, who want to reverse all these policies,” she said. “And that’s not just in one province, that’s in a number of provinces.”


----------



## Jarnhamar (24 Mar 2018)

Something to strive for in Canada?

A page out of Wynnes book maybe. 

Nurses in Australia have to apologise for being white before treating indigenous patients.
https://www.todaytonightadelaide.com.au/stories/nurses-code


----------



## jollyjacktar (24 Mar 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Something to strive for in Canada?
> 
> A page out of Wynnes book maybe.
> 
> ...



FFS, this shit is really starting to get out of hand.  Wait until PM Virtue Signalling hears about this.  We'll all be doing it here too.


----------



## YZT580 (24 Mar 2018)

To whom it may concern, you will be pleased to know that this bomb that has destroyed your factory was constructed in a factory staffed by Canadian indigenous peoples, packed by individuals of Asian descent and the aircraft is flown by a direct descendant of a zulu warrior.


----------



## George Wallace (24 Mar 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> FFS, this shit is really starting to get out of hand.  Wait until PM Virtue Signalling hears about this.  We'll all be doing it here too.



QUIET YOU!   Don't be giving them any ideas.


----------



## Jarnhamar (24 Mar 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> FFS, this shit is really starting to get out of hand.  Wait until PM Virtue Signalling hears about this.  We'll all be doing it here too.



It's not that bad. Before teaching students you should apologize for your whiteness and acknowledge that you're standing before your class in a position of advantage not because of your experience and authority but white privilege and acknowledgement that anyone not a white cis male is at a disadvantage.   

I know I'm annoying but I'm not bitter, it's humorous in a self-destructive way at this point


----------



## PPCLI Guy (24 Mar 2018)

YZT580 said:
			
		

> To whom it may concern, you will be pleased to know that this bomb that has destroyed your factory was constructed in a factory staffed by Canadian indigenous peoples, packed by individuals of Asian descent and the aircraft is flown by a direct descendant of a zulu warrior.



I am at a loss as to what your point is :dunno:


----------



## jollyjacktar (24 Mar 2018)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> I am at a loss as to what your point is :dunno:



It's called  :sarcasm:  l got it...


----------



## Fishbone Jones (24 Mar 2018)

Or just plain old frustration at the present idiocy of our current PM maybe?


----------



## FJAG (24 Mar 2018)

Okay. Here's another one to shake your head at or enter into debate about.



> Justin Trudeau To Exonerate First Nations War Chiefs Hanged In 1864
> He is expected to absolve the Tsilhqot'in of guilt on Monday.
> 
> . . . On Monday, Trudeau will absolve the Tsilhqot'in of guilt "in any way, shape or form" related to the killing of 14 construction workers in 1864, said Chief Joe Alphonse in a video posted on the Tsilhqot'in National Government's Facebook page.



https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2018/03/24/justin-trudeau-to-exonerate-first-nations-war-chiefs-hanged-in-1864_a_23394365/?utm_hp_ref=ca-homepage

This is quite interesting as in 1864, BC was not in Confederation and the BC Government in 1999, after an Inquiry conducted in 1993, pardon the six.

I've taken a bit of a read of the circumstances. There's a really good website with numerous source documents here:

http://www.canadianmysteries.ca/sites/klatsassin/home/howtousesite/indexen.html

and the 1993 Report on the Cariboo-Chilcotin Justice Inquiry here. Note that the Inquiry dealt with much broader issues than just the six chiefs. For the Inquiry's recommendations see item "E" at pages 30-31 (which deal more with the issue of whether the six surrendered and gave inculpatory statements on an inducement that they would be granted immunity than whether or not they were guilty of murder):

http://www.llbc.leg.bc.ca/public/pubdocs/bcdocs/149599/cariboochilcotinjustice.pdf

From my read of the events, there may have been some grounds for discontent by the bands (the possible attempt to reintroduce smallpox into the communities by two white men being the primary one) but no justifiable reason to ambush and massacre an essentially unarmed/lightly armed road work party that had nothing to do with that issue. 

Whether you count it as a war crime or an all out murder, a crime had been committed by the six. The pardon issued by the BC government seems appropriate based on the findings of the inquiry and it's recommendation. An all out absolution of guilt by the Federal Government seems entirely excessive but typical for the current Prime Minister's penchant for wrapping himself in a hair-shirt.

 :cheers:


----------



## jollyjacktar (24 Mar 2018)

He really is the Kim Kardashian of politicians.  Desparate to get attention while at the same time accomplishing SFA.  I do wonder how many folks from within his party are gnashing their teeth at this plummet towards irrelevancy at accomplishing much of substance.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (25 Mar 2018)

Sorry, this is a Brit problem, not Canadian. We weren't even a nation in 1864. Just more bullshit virtue signaling from the most disingenuous 
PM ever.

I think there is something, maybe even bigger than taking a Sikh terrorist to India that he's trying really, really hard to take attention from. Just a hincky feeling.


----------



## Jarnhamar (25 Mar 2018)

Indigious People struggling to heat their homes, don't even have clean or working  water and battling corrupt band councils will give a collective fuck yes when this happens.


----------



## Halifax Tar (25 Mar 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Indigious People struggling to heat their homes, don't even have clean or working  water and battling corrupt band councils will give a collective frig yes when this happens.



I dunno they seem to eat this stuff up.  Its a shame because its all a distraction.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (25 Mar 2018)

recceguy said:
			
		

> I think there is something, maybe even bigger than taking a Sikh terrorist to India that he's trying really, really hard to take attention from. Just a hincky feeling.



Notwithstanding the fact that I abhor the thought of the convicted attempted murder being invited to an official function, and also think that the India trip was a shambolic embarrassment, it is worth noting that the PM didn't "take a Sikh terrorist to India".  The individual travelled by himself, on a visa issued by the Indian government.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (25 Mar 2018)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> Notwithstanding the fact that I abhor the thought of the convicted attempted murder being invited to an official function, and also think that the India trip was a shambolic embarrassment, it is worth noting that the PM didn't "take a Sikh terrorist to India".  The individual travelled by himself, on a visa issued by the Indian government.



Cheers You're right. I didn't know how he got there.


----------



## Good2Golf (25 Mar 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Indigious People struggling to heat their homes, don't even have clean or working  water and battling corrupt band councils will give a collective fuck yes when this happens.



Indeed.

Perhaps the PM and the Government can bring forth a Bill that fully and completely removes gender discrimination from the status of the Canadian Indian Act?  

Ironically, it was the Conservatives who made moderate improvements to the status of First Nations women in 1985 (Bill C-31) and 2010 (Bill C-3), but First Nation women still have some restrictions placed on the status of their children, depending on their own aboriginal and personal status (ex. married to non-status man with no children, not eligible for her own status).

Words and fancy dancing on a stage during a national birthday celebration are one thing, true action to remove all gender discrimination is another -- Deeds Speak! :tsktsk:

Perhaps PMJT could actually achieve positive change where his father couldn't/didn't?  ???


Regards
G2G


----------



## Colin Parkinson (25 Mar 2018)

That would expose the current leaderships of many of the bands for what they are and so they will do their best to block any changes.


----------



## Jed (25 Mar 2018)

Colin P said:
			
		

> That would expose the current leaderships of many of the bands for what they are and so they will do their best to block any changes.



It would also introduce accountability and put a serious crimp in the gravy train funding to the in place fiefdoms that now exist. We must not be effective and efficient with funding as that would remove the money to grease the machinery of bureaucracy.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (25 Mar 2018)

I would actually be in favour of getting rid of most of INAC and give all of the money directly to First Nations every April 1. I would remove all strings on how it is spent (surplus funds can be saved for future years), except one:

1). All federal money is fully audited every year. Spend it on "band council retreats to Vegas", if you like- but everyone is going to know.

Then the "Blame Canada" game can stop.


----------



## Rifleman62 (25 Mar 2018)

Good idea. Problem is, they will never, never ever, be enough money to satisfy the "First Nations". No matter how much they guilt the government of the day, it is not enough.

If we could give every one of the First Nations $10M plus another $10M for the next two generations to just go away it would not be enough. The "First Nations" would still protest, after all it's their land and whitey stole it from them.

Personally, I am sick of it.


----------



## Altair (27 Mar 2018)

'The court wouldn't even hear it': B.C. loses Trans Mountain appeal in federal court in 'definitive' victory: http://nationalpost.com/investing/the-court-wouldnt-even-hear-it-b-c-loses-trans-mountain-appeal-in-federal-court/wcm/ee913fcb-7e16-4796-9218-ed20b3fb41ff



> Alberta Premier Rachel Notley cheered a court victory for the $7.4-billion Trans Mountain pipeline expansion Monday, which upholds the project’s ability to sidestep local permitting processes in cities opposed to the pipeline.
> 
> The Federal Court of Appeal declined late on Friday to hear an appeal by the government of B.C. and a handful of opposed municipalities of a ruling by the National Energy Board, which allowed Kinder Morgan Canada to seek construction permits for the pipeline directly from Canada’s pipeline regulator.


  go figure.


----------



## CBH99 (27 Mar 2018)

So a large oil company gets to expand a project, while sidestepping both provincial & municipal government permitting processes.  And the court won't even hear the arguments?

Sounds like a pretty slanted & unfair ruling.  How can a court rule in favor of one side, without even hearing the arguments from the other?


----------



## JesseWZ (27 Mar 2018)

CBH99 said:
			
		

> So a large oil company gets to expand a project, while sidestepping both provincial & municipal government permitting processes.  And the court won't even hear the arguments?
> 
> Sounds like a pretty slanted & unfair ruling.  How can a court rule in favor of one side, without even hearing the arguments from the other?



That's a bit out of context. It's the Court of Appeal that declined to hear the ruling. The case had already been decided by a lower court. (or in this case, the National Energy Board). Courts of Appeal have stringent rules in place for what cases can be heard or not. In order for a Court of Appeal to rule, there must be an unsettled question of law, or an error the appellant has identified (and can substantiate) they see the Court of Appeal correcting. You can't use an appeal court to re-litigate if there isn't an area where the appellant can demonstrate the judge(s) erred in fact or law. 

Appeal courts will be hesitant to interfere with trial (lower) courts decisions if the aforementioned threshold isn't met.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (27 Mar 2018)

CBH99 said:
			
		

> So a large oil company gets to expand a project, while sidestepping both provincial & municipal government permitting processes.  And the court won't even hear the arguments?
> 
> Sounds like a pretty slanted & unfair ruling.  How can a court rule in favor of one side, without even hearing the arguments from the other?



Kinder Morgan did not "side step" anything.

Various Municipalities and the BC Govt are trying to assert authority where, constitutionally, they have none.

All because they don't want another, modern pipeline. Right beside the 50 year old pipeline.

You would think, by listening to some of the overheated rhetoric in BC that Alberta was proposing piping human babies to the coast instead of oil and refined petroleum products.

Vancouverites must some how enjoy paying the highest gas prices in North America...


----------



## jollyjacktar (27 Mar 2018)

Nah, just Dinosaur babies and ancient trees.  It's no wonder that Elizabeth May is looking for someone to chain herself to.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (27 Mar 2018)

The Federal Court of Appeals, in this case, only has jurisdiction over what is known in administrative law as judicial review of the lower court (NEB) decision. Since the NEB has a pretty stringent protective clause in its act, the only course opened for  review was a demonstration that the decision was unreasonable. That's a pretty high burden to pass and obviously, the Court felt that on its face, the application did not meet it.

If the issue raised by the municipality is that the law authorizing the NEB to issue permits instead of municipalities was an unconstitutional law, then the process is not to go for judicial review before the Court of Appeals, but to seize any Superior court in the country with the issue of unconstitutionality of the NEB Act. BC wouldn't do that here, I believe, because they probably had been advised that it would not play out in their favour. 

Thus, I am not surprised that the Court of Appeals dismissed it at this preliminary stage.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (27 Mar 2018)

I almost hate to admit this but, the NDP government in BC has, so far, acted more "small c-conservative" than its Liberal (supposed conservative) predecessor.

I am starting to read the official opposition to Kinder Morgan as a "forlorn hope" that John Horgan knows is doomed to fail, but that placates his base and unbalances the Green Party.

What he might be losing in Green/Left support, he is more than making up in former Liberal support. He might pull a majority government out of this yet.


----------



## Rifleman62 (27 Mar 2018)

Trudeau's comments on Vets want more than the government can afford. $1M per week up in smoke (vapours).

How much to repair the grass?


----------



## Loachman (27 Mar 2018)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> I would actually be in favour of getting rid of most of INAC and give all of the money directly to First Nations every April 1. I would remove all strings on how it is spent (surplus funds can be saved for future years), except one:
> 
> 1). All federal money is fully audited every year. Spend it on "band council retreats to Vegas", if you like- but everyone is going to know.



My solution skips the band council and would see the money divided up and paid to each adult, perhaps with an allowance for each child.

The band councils could then tax members to pay for programmes and infrastructure.

That would likely/hopefully give band members the ability and desire to force transparency, accountability, and restraint within their communities.


----------



## Loachman (27 Mar 2018)

Rifleman62 said:
			
		

> Trudeau's comments on Vets want more than the government can afford. $1M per week up in smoke (vapours).
> 
> How much to repair the grass?



The grass, ah, uh, will, uh, ah, repair, ah, uh, itself.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (27 Mar 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> My solution skips the band council and would see the money divided up and paid to each adult, perhaps with an allowance for each child.
> 
> The band councils could then tax members to pay for programmes and infrastructure.
> 
> That would likely/hopefully give band members the ability and desire to force transparency, accountability, and restraint within their communities.



The problem with that approach is that the number of First Nations people in Canada would magically increase by ten-fold...


----------



## PuckChaser (27 Mar 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> My solution skips the band council and would see the money divided up and paid to each adult, perhaps with an allowance for each child.
> 
> The band councils could then tax members to pay for programmes and infrastructure.
> 
> That would likely/hopefully give band members the ability and desire to force transparency, accountability, and restraint within their communities.


That's a fantastic idea. Could also change the Indian Act so individuals on reserves would be allowed to own property. Property tax paid to the band would pay for a lot of upgrades.


----------



## Loachman (27 Mar 2018)

Only for those residing on reserves.

But perhaps a DNA test to establish legitimacy would be required.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (27 Mar 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> Only for those residing on reserves.
> 
> But perhaps a DNA test to establish legitimacy would be required.



Gotcha. Thanks.


----------



## Loachman (27 Mar 2018)

Five articles in one post:

https://www.spencerfernando.com/2018/03/25/falling-fast-chart-shows-investment-collapse-trudeau-government/

FALLING FAST: Chart Shows Investment Collapse Under Trudeau Government

Money Spencer Fernando March 25, 2018

Carbon taxes and increasingly burdensome regulations imposed by the Trudeau government have caused a collapse of investment into Canada.

A chart based upon Statistics Canada data shared by the Conservatives shows the full extent of the investment collapse under the Trudeau government.

***********************************

https://globalnews.ca/news/4104673/trudeau-liberals-approval-rating-down/

Liberal approval rating drops to 44% as women, middle class look to Tories: Ipsos poll

By Rahul Kalvapalle

March 26, 2018 7:00 am

Discontent with the Trudeau Liberals has grown to such a level that if a federal election were held tomorrow, the Conservatives would romp to a comfortable win.

That’s according to a new Ipsos poll that found the Liberals to be hemorrhaging support even among their target demographics, namely the middle class, women and millennials, with many progressives increasingly weighing up a vote for the NDP.

Overall, 56 per cent of the 1,003 Canadians surveyed for the poll said the Liberals have fallen short of expectations, with 60 per cent saying it’s time for them to make way for another federal party.

Only five per cent said the Trudeau government exceeded their expectations.

***********************************

https://www.spencerfernando.com/2018/03/26/justin-trudeau-knew-national-security-advisor-going-brief-media-hes-lying-cant-testify-didnt-know-hes-incompetent/

If Justin Trudeau Knew The National Security Advisor Was Going To Brief The Media, Then He’s Lying About Why He Can’t Testify. If He Didn’t Know, Then He’s Incompetent.

News Spencer Fernando March 26, 2018

Which is why he can’t seem to bring himself to answer the question.

Justin Trudeau is trying to get everyone to focus on his ‘offer’ of a classified briefing for Andrew Scheer on the India conspiracy theory.

Of course, as I’ve pointed out, the ‘offer’ is a trap, since Scheer won’t be able to speak about what he’s told in the briefing, which would make it the perfect venue for the Trudeau government to admit that the India conspiracy theory is a total farce.

Yet, Trudeau’s ‘offer’ brings up an interesting truth:

If Justin Trudeau knew that National Security Advisor Daniel Jean was going to brief the media on the discredited conspiracy theory, then he’s lying about why Jean can’t testify. After all, if Trudeau is refusing to let Jean testify to elected Members of Parliament because he’s worried about classified info being released, then why would he have approved Jean speaking to the media about that exact same info?

Yet, if Trudeau didn’t know that Jean was going to speak to the media, it means that he is so incompetent that the government spread a discredited conspiracy – that severely damaged our relationship with a close ally - and garnered international attention, all without the Prime Minister being aware of it.

So, either Trudeau is lying, or he’s incompetent.

***********************************

https://www.spencerfernando.com/2018/03/26/watch-canadas-federal-market-debt-surpasses-1-trillion-morneau-gets-grilled-endless-deficits/

WATCH: After Canada’s Federal Market Debt Surpasses $1 Trillion, Morneau Gets Grilled On Endless Deficits

Money Spencer Fernando March 26, 2018

In the Standing Committee on Finance, Moneybags Morneau was grilled on why he refuses to even say “balanced budget,” and why he is running up massive amounts of debt - contrary to the Liberals campaign promises.

MP Dan Albas pointed out that the debt incurred by the Trudeau Liberals can’t even be justified by a war or a recession, and is instead related to an ideological choice by the Trudeau government to run large deficits.

For him to say that the Trudeau Liberals economic plan is working is totally false. Instead, our debt has exploded, our economy is slowing down, and investment is collapsing.

***********************************

https://www.spencerfernando.com/2018/03/27/trudeau-government-order-national-security-advisor-share-classified-info-media/

Did The Trudeau Government Order The National Security Advisor To Share Classified Info With The Media?

News Spencer Fernando March 27, 2018

Trudeau’s attempt to trap Andrew Scheer has backfired.

The Atwal affair keeps getting worse for the Trudeau government.

The more they try to dig themselves out of the hole they find themselves in, the farther they fall in.

When they offered Andrew Scheer a classified briefing on the issue, they probably thought they were being clever. After all, a classified briefing would mean that Scheer couldn’t talk about what he is told, making it the perfect place for the Trudeau Liberals to admit that their India conspiracy theory is false.

Scheer, knowing it’s a trap, and didn’t take the bait, but the Liberals still probably felt they could score points by making the ‘generous’ offer.

Instead, it’s backfired.

Scheer pointed out that he wanted the same briefing on the India conspiracy theory that National Security Advisor Daniel Jean gave to the media.

It was that briefing which led to the India conspiracy theory being spread in the first place, as the media reported on it once Jean briefed them.

However, the Trudeau government claims that they can only offer Andrew Scheer a classified briefing on that same issue, as Scheer has the necessary clearance to get classified briefings - clearance which most MPs lack.

The problem for the Liberals is, the media lacks that clearance as well. So, if they are saying that Andrew Scheer needs high level clearance to hear the same thing the government told National Security Advisor Daniel Jean to share with the media, then they are tacitly admitting that they ordered Jean to share classified information with those who lack the clearance to hear it.

And, if they didn’t order Jean to share classified info, then they are lying about why Scheer needs a classified briefing.

As we can see, the Trudeau Liberals’ attempt to trap Andrew Scheer has backfired, and they have instead trapped themselves.

Either they were willing to share classified info for political reasons – showing a total disregard for our national security and public service – or they are lying to hide their increasingly bungled cover-up.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (27 Mar 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> My solution skips the band council and would see the money divided up and paid to each adult, perhaps with an allowance for each child.
> 
> The band councils could then tax members to pay for programmes and infrastructure.
> 
> That would likely/hopefully give band members the ability and desire to force transparency, accountability, and restraint within their communities.



This. right. here.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (27 Mar 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> Only for those residing on reserves.
> 
> But perhaps a DNA test to establish legitimacy would be required.



....and again.


----------



## Loachman (27 Mar 2018)

And as a side benefit, it removes a lot of the "patriarchal" government control over First Nations and returns power to them (but through individuals rather than oft-corrupt band chiefs and councils.

This should go over well with most indigenous people (although, obviously, not the corrupt chiefs and councillors) and a good number of non-Indigenous citizens and voters.


----------



## Loachman (27 Mar 2018)

Of course, the US government may not see it this way, although Mr Goodale does acknowledge that in the article:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/marijuana-border-goodale-1.4594433

No reason legalized pot should prompt tighter screening at U.S. border: Goodale

Joan Bryden · The Canadian Press · Posted: Mar 26, 2018 8:17 PM ET | Last Updated: March 26


----------



## Loachman (27 Mar 2018)

https://www.spencerfernando.com/2018/03/27/despicable-bill-morneau-calls-lisa-raitt-neanderthal/

DESPICABLE: Bill Morneau Calls Lisa Raitt A “Neanderthal”

News Spencer Fernando March 27, 2018

SUNNY WAYS.

Canada’s most unpopular cabinet minister Bill ‘Moneybags’ Morneau is facing massive criticism for his comments toward Conservative Deputy Leader Lisa Raitt during questions at the Standing Committee on Finance.

When Raitt referred to the 2018 Trudeau budget a “cynical political gesture” that was all about “buying votes,” – a point many others have made considering the immense amount of virtue-signalling and absence of common-sense in the most recent budget – Morneau arrogantly referred to Raitt as a “neanderthal.”


----------



## Loachman (27 Mar 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Another insulting and aggravating call from the Conservative party badgering me to donate money.



I've not had a phone call in many months (I cannot remember when the last one was).

I do get occasional e-mails, and respond with my concerns to a few of them, and comment that I am waiting to see some real performance in those areas of particular interest to me after past disappointments (in particular with the failure to repeal and replace the Firearms Act while able, and fishing for votes in the Firearms Community with tidbits for bait) prior to donating.


----------



## Jarnhamar (27 Mar 2018)

Deleted my post instead of modify, long day.

I haven't had one in a while either. I really thought this girl was a robot then fake caller. She was the worst.  After the 4th or 5th time asking me how much I was giving and me asking questions she said she would call back and hung up on me.


----------



## Furniture (27 Mar 2018)

In Dec and Jan I think I was at a call every 5 days or so... They were getting very persistent and wouldn't take a no. I told myself next call that I get push back when I say no, I'll tell them I'm never donating again. Next call I got an extremely apologetic woman asking if I would give a bit, and if not that was fine. So I gave a bit and have backed down a bit from my previous stance, but I'm rather unimpressed with the fundraising drives lately. If the party goes back to badgering I'm done donating directly to them.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (28 Mar 2018)

I'm a member of both the Fed and Provincial Conservatives. It's pretty simple really, I've never provided them my phone number. So I don't get called. If you have given it to them, block the number. I have a special spam folder for them that I look at once a week. It intercepts the emails before they hit my mail program. If something serious is going on, I'll get it  by other means.


----------



## FJAG (28 Mar 2018)

recceguy said:
			
		

> I'm a member of both the Fed and Provincial Conservatives. It's pretty simple really, I've never provided them my phone number. So I don't get called. If you have given it to them, block the number. I have a special spam folder for them that I look at once a week. It intercepts the emails before they hit my mail program. If something serious is going on, I'll get it  by other means.



That's actually a great idea. I've been with them for years but didn't sign up the last time I moved because I was getting tired of all the communications. Might do that when I get home.

 :cheers:


----------



## Halifax Tar (28 Mar 2018)

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poll-tracker-federal-poll-averages-and-seat-projections-1.4171977?cmp=FB_Post_News

Yikes.  Lots of head scratching going on in the Liberal fortress these days I would imagine.  How could it all go so badly that even the CBC is running the stats ?


----------



## jollyjacktar (28 Mar 2018)

Halifax Tar said:
			
		

> http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poll-tracker-federal-poll-averages-and-seat-projections-1.4171977?cmp=FB_Post_News
> 
> Yikes.  Lots of head scratching going on in the Liberal fortress these days I would imagine.  How could it all go so badly that even the CBC is running the stats ?



Music to my eyes.


----------



## ModlrMike (28 Mar 2018)

Not sure if this belongs in the politics thread, but FWIW...

I guess it was only a matter of time... (not commenting on the appropriateness of sentencing guidelines for aboriginals)

Lawyers ask judge to declare African-Canadians deserve special consideration in sentencing, like Indigenous people


----------



## Loachman (28 Mar 2018)

"Disproportionate rates of incarceration" usually reflect disproportionate rates of criminal activity, usually within the offender's own ethnic/racial community.

Failure to hold people accountable for their actions, ie "special consideration in sentencing", merely encourages more of the same negative behaviour.

Many, perhaps most, of these people, however, could also benefit from support programmes to help overcome the circumstances into which they were born, but should begin early, at the first indication of a budding criminal career.


----------



## Jarnhamar (28 Mar 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> "Disproportionate rates of incarceration" usually reflect disproportionate rates of criminal activity, usually within the offender's own ethnic/racial community.
> 
> Failure to hold people accountable for their actions, ie "special consideration in sentencing", merely encourages more of the same negative behaviour.



Like Catherine McKay killing four members of the Van de Vorst family while driving drunk, sentenced to 10 years, then a month after sentencing sent to a healing lodge for Indigenous women?


----------



## Colin Parkinson (28 Mar 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> And as a side benefit, it removes a lot of the "patriarchal" government control over First Nations and returns power to them (but through individuals rather than oft-corrupt band chiefs and councils.
> 
> This should go over well with most indigenous people (although, obviously, not the corrupt chiefs and councillors) and a good number of non-Indigenous citizens and voters.



What has benefited the FN, is off reserve voting, so no longer can Band Councils punish people and disenfranchise them for speaking out against corruption. The CPC open books requirements, was the next step in cleaning up the system. To be fair, if you gave any group of people, millions of dollars with little accountability, things would go off the rails.


----------



## YZT580 (28 Mar 2018)

Colin P said:
			
		

> What has benefited the FN, is off reserve voting, so no longer can Band Councils punish people and disenfranchise them for speaking out against corruption. The CPC open books requirements, was the next step in cleaning up the system. To be fair, if you gave any group of people, millions of dollars with little accountability, things would go off the rails.


Wasn't this action one of the first things that Justin rolled back?  On a different note, with the Iroquois tribes it used to be only the women who elected the band council members, who were always male.  Reverting to that form of government would soon put a crimp in those who freeload.  If the women in my life are indicative of the gender spending priorities would definitely soon change and if the kids started misbehaving and the council members didn't take action said council members would be looking for a new job. Pronto.


----------



## Loachman (28 Mar 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Like Catherine McKay killing four members of the Van de Vorst family while driving drunk, sentenced to 10 years, then a month after sentencing sent to a healing lodge for Indigenous women?



Yes, like that.


----------



## Loachman (28 Mar 2018)

Colin P said:
			
		

> To be fair, if you gave any group of people, millions of dollars with little accountability, things would go off the rails.



Yup. Skin colour is not a factor at all.

Treat people, and expect them to act, as adults, challenge them rather than babysit them, and give them the tools and they will usually perform accordingly. Accountability, preferably from within but also with assistance from without, is key.

There are some high-functioning reserves at one end of the scale - usually due to a combination of solid leadership and decent local employment (on or off reserve - including competitive indigenous-run businesses). Some have absolutely nothing going for them, ie completely isolated. Some are corrupt, dysfunctional, and even abusive.

The best people to help them are their own people, suitably educated and equipped.


----------



## Loachman (28 Mar 2018)

https://www.spencerfernando.com/2018/03/28/journalist-says-senior-government-official-atwal-briefing-told-stuff-said-couldnt-print/

Journalist Says “Senior Government Official” In Atwal Briefing “Told Me Stuff He Said I Couldn’t Print”

News Spencer Fernando March 28, 2018

“How would I know if that was unclassified or classified?” asks David Akin.

Another part of the Trudeau Liberals’ convoluted and discredited house of cards surrounding Trudeau’s India conspiracy theory surrounding Jaspal Atwal has fallen apart.

Here’s what journalist David Akin tweeted:

I had one of those briefings from the "senior government official". At several points in our not-for-attribution briefing, the official told me stuff he said I couldn't print. How would I know if that was unclassified or classified?

- David Akin 🇨🇦 (@davidakin) March 27, 2018

The “senior government official” has been reported as being Daniel Jean - Trudeau’s national security advisor.

The Trudeau government has refused to let Jean testify, leading Canadians to wonder what the government is hiding.

Akin’s tweet is devastating for the argument being made by the Trudeau Liberals, who keep saying that Andrew Scheer needs a classified briefing to hear the same info Jean told to reporters behind the scenes. But at the same time, the Trudeau government says they didn’t give any classified info to the media.

Of course, both can’t be true, and Akin’s tweet makes it seem very likely that the government released classified info in an attempt to distract from Justin Trudeau’s awful India trip.

As we are all witnessing, the lies of the Trudeau government are collapsing more and more every day.

How will Goodale try to spin this one?


----------



## Jarnhamar (28 Mar 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Deleted my post instead of modify, long day.
> 
> I haven't had one in a while either. I really thought this girl was a robot then fake caller. She was the worst.  After the 4th or 5th time asking me how much I was giving and me asking questions she said she would call back and hung up on me.



I'm an idiot.  She called back. It was a cleverly designed recording that must have different options based on key words lol

Good to see the conservatives connecting with members, begging for money with a phone recording.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (28 Mar 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> I'm an idiot.  She called back. It was a cleverly designed recording that must have different options based on key words lol
> 
> Good to see the conservatives connecting with members, begging for money with a phone recording.



What? Like every other party has done for years? Phone calls for donations are normal election fare. Nothing new on the part of the PC or any other government in Canada. Plain SOP.


----------



## Jarnhamar (28 Mar 2018)

Is this true?

Member of Parliament Michelle Rempel discussing the Liberals De-Radicalization plan from a document compliments Public Safety Canada.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xm--piPFgCo&feature=youtu.be

Well over half of the 35 Million dollars earmarked for this is going to bureaucrats salary? Which doesn't include travel costs and employee benefits.

First goal is to "enhance the credibility and trust in this office". I'll say.


----------



## dapaterson (28 Mar 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Is this true?
> 
> Member of Parliament Michelle Rempel discussing the Liberals De-Radicalization plan from a document compliments Public Safety Canada.
> 
> ...



What portion of the DND/CAF budget goes to payroll?


----------



## Jarnhamar (28 Mar 2018)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> What portion of the DND/CAF budget goes to payroll?


Between 31% and 34% depending on promotions?

I wouldn't consider the CAF a good example due to how top and HQ heavy we are. Not enough soldiers to fill 1 division but staff for 4 of them, sorta stuff.  I'm sure our spending is shit too but we're also a little different than ISIS fighters returning home, and that's who this bureaucracy is for. 

The rest of that video doesn't make that new center sound any better. It just seems like the government is throwing 35 million at a new branch(?) of the government. Like Andrew Scheer says poems and group hugs.


----------



## dapaterson (28 Mar 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Between 31% and 34% depending on promotions?
> 
> I wouldn't consider the CAF a good example due to how top and HQ heavy we are. Not enough soldiers to fill 1 division but staff for 4 of them, sorta stuff.  I'm sure our spending is shit too but we're also a little different than ISIS fighters returning home, and that's who this bureaucracy is for.
> 
> The rest of that video doesn't make that new center sound any better. It just seems like the government is throwing 35 million at a new branch(?) of the government. Like Andrew Scheer says poems and group hugs.



My point is that personnel are a dominant cost for most organizations.   If we are setting up a group to provide rehab services, that will be... people providing those services.  Despite the federal government's efforts with Phoenix, people like to be paid for their work.


----------



## Loachman (28 Mar 2018)

That'll only leave enough to pay off one terrorist at Khadr rates (plus a bit for a couple of desks, chairs, computers, and miscellaneous office supplies).

The rest will be right pissed.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (28 Mar 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> Is this true?
> 
> Member of Parliament Michelle Rempel discussing the Liberals De-Radicalization plan from a document compliments Public Safety Canada.
> 
> ...



I had a look and listen to Ms. Rempel's babble.  Okay, I'm being a little sarcastic, but to be honest she didn't make a lot of sense.  But that's to be expected; it is very difficult to make a cogent argument on financial matters (or anything based on numbers) without displaying the numbers to the audience.  So, a typical political performance - never left facts interfere with your point of view.

I tried to find out more about the document that Ms. Rempel was referencing.  The only title she provided was (I think) "Performance Measurement and Evaluation Strategy - Centre for Community Engagement and Prevention of Violence" or something similar.  Since I couldn't find a link to the document on the Centre's site, I can't make a detailed critique of Ms. Rempel's analysis.  However, since the main point that she objects to is the "$35 million, half of which is for bureaucrats", perhaps it is better put in perspective if the budgeted amount is clarified as per this news release.
https://www.canada.ca/en/public-safety-canada/news/2017/06/new_canada_centreforcommunityengagementandpreventionofviolencesu.html?wbdisable=true


> Quick Facts
> 
> •Budget 2016 provided $35 million over five years and $10 million annually thereafter to combat radicalization to violence in Canada;
> •The July 6, 2017 call for proposals for the Community Resilience Fund (CRF) will have $1.4 million available to fund projects in 2018-19. For 2019-20 and beyond, the CRF will have $7 million available each year for existing and new projects.
> ...



While half of $35 million ($17.5 million) may seem like a lot for personnel, but not a lot for those familiar with large organizations, in actuality it appears to be only half of one fifth of the $35m or $3.5 million per year.  With the high priced help that one would expect of such an organization, especially from start-up, it sounds a lot leaner.

As for the document that Ms. Rempel waved about, one conjecture is that it may have been acquired through ATIP so it might be one of these two:
A-2017-00320 
A-2017-00333


----------



## Jarnhamar (28 Mar 2018)

It's interesting I'd like to know more so I emailed her and asked for a copy of the document.  I'll post the numbers here if I get the document. I'm also curious to read about their rehabilitation plan.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (28 Mar 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> . . . I'm also curious to read about their rehabilitation plan.



I don't think that such an animal is in their purview.



> The Canada Centre for Community Engagement and Prevention of Violence (Canada Centre) provides national leadership on Canada’s efforts to prevent radicalization to violence. The Canada Centre works with all levels of governments, not-for-profit organizations, communities, youth, frontline practitioners, academia, law enforcement, and international organizations. The Canada Centre’s activities include:
> •Developing and implementing a National Strategy on Countering Radicalization to Violence, which prioritizes action areas for addressing radicalization to violence in Canada
> •Supporting intervention efforts through funding, research, policy and programming tailored to the Canadian context
> •Working with partners to better measure and evaluate what works, what does not, and what is promising for countering radicalization to violence
> ...


----------



## PPCLI Guy (28 Mar 2018)

Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> I don't think that such an animal is in their purview.



Neither is monitoring or deterring terrorists, but she knew that as well.


----------



## Cloud Cover (28 Mar 2018)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> Neither is monitoring or deterring terrorists, but she knew that as well.


You're granting too much intellectual credit.


----------



## Jarnhamar (28 Mar 2018)

So what's the 17 million being spent on then?


----------



## Blackadder1916 (29 Mar 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> So what's the 17 million being spent on then?



Did you look at the Centre's site?  I previously provided the link.  If not, here are some projects that were funded.

https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca/cnt/bt/cc/fpd-en.aspx

or some high value multi-year projects
https://www.newswire.ca/news-releases/4-million-to-alberta-organizations-to-address-radicalization-to-violence-670137533.html


----------



## Jarnhamar (29 Mar 2018)

I did yes and thank you for the in depth posts. Maybe I'm not seeing it but none of this looks like it directly deals with the ISIS members who returned to Canada, seemingly left to their own devices by the government, and the 200 some members still abroad that we know of.  It appears these Canadians got away with murder. Now there's no bodies of course but I'm pretty sure we could make a good case that they left to commit terrorism.  You mentioned they don't directly deal with "bad guys". So not even poems and pottery? 

It's still mind boggling they weren't arrested and charged.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (29 Mar 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> . . . Maybe I'm not seeing it but none of this looks like it directly deals with the ISIS members who returned to Canada, seemingly left to their own devices by the government, and the 200 some members still abroad that we know of.  . . .



Oh, you actually believed Ms. Rempel's diatribe?  I'm sorry, but she is either stupid and did not know what the Canada Centre's purpose was or was being deliberately misleading in order to heap scorn on the government.  And we know that politicians are far too ethical to be deliberately misleading.

As for what the government's plan on how they will deal with any returning ISIS fighters, who knows?  Do your own research, I was only responding to your post about the specific errors of Ms. Rempel's babbling.

_(As an aside, I think that Ms. Rempel is one of the more intelligent CPC MPs; I can't speak to her ethics, but she is attractive.)_


----------



## ModlrMike (29 Mar 2018)

Blackadder1916 said:
			
		

> As for what the government's plan on how they will deal with any returning ISIS fighters, who knows?



I certainly know what it should be, and it doesn't include poetry and group hugs.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (29 Mar 2018)

.....or even allowing them into Canada.


----------



## Jarnhamar (29 Mar 2018)

[quote author=Blackadder1916 ]
Oh, you actually believed Ms. Rempel's diatribe?  I'm sorry, but she is either stupid and did not know what the Canada Centre's purpose was or was being deliberately misleading in order to heap scorn on the government.  And we know that politicians are far too ethical to be deliberately misleading.[/QUOTE] 

I heard it first from the libeal Government. The 35 million was going towards rehabilitation, which everyone mocked. I guess we should have read the fine print. 



> As for what the government's plan on how they will deal with any returning ISIS fighters, who knows?


Again maybe I'm wrong but the impression I got from the government was this 35million and program WAS how we were dealing with the returning murderers and rapists. 



> I can't speak to her ethics, but she is attractive.


I think that statement defines the thought process on why a lot of Canadians voted for Trudeau.


----------



## Cloud Cover (29 Mar 2018)

- being attractive. I would be happier if she was more healthy for such a young age. Ottawa has not been kind to her that way.
- comparing her to Trudeau is unfair. She is not silver spooned, having personal fitness trainers, yoga coaches and exclusive gym memberships her whole life.
-OTOH,  Trudeau smoked 90 percent of the  runners at the Army run last year. Many of these people have an operational requirement to be fit and healthy as part of their jobs.


----------



## Kat Stevens (29 Mar 2018)

So, much like the army, he can't lead a liquid fart to the nearest exit, but he can run. Too bad he can't get promoted any higher. Well, there's always Governor General I guess.


----------



## YZT580 (29 Mar 2018)

Pardon my naivety but I see lots of studies and lots of organisations being set up but I don't see any regulatory measures to ensure participation nor do I see much in the way of one on one intervention.  All I see is bureaucracy.


----------



## Blackadder1916 (29 Mar 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> I heard it first from the libeal Government. The 35 million was going towards rehabilitation, which everyone mocked. I guess we should have read the fine print.
> 
> Again maybe I'm wrong but the impression I got from the government was this 35million and program WAS how we were dealing with the returning murderers and rapists.



Can you provide a quote or a link to any statements from government ministers/spokesmen/talking heads that the purpose of the $35m was rehabilitation?  Granted, from some of the Ottawa based lip flapping (from both sides of the House) an impression could have been made that rehabilitation was a feasible approach to dealing with some of the Canadians who went overseas and joined ISIS and somehow the Canadian Government was going to make some arrangements.  However, the specific intent of this specific $35m and the specific role of the organization referenced in Ms. Rempel's youtube babble seems (to me) to have been very clearly identified in the paragraph in the 2016 budget that authorized it.
https://www.budget.gc.ca/2016/docs/plan/ch5-en.html#_Toc446106814


> Office of the Community Outreach and Counter-Radicalization Coordinator
> 
> Success in countering radicalization to violence requires the support and participation of all levels of government and civil society. Budget 2016 proposes to provide $35 million over five years, starting in 2016–17, with $10 million per year ongoing, to establish an Office of the Community Outreach and Counter-radicalization Coordinator. The Office will provide leadership on Canada's response to radicalization to violence, coordinate federal/provincial/territorial and international initiatives, and support community outreach and research.



Other than some changes in titling, it appears what the Canada Centre says they are doing is exactly what they are funded for.


----------



## Jarnhamar (29 Mar 2018)

I didn't find as much as I thought I would.

Came across a cbc article. 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/deradicalization-canada-isis-fighters-program-1.4414999



> The new Canada Centre for Community Engagement and Prevention of Violence is supposed to be on the front line of this fight. It funds research and programs that "aim to prevent and counter radicalization to violence at the individual level."
> 
> But the government doesn't know how many radicalized people are actually being spoken to, or who they are. Public Safety Canada says it can't provide statistics because the centre does not directly intervene with radicalized individuals.
> 
> Moreover, the groups the centre funds tend to focus on research over action.



Sounds even more useless than I thought. 

They're not tracking what if any services the returned rapists and murderers are using (strange isn't it since they're under CSIS and RCMP's watchful eye) and these no plan to deal with the 200 or so still out there when they make their way back here.  That's great.


----------



## Loachman (29 Mar 2018)

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-ottawa-sued-for-195-million-over-canadian-visa-services-contract/

Ottawa sued for $195-million over Canadian visa services contract

Robert Fife  and Steven Chase 

Ottawa 

Published March 28, 2018

The federal government is being sued for $195-million for cancelling an $867-million contract to manage Canadian visa application centres around the world, a dispute that ended up at the cabinet table.

The retendered contract, now valued at $1-billion, was awarded last month to VF Worldwide Holdings, an Indian company that previously handled Canadian visa services for the government.

A statement of claim filed in Ontario Superior Court on Wednesday by Ottawa-based Le Group Conseil Bronson Consulting and Cox and Kings, a global corporation that is headquartered in Mumbai, accuses the government of acting in bad faith.

The two companies claim that they won the multimillion-dollar visa-application services contract in 2016 but bureaucrats at Public Services and Procurement Canada suddenly cancelled the solicitation and retendered the procurement.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2018/03/29/canadians-love-affair-with-justin-trudeau-is-over/?utm_term=.a601493b0fa3

Canadians’ love affair with Justin Trudeau is over (I'm Canadian and was not so afflicted)

by Alan Freeman  

March 29 at 2:44 PM 

OTTAWA - Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau no longer looks invincible.

After showing a steady lead in public opinion surveys for more than two years after his surprise October 2015 election victory, Trudeau appears to be politically vulnerable. And that’s despite a buoyant economy, what’s seen as a steady hand in NAFTA trade talks with President Trump, and a weak political opposition.

“All of a sudden, we saw this drop,” said David Coletto, chief executive of Abacus Data, an Ottawa polling firm, referring to his company’s latest poll, completed in early March. “It’s the first time since Trudeau became prime minister that we have results showing the Conservatives slightly ahead.”

CBC’s Poll Tracker, which aggregates and weights the results of a dozen opinion surveys, reported in late March that the opposition Conservative Party is now in the lead, at 37.7 percent of voting intentions, compared with Trudeau’s Liberals, at 33.7 percent. The left-of-center New Democratic Party was third at 18.5 percent.

_*“When you have foreign media like CNN and BBC making fun of our prime minister, that was jarring for some people and made people question whether he was the best person for the job,” Coletto said.*_

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2018/03/29/mark-strahl-ralph-goodale-daniel-jean_a_23398785/

POLITICS 03/29/2018 14:31 EDT  | Updated 3 hours ago  

Tory MP Mark Strahl Accuses Ralph Goodale Of 'Muzzling Journalists' In Jaspal Atwal Affair

Conservatives keep up the pressure to have the PM's security adviser testify.

By Ryan Maloney

A week of heated debate over a government official's briefing to the media ended with federal Conservatives accusing the Liberal government of "muzzling journalists."

Tory MP Mark Strahl made the charge in question period Thursday while pressing Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale on the Liberals' refusal to let Daniel Jean testify at committee on the Jaspal Atwal affair.

Jean, who serves as Prime Minister Justin Trudeau''s national security adviser, gave a briefing to reporters covering Trudeau's trip to India last month. He suggested factions in the Indian government may have had a hand in Atwal, a failed assassin, landing an invite to attend an official event.

Strahl reiterated in the House of Commons that Tories want Jean to give the same briefing to members of Parliament that he gave to the media. Liberals have instead offered Tory Leader Andrew Scheer a full, classified briefing on the matter and have criticized him for not taking them up on it.


----------



## Loachman (3 Apr 2018)

https://www.spencerfernando.com/2018/04/02/trudeau-economy-investment-capital-is-leaving-our-country-in-real-time-says-rbc-ceo/

TRUDEAU ECONOMY: Investment Capital Is Leaving Our Country “In Real Time” Says RBC CEO

News Spencer Fernando April 2, 2018

According to a recent report, “McKay told The Canadian Press that a “significant” investment exodus to the U.S. is already underway, especially in the energy and clean-technology sectors. The flight of capital, McKay added, will likely be followed by a loss of talent, which means the next generation of engineers, problem solvers and intellectual property could be created not north of the border, but south of it instead.”

A key area of concern is Canada’s weakening competitive position compared to the United States, especially after big tax cuts in the US, which the government is doing nothing about – with serious consequences:

“We would certainly encourage the federal government to look at these issues because, in real time, we’re seeing capital flow out of the country,” said McKay.

The 2018 budget was a chance for the Trudeau government to adjust to the new competitive environment. They could have eliminated the carbon tax, cut regulations, and reduced taxes for middle-class and low-income Canadians.

Instead, the budget talked a bunch about gender and diversity – talk that has already been forgotten as investment keeps heading out the door. And yet, despite the rising number of warnings about our nations declining economic situation, the Trudeau government keeps doubling down on their horrendous economic policies, and our whole country is going to pay the price.

https://www.spencerfernando.com/2018/04/02/contempt-for-taxpayers-trudeau-government-spent-almost-700k-on-davos-globalist-gathering/

Contempt For Taxpayers: Trudeau Government Spent Almost $700K On Davos Globalist Gathering

Money Spencer Fernando April 2, 2018

When Justin Trudeau went to the gathering of the globalist elites in Davos, he made a big deal about saying Canada _*wouldn’t*_ respond to US tax reform with tax cuts of our own.

For some reason, Trudeau thought he was bragging, even though we are seeing investment fleeing Canada as our competitiveness falls while companies and money head south.

Now, we’re finding out that Trudeau’s speech wasn’t the only total waste in Davos.

According to a Globe & Mail report, the Trudeau government spent almost $700,000 in taxpayer dollars at the globalist gathering – and the final price tag could be even higher.

“The total cost of the three-day trip in January to the World Economic Forum in Switzerland was $678,000, most of that for hotels, office and room rentals and transportation, according to figures recently tabled in Parliament.”

_*Basically, we’re being forced to pay for the weakening of our own country.*_

https://www.spencerfernando.com/2018/04/03/crazy-radical-carleton-university-leftists-call-gandhi-racist-misogynist-want-statue-removed/

CRAZY: Radical Carleton University Leftists Call Gandhi “Racist” & “Misogynist,” Want Statue Removed

Culture Spencer Fernando April 3, 2018

The insanity of the left has now reached the point at which they are trying to remove Gandhi from history. They won’t stop until all of history has been wiped out and re-written in accordance with their sick worldview.

Every time it seems the radical left can’t get even more insane, along comes a new story.

“The removal of the statue is one way of correcting that history and re-thinking the narratives we tell - especially in an institution responsible for creating critical thinkers. Gandhi was a violent man. _*His proximity to whiteness as one who continually espoused anti-Black rhetoric*_ is, perhaps, one of the reasons behind his apotheosis. Remove the Gandhi statue.”

https://www.spencerfernando.com/2018/04/03/canadas-immigration-refugee-numbers-should-be-decided-in-a-national-referendum/

Canada’s Immigration & Refugee Numbers Should Be Decided In A National Referendum

Politics Spencer Fernando April 3, 2018

Unfortunately, this debate often gets messed up because of political correctness. Despite repeated polls showing Canadians want reduced immigration and reduced refugee numbers, politicians are afraid to say that. As a result, the debate over immigration and refugee policy happens in a very narrow range, often leaving out the views of a majority of Canadians.

That’s why the time has come for a totally different approach to immigration and refugee policy:

Every 5 or 10 years, Canada’s immigration and refugee numbers should be decided in a national referendum.

The reason for this is clear: Because immigration and refugee policy has such wide-ranging and long-term ramifications for the future of our nation, it’s not acceptable for it to be left to the whim of whichever government happens to be in power.

After all, an Angus Reid poll from 2017 showed that 57% Canadians believe “Canada should accept fewer immigrants and refugees.” Yet, the Trudeau government is going in the opposite direction, planning a massive increase compared to the numbers under the previous Harper government.

Why should the government be allowed to go against what the people want? Why aren’t we allowed to vote on it directly?

https://www.spencerfernando.com/2018/04/03/report-after-trudeau-blocks-testimony-scheer-accepts-national-security-briefing-on-atwal-scandal/

REPORT: After Trudeau Blocks Testimony, Scheer Accepts National Security Briefing On Atwal Scandal

News Spencer Fernando April 3, 2018

Here’s what the Conservatives said in a statement:

“The Leader of Canada’s Conservatives, the Honourable Andrew Scheer, today responded to the offer of a briefing concerning the incident that saw a convicted attempted murderer attend official events during Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s trip to India. Mr. Scheer has accepted the offer and has informed the government that he will invite members of the Conservative caucus and media to the portion of the briefing that will cover non-classified information.

“In correspondence with my Chief of Staff, the government confirmed that the information provided to journalists by Daniel Jean was not classified. In addition, the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness confirmed that the information provided to the media by the National Security Advisor did not contain classified information,” said Scheer.

“Given these admissions, I believe it is appropriate for all members of the Conservative caucus to be present for the briefing and I will invite them to attend. I will also invite members of the media who were present for the original briefing with the National Security Advisor.”

Mr. Scheer informed the government that if it had any additional classified information to share, members of the Conservative Caucus who are also members of the Queen’s Privy Council will remain in the room for a separate briefing.

“Justin Trudeau has failed to be honest with Canadians about why a convicted attempted murderer was invited to his official events in India. The Prime Minister blamed rogue elements within the Indian government for Jaspal Atwal’s presence in India, but since that time, the Indian government, Randeep Sarai, Jaspal Atwal and the Minister of Foreign Affairs have all refuted Justin Trudeau’s claims.”

“It’s becoming clear why Justin Trudeau is going to such lengths to cover-up the details of his trip to India. Just last week it was revealed that a Liberal Member of Parliament, who gets paid by a construction company in Brampton, secured access for his business partner to meet with the Prime Minister, the Minister of Infrastructure and Communities and the Minister responsible for economic development.”’


----------



## Colin Parkinson (3 Apr 2018)

It would be far cheaper to spend money at the entry screening level than to follow suspects around. I think the CPC was on the right track, force our concept of society and expectation down their throats upon applying, have a probation period where certain offenses are automatic expulsion and follow through on them. After a bit, the problem types will go elsewhere and the remaining immigrants will suffer less discrimination as a result.


----------



## jollyjacktar (3 Apr 2018)

Kumbaya, my lord, kumbaya..... :


----------



## PPCLI Guy (3 Apr 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> https://www.spencerfernando.com/2018/04/02/trudeau-economy-investment-capital-is-leaving-our-country-in-real-time-says-rbc-ceo/
> 
> TRUDEAU ECONOMY: Investment Capital Is Leaving Our Country “In Real Time” Says RBC CEO
> 
> ...



Are you a member of a discussion board, or a "Spencer Fernando" auotobot?  If you have no comment to make, or no desire to start a discussion, how about you just post the links?

An interesting character, this Mister Fernando.

He was let go by the CPC in 2014:

https://www.winnipegfreepress.com/local/firing-young-pc-staffer-over-blog-wasnt-smart-274860561.html

And then left the Manitoba Liberals (he was Chef of Staff to the leader) in the middle of an election in 2106:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/manitoba-liberals-chief-of-staff-spencer-fernando-resigns-1.3479721

His views are certainly provocative, and some of them resonate with the social liberal fiscal conservative inside me.  It will be interesting to see if his views manifest themselves in either candidacy or staffing for an established party in the coming years.   It is a safe bet that he will not be working on the Trudeau 2019 campaign  :rofl:


----------



## Bird_Gunner45 (3 Apr 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Kumbaya, my lord, kumbaya..... :



Another thought provoking, well thought out comment. If you have nothing to add just keep it to yourself. You dont like Trudeau. Got it.


----------



## Loachman (3 Apr 2018)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> Are you a member of a discussion board, or a "Spencer Fernando" auotobot?  If you have no comment to make, or no desire to start a discussion, how about you just post the links?



He generally posts stories - usually with links to source stories - that might otherwise be missed. Those that I post, which may either be his or the source stories from his links, whichever is shorter, are trimmed to varying degrees. I try to keep them short yet retain the gist to save people from having to open every link to see if there is something that they consider worthwhile, or not.


----------



## Bird_Gunner45 (3 Apr 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> Canada’s Immigration & Refugee Numbers Should Be Decided In A National Referendum
> 
> Politics Spencer Fernando April 3, 2018
> 
> ...



One interesting point worth discussion- why should the government be allowed to go against what the people want?

It raises the question on whether or not there should be a referendum or plebiscite for every issue, which goes against our system of parliamentary government. In theory, the election of a party to a majority position bequeaths the right to speak on behalf of more than 50% of the nations ridings (not necessarily people), which in theory, should represent the interests of the people. 

the next question raised would be should all issues and matter of policy be voted on, and if not, than what issues should explicitly be voted upon? When election reform was being considered, the CPC was big on the need for a referendum to make it law, though there's no legal requirement and they certainly didn't go to a referendum when they added more seats to the commons. If we say its matter's of national importance than should issues like marijuana, pipelines, and voting age changes also be subjected to referendum vice direct vote in the HoC? Legitimate debate points as it seems like people only think it should be a national referendum when the party in power is not "their" party and not doing what they feel should be done.

Finally- many on here consistently talk about polls being wrong all the time. So, how do we know the Angus Reid poll is correct? the article linked states that only 38.4% of people felt there were too many immigrants, 41.1% said there were the right number, and 10.4% that felt there weren't enough. So which poll is right? That's the problem- there's always a stat to prove your side (on both sides of the aisle). 39% of people still think that Global warming is fake.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/justin-trudeau-rolls-the-dice-on-immigration/article36805629/


----------



## jollyjacktar (3 Apr 2018)

BG45 I've told you twice now.  DILLIGAF about your mil points deductions to my posts?  I don't.  So spare yourself the effort.  That's why you're on my ignore list.  It's all a matter of mind over matter.  I don't mind and you don't matter.


----------



## Bird_Gunner45 (4 Apr 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> BG45 I've told you twice now.  DILLIGAF about your mil points deductions to my posts?  I don't.  So spare yourself the effort.  That's why you're on my ignore list.  It's all a matter of mind over matter.  I don't mind and you don't matter.



Modified for tone.

You made an asinine comment that added nothing to any discussion so I docked points for trolling, which is how I viewed it. As for the rest - it's an Internet message board. No need to be so emotional. Just make better comments.


----------



## mariomike (4 Apr 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> DILLIGAF about your mil points deductions to my posts?



Thank-you, Urban Dictionary.  
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=DILLIGAF


----------



## Bird_Gunner45 (4 Apr 2018)

mariomike said:
			
		

> Thank-you, Urban Dictionary.
> https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=DILLIGAF



Tbh, I had to look it up too.


----------



## FJAG (4 Apr 2018)

Bird_Gunner45 said:
			
		

> Tbh, I had to look it up too.



Me twice.

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=tbh

 ;D


----------



## Fishbone Jones (4 Apr 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> BG45 I've told you twice now.  DILLIGAF about your mil points deductions to my posts?  I don't.  So spare yourself the effort.  That's why you're on my ignore list.  It's all a matter of mind over matter.  I don't mind and you don't matter.



BG actually gave you 300 :rofl:


----------



## Jed (4 Apr 2018)

I suppose all you liberal apologists will jump in there and start doing point deductions because I have not added to the conversation, but I sure see that you are very touchy about minor things. Very immature behaviour in my opinion. I suppose you are taking the lead from our Prime Minister. What is good for the Goose is Good for the Gander, what?


----------



## jollyjacktar (4 Apr 2018)

recceguy said:
			
		

> BG actually gave you 300 :rofl:



He felt l was trolling, I never said he was smart.


----------



## Lumber (4 Apr 2018)

Get pissed off conservatives
Vote Liberal to get rid of conservatives
Get pissed off at Liberals
Vote Conservative to get rid of Liberals

I'm sensing a pattern in this country.

Actually, maybe not. If it wasn't for the Sponsorship Scandal, how many more years would the Liberals have stayed in power under Paul Martin? Without a Sponsorship Scandal, would Chretian have stayed on as leader and lasted longer then Paul Martin did? 

Conjecture I know,  but in my short life all I've seen is:

1. A long lasting Liberal government that fell because of a scandal and was replaced by the Conservatives;
2. A long lasting Conservative government that fell because no on liked them.

So far, it looks like the Liberals only lose when they get caught doing something majorly untoward (i.e. a scandal), while  the Conservative lose after a the few years it takes Canadians to say, "Oh right, we know this Starbucks coffee is better, but we kind of like being slaves to the national brand."

Apparently, no one cares about nepotism/partisanship as long as everything feels nice and pretty. "Hardly" anyone cares if Prime Minister Trudeau is an effective leader so long as the cowl he wraps around us is soft, warm, and covers our eyes.

Now back in line, sheep.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (4 Apr 2018)

The reality about immigration in Canada is that it's less about numbers, than about the makeup of those numbers. Saying that you don't like the make up gets you automatically called racist, there is an element in Canadian society that wants to short circuit debate on the issue and that is their favorite weapon. For the health of the country, you need to have the majority of the immigrants from "safe" countries that can met a easier standard of entry. You then then have smaller quota from "at risk" that need a higher level of screening prior to entering, then a quota for refugees and a smaller sliver for special cases.


----------



## jollyjacktar (4 Apr 2018)

Only the gormless don't care about performance over appearances.


----------



## Altair (4 Apr 2018)

Colin P said:
			
		

> The reality about immigration in Canada is that it's less about numbers, than about the makeup of those numbers. Saying that you don't like the make up gets you automatically called racist, there is an element in Canadian society that wants to short circuit debate on the issue and that is their favorite weapon. For the health of the country, you need to have the majority of the immigrants from "safe" countries that can met a easier standard of entry. You then then have smaller quota from "at risk" that need a higher level of screening prior to entering, then a quota for refugees and a smaller sliver for special cases.


canada already has a merit based point system,  it's not that easy to make it into canada. 

Its no surprise that trump points to canada as a model on immigration.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (4 Apr 2018)

Exactly, Altair.  Which is what leads to the problem that all proportions considered, a lot of people try to circumvent the system by claiming refugee status. As I speak, I am listening to my local radio station (I live about 30 Kms from the US border in Quebec's Monteregie region) and they just indicated that the official RCMP numbers is that more than 500 people came over illegaly and claimed refugee status just this last long week-end, here at the now famous Quebec false crossing (where, to replace the army tents, the government has actually now built and installed semi-permanent construction site trailers - that is really working hard to stem the flow of illegals - much better than a wall /SARC OFF).

These people then stay in until all possible appeals have been exhausted - about four or five years - and in the meantime, give birth to one or two kids - who are automatically Canadians - and start to earn a living and make friends in the "bring-tons-of-refugees-in" crowd, who then spirit them away into some church somewhere as "sanctuary" and start long public campaigns to get them special "humanitarian" exemption from the Minister of Immigration to avoid deportation when their claim is finally denied. Etc. Etc.

Well, those "refugees" are basically stealing spots from legitimate immigrants seeking entry legally, upon completing the process, and having all the points required to do so.


----------



## ModlrMike (4 Apr 2018)

For the sake of comparison:

Immigration points-based systems compared

Points-based immigration system


----------



## Bird_Gunner45 (4 Apr 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> He felt l was trolling, I never said he was smart.



or it was on purpose to see if you even looked. You're the one who went off on a rant without noticing what actually happened.


----------



## Scott (4 Apr 2018)

Enough.

Take it to PMs. If you have an issue, report it. End the bunfight.


----------



## Loachman (5 Apr 2018)

One comment at the end:

Roger Weigel · Works at Universal Ford

I can help the Liberals find the problem for well under $300000. A $10 mirror is all they need to use.

https://globalnews.ca/news/4123026/oil-and-gas-canada-falling-behind-study/

April 5, 2018 7:00 am   

Feds to spend $280k to study why Canada’s oil and gas sector is falling behind

By Monique Scotti   National Online Journalist, Politics  Global News


----------



## jollyjacktar (6 Apr 2018)

> BONOKOSKI: Adieu once again, Prime Minister, nice of you to have stopped by
> 
> Sean Kilpatrick / THE CANADIAN PRESS
> 
> ...


----------



## PPCLI Guy (7 Apr 2018)

So attendance at Summit of the America's and the Commonwealth Heads of State is being fleshed out with other commitments to maximise the value of the travel by bundling it?

Shocking.

It's almost like he is the PM of a G7 nation, and one that is an inveterate "joiner of clubs" at that.

Imagine the hue and cry from some if he did not attend...


----------



## Altair (7 Apr 2018)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> So attendance at Summit of the America's and the Commonwealth Heads of State is being fleshed out with other commitments to maximise the value of the travel by bundling it?
> 
> Shocking.
> 
> ...


The Prime Minister has done himself no favors this year,  but this falls under the "impossible to please some people "category


----------



## FSTO (7 Apr 2018)

Not a very positive review of "Canada's Back!"

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-canadas-back-when-its-convenient/

KONRAD YAKABUSKI
PUBLISHED 1 DAY AGO
UPDATED APRIL 5, 2018
The world now knows what Prime Minister Justin Trudeau meant when he said: “Canada is back.” We’re not the helpful middle-power willing to punch above our weight, after all. We’re more like the spoiled teen who engages in voluntourism to pad her résumé. It seems we’re more out to impress people than take on the thankless tasks required of an adult.

Our friends have come to see us as high maintenance, fickle and even hypocritical. Helpful? Not so much. We get up on our high-horse to proclaim our “feminist” foreign policy while continuing to sell armoured vehicles to one of the world’s most misogynistic regimes. We don’t have the guts to admit why we’re really selling arms to Saudi Arabia and hide behind the excuse of done deals.

We naively trumpet a return to peacekeeping without so much as a basic understanding of the modern meaning of the term. When we learn what’s really involved, we stall and waver, until that is no longer possible. We make a commitment to supply helicopters and personnel in a danger zone, but offer no date for deployment, fearing body bags before the next election.

We are becoming a laughing stock in diplomatic circles for the haplessness and tone-deafness of our Prime Minister on foreign soil and the failure of his entourage to insulate him from himself.

“The government’s actions and rhetoric have been inconsistent, at times contradictory and mostly focused on messaging and advancing the Liberal brand than fixing real problems,” according to the 2018 Foreign Policy Report Card produced by Carleton University’s School of International Affairs in partnership with the Canadian Foreign Policy Journal. “For a political party that promised to elevate Canada’s position in the world, the Liberal government under Justin Trudeau has achieved remarkably little in the first half of its tenure to meet that goal.”

Was Mr. Trudeau really ever that interested in the hard work needed to enhance Canada’s influence on the world stage, especially if it involved taking any political risks? During the 14 months that Stéphane Dion served as his Foreign Affairs minister, Mr. Trudeau held only a single face-to-face meeting with him, according to a new book by former Dion adviser Jocelyn Coulon. And that meeting only happened because the two men were stuck on a flight to Europe together.

“On the plane, Dion brings up several topics, including re-engaging with Russia,” Mr. Coulon writes in Un Selfie avec Justin Trudeau. “Trudeau is hesitant and reminds [Dion] that there are two schools of thought within cabinet on the topic [of Russia]. According to a witness at the scene, it is not a deep conversation and Trudeau grows irritated by Dion’s insistence.”

Mr. Dion, it seems, was a constant thorn in the side of the Prime Minister’s Office, pushing a seemingly uninterested Mr. Trudeau to leverage Canada’s middle-power status on a host of issues. In return, Mr. Dion was demoted from chairing the cabinet committee on the environment, because he pushed for more ambitious greenhouse gas reduction targets, and ultimately turfed from cabinet altogether.

On Russia, of course, that other school of thought was championed by Chrystia Freeland, who had antagonized President Vladimir Putin as a journalist. By the time she replaced Mr. Dion at Foreign Affairs in early 2017, however, saving the North American free-trade agreement had become her all-consuming priority. She has, hence, paid only fleeting attention to other files under her authority.

Even if her NAFTA work pays off soon with an agreement-in-principle with the United States and Mexico, it is unlikely to lead to a refocusing of Canada’s foreign policy or a revival of the Pearsonian diplomacy the Liberals once talked about. This government seems to have neither the courage nor wherewithal of its high-minded diplomatic pretensions.

Consider the tepidness with which Mr. Trudeau greeted this week’s report from his own Special Envoy to Myanmar. Bob Rae called on Ottawa to press the international community to launch an investigation into crimes against humanity committed by Myanmar’s military against the largely Muslim Rohingya minority. Canada, he said, should let in thousands of Rohingya refugees and triple its aid to the region. “What we do, or don’t do, in response to the Rohingya crisis will be a litmus test for Canada’s foreign policy,” Mr. Rae insisted.

In a statement, Mr. Trudeau thanked him for his “thoughtful recommendations” and added: “In the coming weeks, we will assess the recommendations in this report and outline further measures we intend to take.”

Canada is willing to be back, it seems, as long as it’s convenient for us.


----------



## FSTO (7 Apr 2018)

Andrew Coyne seems to think that our current government is much more than just incompetent when it comes to international security and foreign affairs.
http://nationalpost.com/opinion/andrew-coyne-serious-questions-remain-around-atwal-affair-despite-partisan-silliness

Like much of the nation, I have been riveted by the high-stakes test of wills between government and opposition over who should brief whom about what with regard to l’affaire Atwal.

As I need hardly recapitulate, the Conservatives had demanded the prime minister’s National Security and Intelligence Adviser, Daniel Jean, appear before a Commons committee to answer questions about his timely intervention on behalf of the prime minister’s ass during what is now universally known as His Disastrous Trip to India.

Among other embarrassments, the trip had been all but derailed by the revelation that a former member of a Sikh terrorist group, Jaspal Atwal, convicted in the 1986 attempted murder of a visiting Indian cabinet minister on Vancouver Island, had twice been invited by the Canadian High Commission to attend receptions in the prime minister’s honour.

That was before Jean, a career civil servant and the most senior member of the national security establishment, contacted members of the national press to suggest, off the record, that Atwal’s appearances had in fact been orchestrated by rogue elements within the Indian government to make the government of Canada look soft on terrorism and sow discord with India.

The theory was widely mocked, including by former intelligence officials, and frankly didn’t make a whole lot of sense: even if Atwal’s presence in the country were due to some elaborate high-level plot to sabotage the prime minister’s visit (he had in fact been granted several visas over the years, the latest of which was last summer) it did not explain how he got on the invite list — especially since a Liberal MP, Randeep Sarai, had already confessed his responsibility.

But this was not some flack from the Prime Minister’s Office spinning this, but the country’s top spook, so my colleagues felt obliged to report it, taking care to describe Jean only as a “senior government official with knowledge of security issues,” and the like. Until the next morning, when I suspect they woke up feeling used.

So when it all blew up, and blew up again — the prime minister backing Jean in Parliament, the Indian government bluntly expressing its dismay at this “baseless and unacceptable” suggestion — it was hardly surprising the Conservatives would demand to hear from Jean, by now outed as the source. When the Liberals refused, citing national security, the Tories held up parliamentary proceedings in protest.

There followed a government offer to give Tory leader Andrew Scheer a classified briefing — for which, as a Privy Councillor, he is eligible — countered by Scheer’s demand that MPs also be briefed on the unclassified bits, to which the government eventually agreed on condition that … well, it all gets a bit eyeglazing at this point. (The Liberals suggested they might be amenable to Jean appearing before the new, top-secret, multi-party, bicameral National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians. If he did, we’d never know it: its members are forbidden by their lifetime secrecy oath even to divulge whether he appeared before them.

That both sides are playing politics with this, the Tories seeking to prolong the prime minister’s India agonies, the Liberals doing their best to tie up their inquiries in national security knots, is not in doubt. But underneath all the partisan silliness there are some serious issues involved, and serious questions raised by Jean’s intervention.

First, who was responsible for the decision to involve him so overtly on such a political file? Was it on Jean’s own initiative? That would be odd, and improper, for someone in his position. Or did the prime minister’s office put him up to it? That would be even more improper.

Second, what is the truth of what he is reported to have said? Was there really a plot to embarrass the prime minister by high-level Indian officials seeking to poison Indian-Canadian relations? That’s a huge charge, and one worth investigating, despite — or because of — the Indian government’s assurances. Or if it is not true, then why did Jean say it? Was he making it up? Wrongly informed? Hallucinating?

Third, what is the evidence backing this theory? The reporters say Jean offered none. The Tories wonder nevertheless if it was based on classified information, which might thus have been put at risk. Or if no classified information was disclosed, then why all the stonewalling and foot-dragging? Why the reluctance to let Jean answer questions from parliamentarians? Why should MPs have less information than reporters?

So that’s national security, Canada-India relations, the rights of Parliament and the impartiality of the civil service potentially in play, to say nothing of the issues raised by the incident Jean was attempting to explain away: the presence of a convicted terrorist, posing for pictures with Liberal cabinet ministers, at official functions — and not just in Canada, where Atwal was a fixture at Liberal events, but on Indian soil. During a visit whose purpose was ostensibly to mend fences on this very issue.

It’s probable this was just a colossal screwup. And yet the government has left hanging the unsupported accusation that elements of a foreign power were responsible — a power with whom we ostensibly have friendly relations. Only rather than make the accusation itself, it has relied upon the shadowy allegations of a shadowy civil servant, whom it has spent the past several weeks shielding from scrutiny.

This will not do. As I said, there are serious questions raised by this affair, and they demand serious answers: about what was said, and why, and at whose behest. At the very least Jean needs to account for his own actions. He may shed light on others’ as well.


----------



## PPCLI Guy (7 Apr 2018)

Two thoughtful pieces, that are bang on the money.  The Trudeau team is incompetent at best, and I am tired of the smugness that we portray on the international scene.

Does anyone remember that we are meant to be informed by the POGG statement.....and the GG part of that is perhaps the most important?


----------



## jollyjacktar (7 Apr 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> The Prime Minister has done himself no favors this year,  but this falls under the "impossible to please some people "category



And there is an ever increasing number of Canadians whom are not pleased, Trudeau zealots aside.  I don't believe this trend will turn around much either towards 2019 and the next election cycle.


----------



## Edward Campbell (7 Apr 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> And there is an ever increasing number of Canadians whom are not pleased, Trudeau zealots aside.  I don't believe this trend will turn around much either towards 2019 and the next election cycle.



Bear this in mind, please ...

          
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





          ... and there are over eight of those "long times" until the 2019 election. 

Prime Minister Trudeau is served by a brilliant campaign machine ... they are just not very good at governing. 

Also, remember this:

        
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




               ... things look rosey for the CPC right now, but whio knows what will happen in 80 "long times?"


----------



## Jarnhamar (7 Apr 2018)

Free daycare anyone?


----------



## jollyjacktar (7 Apr 2018)

That is true, ER, but looking at past performance/satisfaction of voters as a guide there seems to be a steady downward trend for both.  Their election machine might be well oiled and powerful but if more voters decide the Emperor is in fact butt naked and not wearing Ermine, can said machine convince those who've moved away that he does indeed wear Ermine.

Voters such as me don't count.  I've never liked Trudeau brand going back to the Snr as CEO, nor shall l ever.  That being said, I'm not in anyone else's camp either.

Maybe the younger might pull it off.  We'll see come next election, yes.


----------



## larry Strong (8 Apr 2018)

Won't make a guess on the drama teachers future, however if this follows all the way thru then Notley's completely toast.....not that NDP are not already toast in Ab.

*"Kinder Morgan cites B.C. opposition as it suspends ‘non-essential’ spending on Trans Mountain pipeline"*

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/alberta/article-kinder-morgan-cites-bc-opposition-as-it-suspends-non-essential/

Cheers
Larry


----------



## PuckChaser (8 Apr 2018)

Trudeau got what he wanted, no pipelines. The legislation would have killed any new ones, and he let BC and Quebec kill Trans Mountain and Energy East. Don't need a $300K study to find out why our oil and gas industry is in shambles. 

The exodus of foreign investment continues, now at levels only seen during the oil price crash/recession in 2008: http://business.financialpost.com/news/economy/foreign-direct-investment-in-canada-plunges-on-oil-exodus-1


----------



## YZT580 (8 Apr 2018)

The fallout will go far beyond Notley.  Investment will leave Alberta by the billions.  They won't have to worry about carbon re-capture.  No one is going to invest unless they see a reasonable chance of a profit and with no line going east, no line going west and you can bet that the NG line will bog down as well one of the greatest sources of cash for all Trudeau's pet projects is going to dry up.


----------



## jollyjacktar (8 Apr 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Trudeau got what he wanted, no pipelines. The legislation would have killed any new ones, and he let BC and Quebec kill Trans Mountain and Energy East. Don't need a $300K study to find out why our oil and gas industry is in shambles.
> 
> The exodus of foreign investment continues, now at levels only seen during the oil price crash/recession in 2008: http://business.financialpost.com/news/economy/foreign-direct-investment-in-canada-plunges-on-oil-exodus-1



All of a sudden it's just like his father's time with the National Energy Program.  The old man must be laughing in his grave at the shambles this will cause Alberta.  The wheel goes round.


----------



## Cloud Cover (8 Apr 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> canada already has a merit based point system,  it's not that easy to make it into canada.
> 
> Its no surprise that trump points to canada as a model on immigration.


All you have to do is walk over the border into Quebec from the US??


----------



## SeaKingTacco (9 Apr 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Trudeau got what he wanted, no pipelines. The legislation would have killed any new ones, and he let BC and Quebec kill Trans Mountain and Energy East. Don't need a $300K study to find out why our oil and gas industry is in shambles.
> 
> The exodus of foreign investment continues, now at levels only seen during the oil price crash/recession in 2008: http://business.financialpost.com/news/economy/foreign-direct-investment-in-canada-plunges-on-oil-exodus-1



This will not end well for anyone in BC or Alberta. And will have ramifications well into the rest of Canada.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (9 Apr 2018)

CPC changed the legislation for NEB, Fisheries Act, NWPA (twice) and CEAA, they do a crappy job of it, due to poor consultation and rushing, Liberals are now changing all those Acts again, while they did a decent job of consultation, they are trying to please to many people and adding bizarre crap that is going to make only the lawyers happy. When CPC gets in, they will be forced to change those Acts yet again, hopefully keeping the good bits from the previous changes and dumping the crap. As it is, when the debt piper comes calling, we won't be able to enforce the Liberal Acts. Trying to warn my program that the money won't keep coming.


----------



## Rifleman62 (9 Apr 2018)

https://www.ourcommons.ca/Parliamentarians/en/votes/42/1/450/

Every single Liberal MP voted against this Conservative motion to support Transmountain in February. Results at link.


----------



## Kirkhill (10 Apr 2018)

Stephen LeDrew - Past President of the Liberal Party of Canada.  

(In)famous for his "Dumb as a sack of hammers" comment about bill C24

https://youtu.be/7gj27W5E2rw

If the youngster has lost LeDrew has he not lost the Party? Or at least, those folks that used to think of themselves as "Liberals"?


----------



## jollyjacktar (10 Apr 2018)

Excellent video.  One more who has come to realise the Emperor's butt naked and most certainly not clothed in Ermine.  I hope this bus keeps rolling and people wake up.


----------



## Remius (11 Apr 2018)

What goes around comes around

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-david-livingston-sentenced-to-four-months-over-deleted-gas-plants/


----------



## YZT580 (11 Apr 2018)

But the end result stays the same: they got away with it, they being Dalton and company and they cost the Ontario taxpayer a billion or more in doing so.  And to that has to be added the cost of the investigation and trial which has to be in 7 figures as well.  Four months, no fine, and 100 hours is a joke.


----------



## Loachman (12 Apr 2018)

Two slightly encouraging Canadian oil-related stories:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-pipeline-kinder-morgan-1.4616241

Trudeau to interrupt foreign trip to meet with Notley, Horgan on pipeline impasse

PM will return to Ottawa from Peru on Sunday to meet with premiers of Alberta, B.C.

Kathleen Harris · CBC News · Posted: Apr 12, 2018 12:06 PM ET | Last Updated: 18 minutes ago

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau will interrupt his nine-day foreign trip to return to Ottawa to meet with B.C. Premier John Horgan and Alberta Premier Rachel Notley to try to end the deadlock over the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/vanadium-shell-oilsands-renewables-1.4608208

Oilsands research could be 'game changer' for renewable energy

Researchers are extracting vanadium from the oilsands and using it to build batteries

Kyle Bakx · CBC News · Posted: Apr 12, 2018 4:00 AM ET | Last Updated: 10 hours ago

"If successful, it could be an absolute game change. It will prove that we are capable of delivering renewable energy game-changing ideas not in spite of traditional energy but precisely because of it.," said Steenkamp. 

Steenkamp has constructed what's called a vanadium redox flow battery inside a garden shed, which is powered by solar panels above the research centre. The battery is run through continuous cycles of charging fully, then draining completely. Data is collected to gauge its performance, which so far is promising, according to Steenkamp.

So far, the vanadium battery can only hold a charge of six kilowatt hours, enough to run a hairdryer for about four hours. It would need to be much larger to store electricity from a wind farm or solar field, but Steenkamp says this type of battery can easily be scaled up. 

"Biggest challenge is the cost," Steenkamp said. "It's the classic problem of flow batteries and why we are here: Can you find this stuff in enough quantity and at a low enough cost to make large-scale energy storage viable?"


----------



## PuckChaser (12 Apr 2018)

Probably would have been cheaper for him to do it while he was on his "personal day" on Wednesday when actually in Ottawa.


----------



## jollyjacktar (12 Apr 2018)

But this looks better.  Rushing in to save the day.


----------



## Altair (12 Apr 2018)

Better late than never.


----------



## McG (12 Apr 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> Probably would have been cheaper for him to do it while he was on his "personal day" on Wednesday when actually in Ottawa.


You mean, when neither Premier was in Ottawa? Seems ineffective to me.

On a related topic, do you  voluntarily forgo your short days before and after TD trips and exercises?


----------



## SeaKingTacco (13 Apr 2018)

MCG said:
			
		

> You mean, when neither Premier was in Ottawa? Seems ineffective to me.
> 
> On a related topic, do you  voluntarily forgo your short days before and after TD trips and exercises?



You mean when the future of Confederation is at stake? To head off a constitutional crisis?

I might give up a short day to handle that...


----------



## PuckChaser (13 Apr 2018)

MCG said:
			
		

> You mean, when neither Premier was in Ottawa? Seems ineffective to me.
> 
> On a related topic, do you  voluntarily forgo your short days before and after TD trips and exercises?


You think those Premiers wouldn't have been in Ottawa if asked? Or met the PM in Sask when he was there inn the weekend?

I don't have enough fingers and toes to count the days I've been to work on a leave day. Or the unit shorts/stats/weekends worked without asking for ETO.

Probably too much to ask our Prime Minister to lead by example during a major crisis.


----------



## McG (13 Apr 2018)

PuckChaser said:
			
		

> You think those Premiers wouldn't have been in Ottawa if asked? Or met the PM in Sask when he was there inn the weekend?


I am sure Notley would have been on a plane in an instant for this, but Horgan knows not being rushed is to his benefit and as a general rule premiers do not coming running when a prime minister snaps his fingers.  So, no.  I do not think anything necessarily would have happened should because the PM summoned them.  I would not assume that an invitation was not sent either.  In fact, that “personal day” was probably one of the dates that was discussed as the three leaders and their offices coordinated a meeting.  I don’t think Canadians would have looked too kindly upon this meeting being placed on the margins of the Humboldt vigil, but I don’t know that options were not discussed to make something work during that weekend.

The place he really skipped his opportunity/obligation was before KM even announced its current deadline.  His pipeline solidarity tour through Alberta & BC (like his earlier steel and aluminium solidarity tour) was a photo-op and campaigning-never-stops trip.  Why, when he was out on the mission to resolve the pipeline dispute, did he not conduct the meeting with the two people empowered to end it? 



			
				PuckChaser said:
			
		

> I don't have enough fingers and toes to count the days I've been to work on a leave day. Or the unit shorts/stats/weekends worked without asking for ETO.


I have no doubt that the PM could say the same thing.  Unlike the PM, you don't have an army of media and people on the internet bemoaning your scheduled day off while being oblivious to the work you are actually doing outside the view of watchful cameras. 

[Pedantic aside: there is no such thing as "ETO" or “CTO” in the CAF.  You can use short for that purpose, and there is special relocation if the worked days were within a long enough period of travel]


----------



## jollyjacktar (13 Apr 2018)

MCG said:
			
		

> I have no doubt that the PM could say the same thing.  Unlike the PM, you don't have an army of media and people on the internet bemoaning your scheduled day off while being oblivious to the work you are actually doing outside the view of watchful cameras.



Unlike any PM (but seems to be this one more so than many of his predecessors) we also don't have the taxpayers swanning us and our families all over the globe at government expense,  the housing and other perks (solid gold pension etc) that come with the job.  He asked for the job as any of them do and thus if you want the slot then you can do the overtime that comes with it too.  I don't have too much pity (at the overtime) those political masters we have in the various institutions they inhabit may have to put in.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (13 Apr 2018)

He must have time. He's seldom in the House.


----------



## Kirkhill (13 Apr 2018)

> ...When Conservative MPs like Michael Chong and Brent Rathgeber went up against their own government during the Harper years, the murmurs from the inside generally weren’t that these guys were secretly adored as heroes. They were offside from consensus.
> 
> But *when it comes to Trudeau, most Liberals you speak to in confidence will nod in agreement with critics from within the Liberal family*.
> 
> It all seems to come down to respect. As one senior Liberal recently described it to me, the infighting *during the Chretien-Martin era *was about power. *No one ever doubted the credentials of either man. That’s not the case with today’s grumblings. There’s a serious respect issue brewing*, one that’s no doubt getting worse after the India mess.



http://torontosun.com/opinion/columnists/furey-a-growing-number-of-liberals-are-coming-out-of-the-woodwork-to-criticize-trudeau


----------



## Colin Parkinson (16 Apr 2018)

Had the CPC allowed more internal opposition and criticism,they might still be in power. As for the Libs, they have a few respected Elders trying to hold the shitshow together. That's what you get when you buy something based on the paint job and not the mechanical bits.


----------



## Jarnhamar (17 Apr 2018)

A bit off topic.

I was recently told by someone that the company who makes our disastrous boots were on the list of party donators to the Liberals. Is there a way to verify that?


----------



## FJAG (17 Apr 2018)

I'm genetically programmed to despise the NDP and all that it stands for, however, this latest move by Notley shows some very non-NDPish realpolitik.



> Bill 12, titled Preserving Canada's Economic Prosperity Act, gives the Alberta government the ability to retaliate against B.C. over any delays to the expansion by driving up gas prices or restricting shipments of other energy products.



http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-oil-gas-producers-support-notley-government-bill-12-1.4622717

 :cheers:


----------



## jollyjacktar (17 Apr 2018)

She has had to change her tune since becoming the bandmaster in the last election.  It's interesting to see two Dippers tearing into each other like this.

op:


----------



## PPCLI Guy (17 Apr 2018)

Jarnhamar said:
			
		

> A bit off topic.
> 
> I was recently told by someone that the company who makes our disastrous boots were on the list of party donators to the Liberals. Is there a way to verify that?



This is, indeed, searchable.  Here are all the corporate donors in Quebec who contributed to the Liberal Party.  Keep in mind that there are severe limitations on corporate donations in Canada...

http://www.elections.ca/WPAPPS/WPF/EN/CCS/ContributionReport?returnStatus=1&reportOption=5&queryId=bef12a6d202c4123b274373f9c9abe34&sortDirection=asc&sortOrder=0%2C1%2C2&totalRecordFound=1178&current200Page=1&total200Pages=6&reportExists=True&displaySorting=True


----------



## Jarnhamar (17 Apr 2018)

Thanks a lot. I tried searching a bit but wasn't coming up with anything.


----------



## Cloud Cover (17 Apr 2018)

FJAG said:
			
		

> I'm genetically programmed to despise the NDP and all that it stands for, however, this latest move by Notley shows some very non-NDPish realpolitik.
> 
> http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/alberta-oil-gas-producers-support-notley-government-bill-12-1.4622717
> 
> :cheers:


Interestingly they are going about in the form of a licensing scheme for pipeline operators with a $10 million per day fine for corporate non-compliance.  BC says they will challenge the legislation in court, and it would be interesting to see if Alberta even bothers respond to that.   All of the operators could possibly voluntarily stop feeding oil into the existing pipelines by not renewing supply contracts.  Start shipping more south by rail... Mr. Trudeau has possibly triggered a constitutional earthquake in several dimensions. Good one JT.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (17 Apr 2018)

It's a true popcorn moment watching a death match between 2 NDP governments and a centre-left Federal government run by enviro-clown over an oil pipeline.


----------



## Altair (17 Apr 2018)

Colin P said:
			
		

> It's a true popcorn moment watching a death match between 2 NDP governments and a centre-left Federal government run by enviro-clown over an oil pipeline.


it really is. 

I like it for it shows how much trouble the NDP is. 

This civil war has been brewing for some time now,  the labour side of the party and the environmental fanatics. 

Now you have the two NDP camps in open economic warfare and the federal NDP has pretty much tried to keep their head down.


----------



## Jed (17 Apr 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> it really is.
> 
> I like it for it shows how much trouble the NDP is.
> 
> ...



Yep, a real live clown show. But it just isn’t funny.


----------



## Retired AF Guy (17 Apr 2018)

PPCLI Guy said:
			
		

> This is, indeed, searchable.  Here are all the corporate donors in Quebec who contributed to the Liberal Party.  Keep in mind that there are severe limitations on corporate donations in Canada...
> 
> http://www.elections.ca/WPAPPS/WPF/EN/CCS/ContributionReport?returnStatus=1&reportOption=5&queryId=bef12a6d202c4123b274373f9c9abe34&sortDirection=asc&sortOrder=0%2C1%2C2&totalRecordFound=1178&current200Page=1&total200Pages=6&reportExists=True&displaySorting=True



The National Post recently created a searchable database where you can do the same thing, but for both Federal and Provincial. You can search by either the recipient or the donor.

http://special.nationalpost.com/follow-the-money/feature


----------



## Kat Stevens (19 Apr 2018)

Three socialists sit down in a room to discuss the economy. No punchline, that’s the joke.


----------



## Altair (19 Apr 2018)

Loachman said:
			
		

> Had he kept all, or even most, promises (and I truly hope that he does not, and that he has no opportunity to do so after 2019), then I would also take that as an indicator that he is more likely to keep others. Past performance, you see.
> 
> Has anybody actually said "will break" in this context? I'm not bothering to go back and look. On the balance of probabilities, however, and given that letting pipelines proceed, or, especially, over-ruling BC, would cost him more votes than he would gain from Alberta, I doubt that he would - willingly and happily - force the issue. I expect him to delay and waffle until the company gives up in frustration.
> 
> ...


I thought of this as I watched the news and saw Greenpeace protesters with a Crudeau oil pipeline mock up in London. 

What a difference a few months make. 

In the pocket of oil companies to the left,  anti pipeline alberta hater to the right,  I guess he's walking the middle ground of compromise.


----------



## CBH99 (19 Apr 2018)

While she may be applauded for "bold leadership" against this "monumental challenge"...<cough>... I think Notley lost a lot of votes over how she conducted herself in this situation as a whole, specifically targeting the 'civilian population' if you will in order to ensure her own political goals are met.

I'm not debating whether the pipeline needs to be expanded or not.


But instead of keeping this a 'government to government' issue...she continues to target the lower to middle class residents of BC.  First, she limited the amount of wine that BC could export to Alberta.  This had a very real affect on small, family owned businesses including wineries, liquor stores, transport businesses, etc.

Now she wants to make gas so unbelievably expensive, that the residents of BC will FORCE their government to concede if for no other reason than people are going broke over just trying to drive to work, drive their kids around, and live normal lives.


I'm all for tough measures if governments disagree and, for some reason, can't come up with a solution that both parties can accept.  But deliberately making the lives of fellow Canadians difficult, and making them suffer financially - especially when it's the lower to middle class that will be affected the most - isn't very noble, honourable, or Canadian.

Canadian provincial governments should not be deliberately targeting & financially hurting other Canadians, just because they happen to reside in a different province.

As someone who lives in Alberta, I have absolutely zero motivation to see average people in BC suffering due to a political dispute.  It's one of the most un-Canadian things I can think of, and I know from discussing this around the water cooler, I'm not the only one that feels that way.


----------



## GR66 (19 Apr 2018)

And what exactly is BC’s attempt to stop the pipeline doing to the citizens of Alberta?

Taking away the ability to ship Albertan oil lowers the price per barrel they get, lowers the total volume they can sell, reduces investment in the industry, reduces the tax income received by the government thus reducing the services they can provide. 

Blocking the pipeline is directly attacking the financial livelihood of every Albertan. Notley is simply retaliating in kind to what BC has started. 

I don’t live in Alberta, but I imagine most of your fellow Albertans don’t share your sympathy with your BC neighbours when they are effectively crippling your economy.


----------



## SeaKingTacco (19 Apr 2018)

This whole pipeline fiasco is something that should have never even evolved in a modern, first world country.

The blame can be laid in equal measures at the feet of politicians at both the federal and provincial levels of government who listen to dogmatic, extremist activists rather than ordinary voters.

If polls are to be believed, more than half of British Columbians want to see the pipeline built. That number has actually increased in the past month.

John Horgan (BC premier) is no dummy. I believe he knows that he has not got a constitutional leg to stand in opposing the pipeline. But, he owes his very survival as premier to the Green Party. And they are absolutely beyond reason on the subject of petroleum products. 

Rachel Notley is also no dummy. She knows that this is probably the last pipeline that will ever get built in Canada. If it fails, she is politically finished. She sold the oil industry the line that if they played ball on carbon pricing, the environmental movement would give them a pass on shipping oil. Unfortunately for her (and everyone else) the environmentalists in BC are a bunch of dogmatic absolutists and professional protestors who cannot see that they have largely won the war. By forcing Alberta in a corner, they are going to trigger a backlash.

If Alberta throttles petroleum shipments to BC, it will be an unholy mess and BC will grind to a halt inside of a week. There is no real infrastructure on the west coast to ship in refined petroleum from the US or abroad in any quantity. Not that there is much surplus supply to be had on the west coast of North America.

I do not wish to see a petroleum embargo come to pass, as tempers are high enough and none of this is good for Confederation (sidebar- why is there always a constitutional crisis when a Trudeau is the PM?). But if it does, maybe it would be instructive, if only to remind the average citizen just how reliant they are on petroleum and not to believe the Green Party that Canada can dump oil consumption, tomorrow.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (19 Apr 2018)

Meanwhile the Lax, a Northern Indian band that is suing the government on the oil tanker ban, is in talks to build a oil terminal at Hyder Alaska, about 3 km from Stewart BC. Life is never dull here. Currently I am reviewing a fuel bunkering facility, a Bulk liquid fuel facility, an LPG facility, with another LPG facility coming in. I just finished a smaller LPG loading facility, all in Prince Rupert. It also seems LNGCanada is closing in on a FID in Kitimat, fingers crossed.


----------



## Rifleman62 (19 Apr 2018)

CBH99: 





> I'm all for tough measures if governments disagree and, for some reason, can't come up with a solution that both parties can accept.  But deliberately making the lives of fellow Canadians difficult, and making them suffer financially - especially when it's the lower to middle class that will be affected the most - isn't very noble, honourable, or Canadian.
> 
> Canadian provincial governments should not be deliberately targeting & financially hurting other Canadians, just because they happen to reside in a different province.



I live in BC now, the Okanagan Valley. What the government of BC is doing is targeting Canada. Where do you think the equalization payments paid to 'have not" provinces come from in part? How do you think that revenue is generated? Have you read how much AB oil is discounted? Have you read how much tax revenue and how much the Canadian economy loses because we cannot get our products to other markets? Also, Quebec supports BC's position and stopped the Energy East project.

Have you heard of the BC Speculation Tax (https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2018FIN0009-000501) ? 1% for Canadian citizens and permanent residents who do not live in British Columbia. Thus if you are from *e.g.* Alberta and own a vacation or future retirement home in Kelowna, besides annual property taxes on your $700K house you will pay annually an additional $7000.

A lot of Albertans own houses in the OK valley. A $700K house is not a luxury property. Of course, to the NDP, nobody should own two properties. Tax the rich, (unlike the federal Liberals tax anything and everything and spend, spend, spend).

I hope AB shuts off POL to BC.
, 
http://calgaryherald.com/opinion/columnists/morton-equalization-payments-have-always-been-about-keeping-quebec-happy
*
Morton: Equalization payments have always been about keeping Quebec happy* - 7 Apr 18

Extract: In 2018-19, equalization payments will rise to a new high of $19 billion. Sixty-two per cent will go to Quebec, while Alberta taxpayers will contribute about $3 billion. This amount is actually only a portion of approximately $20 billion of net federal transfers out of Alberta this year. Two other federal programs — the Canada Health Transfer and Canada Social Transfer — have a transfer effect. The same is true for federal benefit programs such as employment insurance, Old Age Security and the Canada Pension Plan.

Each year, Albertans collectively pay in much more in that we receive back. Understanding the transfer effects of these other federal programs explains how it is that between 2007 and 2015, Alberta’s net contribution to the federal government was $221 billion, or an average of over $24 billion a year.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equalization_payments_in_Canada

Quebec will receive the most from equalization payments in the 2018-2019 year.[1] However, per capita, PEI benefits the most.

In the 2018–2019 year, the following provinces will receive equalization payments:[1]

Quebec ($11.732 billion)
Manitoba ($2.037 billion)
Nova Scotia ($1.933 billion)
New Brunswick ($1.874 billion)
Ontario ($963 million)
Prince Edward Island ($419 million)
Equalization per citizens 2016-2017

Provinces / Per Citizen / Total

PEI / $2,573 / $380 million
NB / $2,259 / $1.708 billion
NS / $1,822 / $1.722 billion
Manitoba / $1,328 / $1.736 billion
Quebec / $1,206 / $10.03 billion
Ontario / $166 / $2.304 billion
Source: Government of Canada (http://blogues.radio-canada.ca/geraldfillion/tag/perequation/)

The following provinces will not qualify for equalization payments in 2018–2019:[1]

Alberta
British Columbia
Newfoundland and Labrador
Saskatchewan


----------



## Lumber (19 Apr 2018)

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/colten-boushie-family-united-nations-study-systemic-racism-1.4625818

Sorry to distract you from your pipeline debate...

I feel like I would get crucified if I shared on Facebook the following comments, but I am honestly getting extremely frustrated with the way this case has blow up. It irked me enough I felt the need to share my thoughts here.

I honestly feel somewhat _embarrassed_ for the country at some of the comments that Boushie's family just made to the UN. Maybe I'm putting too much stock into their presence at a UN forum, but I feel like what they said about Canada and our justice system are just not true, and is therefore embarrassing to be said in front of the whole UN. One line in particular:



> "Colten was not a thief. He was a kind and generous young man," she told the forum."



I read the entire judges decision. A "thief" is exactly how I would describe Colten Boushie, at least on the day of the incident. Could you come to any other conclusion if you actually read the facts of the case?

Another quote:



> "The systemic injustices, the acquittal and the decision not to appeal show that justice is not equally applied to Indigenous people in Canada."



The whole thing, but specifically the part in yellow, does not demonstrate discrimination in the justice system. It simply shows that the prosecution was not able to provide proof beyond a reasonable doubt, and that the trial was conducted without any errors, eliminating the possibility of an appeal. Again, read the judgment.

Perhaps it's the fact that I'm a white cis-gendered male from an upper-middle class family of European ancestry who's never had to deal with discrimination or poverty, but I feel like I'm a pretty good critical thinker, and I see absolutely no reason case necessitating a UN investigation, a Royal Commission, and an overhaul of our criminal justice system. 

Final note, I'm getting tired of being referred to as a "settler" or a "colonist". I was born here. My parents were born here. All of my family was born here. I don't have any close relatives in the "old" country, and that's only on one side of the family, the rest have been here for 3 hundred years. 

I don't know any other home than here, this is my home. Stop grouping me with those who showed up 300 years ago to sell bibles and buy beaver pelts.

/endrant


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (19 Apr 2018)

There is monkey wrench that may be thrown into the equation today: The Supreme Court is supposed to release its ruling in the Gerard Comeau "taking Quebec bought beer into New Brunswick" inter provincial trade rules case.

If, as I suspect they will, the court's majority rules that Article 121 of the Constitution means what it plainly means, which is that provinces do not have the power to put up any barrier to inter provincial trade (which would fall squarely within exclusive federal power only), then Ms Notley's Act allegedly giving her the power to stop shipping of crude to any specific out of province location would clearly be unconstitutional.

Personally, I believe that it is unconstitutional even before such determination. Alberta allegedly bases its power to enact it on its power over their natural resources. That certainly gives them power over regulating who, where, when and how to extract the resource from the ground, and with what compensation or payment the province should get from the extractor for the resource. However, once extracted, it ceases to be a "natural resource" and becomes product that is subject to laws on transportation and trade. Both of these aspects, when inter-provincial, fall squarely within exclusive federal jurisdiction. So her Act, which delves into permitting transportation - or not - outside of the province fails that constitutional test. 

If Trudeau had guts, he would tell Alberta that, should it try to enact that law, he would use the Federal disavowal power and make it known he will do this, followed in the same speech by announcing that he is actually going to introduce immediately a motion in Parliament to have the Kinder Morgan pipeline formally declared a "work for the general advantage of Canada or two or more provinces", which would take any aspect of it out of provincial jurisdiction. That would signal to both sides that recess is over and it's time to act like adults again.

Such actions could, and if he was politically savvy, would be followed by Mr. Hogan going to the Lt.-G. and asking for the assembly to be dissolved. He would explain himself as follows to the public: "As you all know, In order to form a stable government for this province after the last general election, I had to agree to a promise extracted from me by the Green party of B.-C. to do all I could to stop the Kinder Morgan pipeline. In view of the recent federal declaration that it is a work of national interest, we have now used every reasonable avenues to effect that aim but the Green party will not release me from doing more, even if of little use. Therefore, I have asked the Lt.G. to dissolve the assembly and call a general election. I did this so that you can relieve this government of its promise to the Green party and I ask that you return this government to power with a majority this time, so that we can move forward together and this government can go on to deal with more pressing matters of importance to all."

I bet you he would get a majority government if he acted in such a proper way showing respect for the electorate.


----------



## larry Strong (19 Apr 2018)

“......the Supreme Court of Canada ruled provincial trade barriers are constitutional as long as they’re aimed at a valid purpose within the province’s jurisdiction, with only an incidental effect on trade. Canada’s constitution simply “does not impose absolute free trade across Canada,” it declared.....”.      http://nationalpost.com/news/politics/free-the-beer-case-loses-at-supreme-court-as-provincial-trade-barriers-are-upheld-as-constitutional


----------



## Rifleman62 (19 Apr 2018)

Never expect that ruling.

NDP get a majority in the next BC election? Never.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (19 Apr 2018)

Rifleman62, by dragging the damn Equalization Payments into the picture - without understanding how it works - you force me once again to trying explain it so this scarecrow gets put back in the closet where it belongs.

Let's see if I can make it simple:

_*The fact that a province gets equalization while another doesn't get any does not mean in any way form or shape that the province not getting equalization or its inhabitants are the ones paying for the "receiving" province. *_

Equalization is paid from the government of Canada's consolidated fund, into which every single Canadian or Canadian corporation pays in the same exact even and fair manner wherever they may live. In particular, and since the Federal government taxes natural resources fairly lightly (as they are a provincial resource), it means that taxing industry, commerce and individuals make up most of the federal revenues. This leads to something like the following, for instance: Since Ontario provides 45% of Federal revenues (though they are only 39% of population), the Ontarian tax base pays 45% of the equalization of each province that receives some gets. You can do the same for each province. So Albertans, for instance contribute 16% of Federal revenue from 12 % of the national population and thus the Alberta tax base pays 16% of equalization to the receiving provinces. Meanwhile, even PEI provides .2% of the national revenues of Canada, and thus the PEI tax base contributes .2% of the equalization payments made to each receiving province.

Since all Canadians are taxed wherever they are on the same equal basis, the only thing you can say about provincial disparities between contributions to the Federal consolidated revenue in relation to their population is that in those provinces where there is a greater contribution than proportional population is made, the residents are either making more money or the province has a lower unemployment rate - in other words they are provinces where the economy is better - but its citizens are still treated equally to all Canadian in the same circumstances as they are.


----------



## Jed (19 Apr 2018)

Did I miss something this morning OGBD? I thought the Supreme Court ruled exactly opposite of your expectations this morning.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (19 Apr 2018)

You didn't miss anything, Jed. They ruled the opposite of my expectation. Haven't read the ruling yet, but from the tidbits reported on the news, it doesn't make much sense to me. It appears they would have simultaneously ruled that a province cannot impose a charge on goods coming from another province, but that they can create and impose monopolies within their own province for certain goods.

I am baffled, but maybe I won't be anymore after I read the whole thing.  :dunno:


BTW, that doesn't change my view that Notley's Act is still unconstitutional on other grounds.


----------



## larry Strong (19 Apr 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> BTW, that doesn't change my view that Notley's Act is still unconstitutional on other grounds.



I wish I could find the article I read where inside sources at the weekend meeting between the Drama teacher and the 2 Premiers stated Notley told Horgan to his face that she had no intentions of putting it into force. 

She does not have the intestinal fortitude. 

Cheers
Larry


----------



## Altair (19 Apr 2018)

Larry Strong said:
			
		

> I wish I could find the article I read where inside sources at the weekend meeting between the Drama teacher and the 2 Premiers stated Notley told Horgan to his face that she had no intentions of putting it into force.
> 
> She does not have the intestinal fortitude.
> 
> ...


two words. 

Jason.  Kenney.  If she isn't hard on BC and hogan Jason Kenney continues to rally albertans around hin saying that she isn't standing up for them,  and he will. 

Notley is facing an election in not too long,  she cannot afford that. She would rather it be struck down by the courts.


----------



## Altair (19 Apr 2018)

Also,  interestingly,  BC says that its unconstitutional for alberta to stop oil shipments to BC. 

https://www.google.com/amp/business.financialpost.com/commodities/energy/alberta-should-cut-off-b-c-s-oil-supplies-as-a-form-of-protest-it-has-used-that-tactic-before-against-ontario/amp



> Since at least the 1970s, the province has had authority to prohibit shipments of energy products outside the province.
> 
> Former PC premier Peter Lougheed once cut the volume of crude oil sent to eastern refineries, as part of his epic battle with Ottawa over control of the industry.
> 
> ...


 Not sure that would go their way in court.


----------



## Jed (19 Apr 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> Also,  interestingly,  BC says that its unconstitutional for alberta to stop oil shipments to BC.
> 
> https://www.google.com/amp/business.financialpost.com/commodities/energy/alberta-should-cut-off-b-c-s-oil-supplies-as-a-form-of-protest-it-has-used-that-tactic-before-against-ontario/amp
> Not sure that would go their way in court.



Well, with the way the Supreme Court seems to be making decisions,you may be right.  I’m sure many people in Alberta and Saskatchewan will begin to think what is the point of being in a Canada that spends decades raping and pillaging these two provinces solely for the benefit of socialist minded larger provinces.  We see the law of the land continually being biasedly applied and the embarrassment of watching every Tom, Dick and Harry minor minority having their pet peeves being addressed all the while the people suffer at the hands of incompetent government.


----------



## Altair (19 Apr 2018)

Jed said:
			
		

> Well, with the way the Supreme Court seems to be making decisions,you may be right.  I’m sure many people in Alberta and Saskatchewan will begin to think what is the point of being in a Canada that spends decades raping and pillaging these two provinces solely for the benefit of socialist minded larger provinces.  We see the law of the land continually being biasedly applied and the embarrassment of watching every Tom, Dick and Harry minor minority having their pet peeves being addressed all the while the people suffer at the hands of incompetent government.


And when the pipeline is built that will all go away? 

Well,  that is good to know.


----------



## Jed (19 Apr 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> And when the pipeline is built that will all go away?
> 
> Well,  that is good to know.



It will go away just like Quebec Separitism ideology will go away. (Never). However the sentiment is strong, stronger than after the reign of PET.  In my opinion this is really going to hit the fan, especially if Liberals go in Federally in 2019.


----------



## Altair (19 Apr 2018)

Jed said:
			
		

> It will go away just like Quebec Separitism ideology will go away. (Never). However the sentiment is strong, stronger than after the reign of PET.  In my opinion this is really going to hit the fan, especially if Liberals go in Federally in 2019.


Those same liberals who are fighting for the pipeline to go through and have pretty much staked their term in government on it? 

So odd. The federal liberals and alberta NDP are trying to make sure the pipeline that will help alberta and canada goes through,  while the BC NDP and the BC green party try to kill the project,  yet its the current head of the federal liberals who will cause western alienation to rise,  not BC? 

Ok then.  I won't pretend to understand,  I'll just take your word for it.


----------



## Jed (19 Apr 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> Those same liberals who are fighting for the pipeline to go through and have pretty much staked their term in government on it?
> 
> So odd. The federal liberals and alberta NDP are trying to make sure the pipeline that will help alberta and canada goes through,  while the BC NDP and the BC green party try to kill the project,  yet its the current head of the federal liberals who will cause western alienation to rise,  not BC?
> 
> Ok then.  I won't pretend to understand,  I'll just take your word for it.



OK. Glad you are taking my word for it. It is pretty obvious that the 'fight that the Liberals are taking' supporting the pipeline has been a charade until very recently.  This Liberal Majority government has been nothing but a clown show for the 2 1/2 years of their tenure.


----------



## dapaterson (19 Apr 2018)

To me, the SCC on R v Comeau suggests a court slightly ahead of the power curve on cannabis legalization.  I enjoyed Emmett MacFarlane's take in Maclean's.


----------



## Altair (19 Apr 2018)

Jed said:
			
		

> OK. Glad you are taking my word for it. It is pretty obvious that the 'fight that the Liberals are taking' supporting the pipeline has been a charade until very recently.  This Liberal Majority government has been nothing but a clown show for the 2 1/2 years of their tenure.


off the top of my head,  when he became liberal leader,  he went to alberta and spoke about the need for pipelines. 

He went to new york and spoke to Americans about balancing the environmental and pipelines. 

He's gone on a cross country speaking tour and reiterated how kinder Morgan was going to be built. He went to BC saying he's going to build the pipeline. He went to fort Mac to say he's going to build a pipeline. 

The man has said his entire time as leader that there needs to be a balance between the economy and the the environment. It must have been a very long running charade.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (19 Apr 2018)

If Parkland decided the refinery here was no longer viable, then the lower mainland would be utterly screwed.


----------



## Cloud Cover (19 Apr 2018)

Well lets all be clear about something. It is not the Alberta government that currently ships oil to BC, it is private companies that do this through a privately owned but heavily regulated pipeline system. (although Notley has offered to become some sort of business partner with KM).  The companies can simply let their contacts run out and ship oil south or east. What the Alberta government is attempting to do is create and then revoke licenses or limit licenses to ship quantities of oil to a particular province. Even if the BC Court of Appeal make a reference decision about this,  Alberta can just seek its own decision with their own court of appeal. Legal deadlock. 

As OGBD says, the feds need to step into this is solid way which they do not appear to have the stones to do. I think Trudeau screwed himself here (again) by not putting his foot down on every entity opposing this pipeline and just ram it through, or alternately making a hard decision to nix the project altogether and maintaining the status quo of shipments. In doing the latter he loses a lot of votes in Alberta, but he didn't have that many anyway but Im not sure he gains much from BC either.   A third option, and its not a good one, is to nationalize the energy industry and have the feds take all of the responsibility away from the provinces for the transportation and distribution of  oil products and coerce companies to comply.  Would Notley oppose????
In any eventuality, this appears to be the end of the days of confidence in the federal government for the left half of the country for decades to come. People that are so deeply divided and firmly entrenched on this issue are not going to back down one way or the other, it has been allowed to go too far.


----------



## Altair (19 Apr 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> Well lets all be clear about something. It is not the Alberta government that currently ships oil to BC, it is private companies that do this through a privately owned but heavily regulated pipeline system. (although Notley has offered to become some sort of business partner with KM).  The companies can simply let their contacts run out and ship oil south or east. What the Alberta government is attempting to do is create and then revoke licenses or limit licenses to ship quantities of oil to a particular province. Even if the BC Court of Appeal make a reference decision about this,  Alberta can just seek its own decision with their own court of appeal. Legal deadlock.
> 
> As OGBD says, the feds need to step into this is solid way which they do not appear to have the stones to do. I think Trudeau screwed himself here (again) by not putting his foot down on every entity opposing this pipeline and just ram it through, or alternately making a hard decision to nix the project altogether and maintaining the status quo of shipments. In doing the latter he loses a lot of votes in Alberta, but he didn't have that many anyway but Im not sure he gains much from BC either.   A third option, and its not a good one, is to nationalize the energy industry and have the feds take all of the responsibility away from the provinces for the transportation and distribution of  oil products and coerce companies to comply.  Would Notley oppose????
> In any eventuality, this appears to be the end of the days of confidence in the federal government for the left half of the country for decades to come. People that are so deeply divided and firmly entrenched on this issue are not going to back down one way or the other, it has been allowed to go too far.


That isn't the way to do it,  not at all. 

Most people in BC support the pipeline. Its a very vocal minority and very motivated activists who are providing this opposition. 

If trudeau and the feds come down here on BC with heavy action,  it becomes a case of the feds versus every British Columbian. It makes Hogan into a martyr,  captain BC. A balanced approach of stick and carrot is the best way to erode opposition to the pipeline.  If the polls are to be believed,  support for the pipeline in BC is up. The BC liberals aren't banging the drum for the pipeline right now,  Notley isn't out to make friends across the border,  a case can be made that its the feds trying to sell this project to BC residents that is pushing that support higher. 

I think things hinge on this pipeline. If the rule of law prevails,  the pipeline is built,  federal jurisdiction is respected and natural resources get to market while respecting the environment we all come out of this better. If it dies and a minority government in BC is allowed to challenge and defeat the federal government in their jurisdiction,  giving the shaft to the energy exporting provinces,  ya,  alberta can be justified asking what good they get out of confederation.  But that talk now is very premature. This is just the messy process in action.


----------



## Jed (19 Apr 2018)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> Well lets all be clear about something. It is not the Alberta government that currently ships oil to BC, it is private companies that do this through a privately owned but heavily regulated pipeline system. (although Notley has offered to become some sort of business partner with KM).  The companies can simply let their contacts run out and ship oil south or east. What the Alberta government is attempting to do is create and then revoke licenses or limit licenses to ship quantities of oil to a particular province. Even if the BC Court of Appeal make a reference decision about this,  Alberta can just seek its own decision with their own court of appeal. Legal deadlock.
> 
> As OGBD says, the feds need to step into this is solid way which they do not appear to have the stones to do. I think Trudeau screwed himself here (again) by not putting his foot down on every entity opposing this pipeline and just ram it through, or alternately making a hard decision to nix the project altogether and maintaining the status quo of shipments. In doing the latter he loses a lot of votes in Alberta, but he didn't have that many anyway but Im not sure he gains much from BC either.   A third option, and its not a good one, is to nationalize the energy industry and have the feds take all of the responsibility away from the provinces for the transportation and distribution of  oil products and coerce companies to comply.  Would Notley oppose????
> In any eventuality, this appears to be the end of the days of confidence in the federal government for the left half of the country for decades to come. People that are so deeply divided and firmly entrenched on this issue are not going to back down one way or the other, it has been allowed to go too far.


Everything you say here rings true.  The cancelled pipeline going East and also kiboshing the Keystone also enter in to this discussion. Meanwhile agriculture is screwed because the railways are shipping oil and not grain, is causing issues there.  All in all, Alberta and Saskatchewan are more than mad. Being as this is round two for Trudeau Liberals, it is not going to end pretty or anytime soon.


----------



## Cloud Cover (19 Apr 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> I think things hinge on this pipeline. If the rule of law prevails,  the pipeline is built,  federal jurisdiction is respected and natural resources get to market while respecting the environment we all come out of this better. If it dies and a minority government in BC is allowed to challenge and defeat the federal government in their jurisdiction,  giving the shaft to the energy exporting provinces,  ya,  alberta can be justified asking what good they get out of confederation.  But that talk now is very premature. This is just the messy process in action.



Hmmm, I agree with you to a certain point- for example, that a majority of people in BC might support the pipeline. For example, Kelowna and the central Okanagon appear to be the summer capital region of Alberta, and many, many people who live in BC work in northern Alberta. 
Since when does the majority matter for anything in this country anymore, especially when it comes to litigation and the rule of law where the good of the majority seems to be a bad, bad thing.  
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Interestingly, (and I think this only by happenstance), at paragraphs 91 and 92 of the Comeau decision touch upon the federal and provincial division of powers, and the Court wrote:

 [91] For the reasons that follow, we do not see these lines of authority to be in conflict. Properly understood, they represent a single, progressive understanding of the purpose and function of s. 121 in the broader constitutional scheme. This understanding is entirely consistent with our earlier conclusion that *s. 121* — understood through the lens of its text, its historical and legislative contexts and the principle of federalism — is best conceived as preventing provinces from passing laws aimed at impeding trade by setting up barriers at boundaries, while allowing them to legislate to achieve goals within their jurisdiction even where such laws may incidentally limit the passage of goods over provincial borders.
[92]                          Gold Seal, decided in 1921, was the first case to interpret s. 121 of the Constitution Act, 1867. It concerned a federal statute that prohibited the importation of liquor into any dry province. The federal law was complementary to provincial prohibition laws, passed because the provinces were not competent under the division of powers to regulate interprovincial trade — an early example of cooperative federalism. The Gold Seal liquor company argued that the trade barrier installed by the federal law violated s. 121. The Court’s discussion of s. 121 in Gold Seal was cursory. Duff and Mignault JJ., in the majority, each held that the law at issue was not caught by s. 121 because it was not a tariff on goods crossing provincial borders. Mignault J. added that this was consistent with a similar provision in the United States Constitution addressing the same concerns: Gold Seal, at p. 470. Anglin J. agreed, but offered no analysis: Gold Seal, at p. 466.
+++++++++++++++++++

Arguably, Alberta is NOT proposing a tariff or a barrier on oil. It is the government of British Columbia that is seeking to impose a barrier by preventing the pipeline work which is in turn intruding on the concept of cooperative federalism- a federal responsibility which the court may have now forced Trudeau to live up to. This in turn is causing Alberta to propose a licensing scheme to protect local matters for the good of the province because if they do not, they may find themselves in the position of having to defend against an argument of not living up to its own constitutional responsibilities.


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (19 Apr 2018)

I am not going to go into a big discussion of the Energy East pipeline because, regardless of the apparent opposition from Quebec's Liberal government and the ex-Federal Liberal imbecile then mayor of Montreal (I mean Coderre), the Quebec business community and the more right wing C.A.Q. party - now leading in the polls - were in favour of it. It was the actual consortium wishing to build it that withdrew its proposal after the N.E.B. asked for more detailed information on environmental protection of the River crossings of the St Lawrence that ended the process. The fact that the consortium failed to provide proper information to the Federal board has more to do with the fact that they thought they could just ram the thing through under the Conservative rule without satisfying the need to demonstrate what they proposed to do to protect the safe drinking water of 20% of Canada's population. Had they done so and revised their information package, who knows what would have happened!

But Jed is on to something important here: All this screwing around with not expanding the pipeline system is NOT resulting into a reduction in oil export from the prairies, its actually having a domino effect in causing serious harm to the agricultural exports of Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba and to container traffic of Quebec, Ontario and Nova Scotia because the trains are now being  monopolized (almost) by the need to ship oil one way or another. And in a lot less safe way than pipeline, I may add.

That's the real  tragedy: A government who wishes to reduce Canada's green house gas emission is actually forcing everyone to use more trains and a lot more trucks on the road - big green house gas emitters - instead of relying on a system - pipelines - that produce very little such emission.

The whole thing is crazy as far as I am concerned.


----------



## Cloud Cover (19 Apr 2018)

those are two very important policy arguments that I would hope the feds are alive to and sympathetic with.


----------



## larry Strong (19 Apr 2018)

Altair said:
			
		

> two words.
> 
> Jason.  Kenney.  If she isn't hard on BC and hogan Jason Kenney continues to rally albertans around hin saying that she isn't standing up for them,  and he will.
> 
> Notley is facing an election in not too long,  she cannot afford that. She would rather it be struck down by the courts.



Notley and her gang of clowns are having their one and only kick at the can that they will get in Ab, at least within my life time if not for ever.....They only really won cause the vote on the right was split between the PC's and the WR...post election navel-gazing showed the combined "conservative" side lost around 800K votes which ironically coincided with the +/- 800K votes Redfraud brought to the PC party with her........



Cheers
Larry


----------



## Kat Stevens (19 Apr 2018)

CBH99 said:
			
		

> While she may be applauded for "bold leadership" against this "monumental challenge"...<cough>... I think Notley lost a lot of votes over how she conducted herself in this situation as a whole, specifically targeting the 'civilian population' if you will in order to ensure her own political goals are met.
> 
> I'm not debating whether the pipeline needs to be expanded or not.
> 
> ...



So, what’s your take on economic sanctions against rogue nations like N Korea, Iran, and all the rest? Are they okay? Plenty of po’ folks suffer there, don’t they? Sanctions are used because they (sometimes) work.


----------



## Altair (19 Apr 2018)

CBH99 said:
			
		

> While she may be applauded for "bold leadership" against this "monumental challenge"...<cough>... I think Notley lost a lot of votes over how she conducted herself in this situation as a whole, specifically targeting the 'civilian population' if you will in order to ensure her own political goals are met.
> 
> I'm not debating whether the pipeline needs to be expanded or not.
> 
> ...


Jason Kenney wanted even harsher measures and accused Notley of not fighting for the energy sector,  so its really a big partisan response from alberta,  wouldn't you say?


----------



## jollyjacktar (22 Apr 2018)

Liberal MP facing sexual assault allegation

Francis Drouin is the Liberal MP in the riding of Glengarry-Prescott-Russell. He is facing an allegation of sexual assault.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/liberal-mp-drouin-halifax-sexual-assault-1.4630636


----------



## ModlrMike (22 Apr 2018)

No small degree of irony:



> Alleged incident occurred early Saturday in Halifax, hours before Liberals took part in anti-harassment forum.


----------



## jollyjacktar (22 Apr 2018)

I'm guessing Karma doesn't like the Trudeau government.  His trip last week was more or less uneventful.  I think the fates said, "fuck that".


----------



## OldSolduer (23 Apr 2018)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Liberal MP facing sexual assault allegation
> 
> Francis Drouin is the Liberal MP in the riding of Glengarry-Prescott-Russell. He is facing an allegation of sexual assault.
> 
> http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/liberal-mp-drouin-halifax-sexual-assault-1.4630636



I smell a rat . If he did it so be it. Innocent til proven otherwise.

Maybe he’s the sacrificial lamb? Or am I wearing my tin foil hat too tightly?


----------



## Cloud Cover (23 Apr 2018)

Hamish Seggie said:
			
		

> I smell a rat . If he did it so be it. Innocent til proven otherwise.
> 
> Maybe he’s the sacrificial lamb? Or am I wearing my tin foil hat too tightly?



Maybe he grabbed her  to make way for the speaker of the bar...


----------



## Oldgateboatdriver (23 Apr 2018)

I must say that in my recollections (or lack thereof) of Halifax, not too many people still hanging around the downtown bar scene at 2 A.M. on a week-end evening are in any condition to make a valid criminal identification.  ;D


----------



## Retired AF Guy (23 Apr 2018)

Oldgateboatdriver said:
			
		

> I must say that in my recollections (or lack thereof) of Halifax, not too many people still hanging around the downtown bar scene at 2 A.M. on a week-end evening are in any condition to make a valid criminal identification.  ;D



I was listening to Antony Fury on National Post Radio this morning on the way to work Fury was saying that according to a "source" Drouin was in a very crowded bar when a women became agitated because someone had grabbed her buttocks. Drouin went over to see what the problem was, whereupon he was accused of being the attacked. Again, strictly rumour, more to follow.


----------

