• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Liberal Minority Government 2025 - ???

Agree 100%, the PM made the only call he could.

It also succeeds in grounding the cult of carney a little, which is beneficial.

Ironically this kind of pragmatic approach to dealing with Trump is what the LPC used so effectivly against Poilievre in the election.

I guess that is one way of looking at it: create policies so terrible your forced to rescind them (the opposition said they will) or lose, and then act like you're throwing a bone.
 
The government already does this in a less direct way by creating the laws. The police are then tasked with enforcing them. Currently the police aren't which is a issue. Why shouldn't the government be able to say enforce the law? That is literally what the law exists for and it is why the police exist. It isn't interfering with charges, it isn't interfering with prosecuting, it is making sure their employees are doing their job as they are failing to act as they should.

The tolerance of poor behavior and 'protesting' has resulted in 'protesters' who do far more than they are legally allowed to do because they know there will be no consequences. People are literally trained to believe they can violate my rights and everyone else's in the name of 'protest'. Because their rights clearly matter more than ours.

Sometimes wielding a stick is necessary as it has gotten to the point where the hands off approach has just lead to a series of more and more disruptive protests (Idle no more, G7, Truckers, Palestinian, etc.). The first time we clamp down on it, it will likely be a disaster, but only by clamping down on it will it prevent the same situation in the future.

Your last sentence is 100% spot on though, no matter what happens it is never the 'right' answer.

1751312924412.png G20 Toronto 2010
Remember "kettlling"?

1751313152860.png FTAA Quebec 2001

That is what we are asking Brihard and his mates to do.

They quit because the government, the press and much of the citizenry didn't like those pictures. And they prosecuted the police.

Personally I think those images represent the price of governance.

Brakes have friction pads for a reason. They manage the heat and the wear that occurs every day. And you can't drive a car without them.
 
Last edited:
Politically, a bit of a "can't win."

Make concessions to move forward, and you get either "go along to get along in the long run" vs. "fucker's spineless."

Stand your ground and get bullied harder, and you get "fuck that other guy - we can take what he throws at us" vs. "saving face at the cost of the electorate."

As others have said, a Red or Blue PM would be getting battered about at this point, with only small differences in response/nuance/narrative.

As I noted elsewhere, it has only taken 11 months for Starmer, the moderate Labour PM in the UK, to go from

a year ago voters regarded him as a good leader by a margin of 40 per cent to 29. Today, 48 per cent consider him a bad leader, with only 25 per cent still backing him. And by 53 per cent to 23, they believe he has performed poorly as Prime Minister.

The life expectancies of PMs aren't what they used to be.

....

Minority government

9-12 months life expectancy

Carney vs Poilievre.

Is Carney going to run against Poilievre's "extreme" policies? He has adopted most of them.
Poilievre's campaign: They agreed with me. You tried the imitator. Now try the original.
 
View attachment 94353 G20 Toronto 2010
Remember "kettlling"?

View attachment 94354 FTAA Quebec 2001

That is what we are asking Brihard and his mates to do.

They quit because the government, the press and much of the citizenry didn't like those pictures. And they prosecuted the police.

Personally I think those images represent the price of governance.

Brakes have friction pads for a reason. They manage the heat and the wear that occurs every day. And you can't drive a car without them.
There’s that pendulum I was talking about.
 
I guess that is one way of looking at it: create policies so terrible your forced to rescind them (the opposition said they will) or lose, and then act like you're throwing a bone.
PMMC inherited a bad policy, used it as a bargaining chip to try to affect positive change in negotiations, and potentially has it coming out on top for Canada and Canadians.... just because he's not wearing blue doesn't mean this was snatching defeat from the jaws of victory: The CPC and Mr. Poilievre have that market cornered in Canadian politics at the moment.
 
PMMC inherited a bad policy, used it as a bargaining chip to try to affect positive change in negotiations, and potentially has it coming out on top for Canada and Canadians.... just because he's not wearing blue doesn't mean this was snatching defeat from the jaws of victory: The CPC and Mr. Poilievre have that market cornered in Canadian politics at the moment.
Let's not forget, PMMC inherited a bad policy that he himself was at least partially responsible for drafting in the first place - even if in an advisory role.

It was a bad policy when it was first introduced. And it was finally rescinded because it was a bad policy at it's end.
 
Let's not forget, PMMC inherited a bad policy that he himself was at least partially responsible for drafting in the first place - even if in an advisory role.
Partial agreement here. Being a consultant on vs owner of a bad policy is a horse of a different colour.

It was a bad policy when it was first introduced. And it was finally rescinded because it was a bad policy at it's end.
No disagreement here. The only thing it was useful for was extending an olive branch on other negotiations.
 
DST imposed on companies in the US is a self-inflicted wound. Proponents reasonably ought to have known it would antagonize the US, and certainly knew when the Biden administration objected. I suppose they assumed they could manage the consequences and did not wargame the worst-case scenario (Trump returning to the presidency). If we want to tax money going abroad, we should do it to ourselves before it leaves the country.

A provocative move damages a relationship to a degree that is not fully offset by removal of the provocation.
 
Partial agreement here. Being a consultant on vs owner of a bad policy is a horse of a different colour.


No disagreement here. The only thing it was useful for was extending an olive branch on other negotiations.
I think I see an identity crisis emerging in the LPC amongst its MPs
-Carney and his line are very economic thinking, looking at big business deals, bringing money to Canada were possible, quietly letting things go that aren't worth the fight (like the DST)
-The Trudeau acolytes which are still chasing hugs and kisses and rainbows, environmental extremist, everyone welcome to Canada because tolerance and diversity
-The Misplaced NDP crowd are out to tax the rich! Tax the hell out of them! More social programs! More government employment
-The Anything but Conservative crowd includes people you look at and wonder how in the F did they ever get elected? Other than the brand name. Ayra Chandra (although gone) and Ya'ra Saks are two that come to mind.

There may be more factions but when Nathaniel Erskine-Smith was quit out loud and public on two occasions now, its just the start. Having the finance minister say the DST would NOT be lifted only for it to be lifted.

My message to the LPC, pick a lane and a direction, and stick to it. Once they do, the rest of the party, Trudeau and his ways are long F-ing gone, get on with the new program, or get out.
 
DST imposed on companies in the US is a self-inflicted wound. Proponents reasonably ought to have known it would antagonize the US, and certainly knew when the Biden administration objected. I suppose they assumed they could manage the consequences and did not wargame the worst-case scenario (Trump returning to the presidency). If we want to tax money going abroad, we should do it to ourselves before it leaves the country.

A provocative move damages a relationship to a degree that is not fully offset by removal of the provocation.

What do you mean by “if we want to tax money going abroad, we should do it ourselves before it leaves the country”. Given that the context is corporations operating in Canada with largely digital business models that are more resilient to Canadian taxation than a brick and mortar presence, I assume you can’t mean that 100% literally as transactions occur in fractions of seconds. Unless tax is levied at point of sale, there’s gonna have to be periodic tallying and payment. Point of sale taxes are taxes on gross revenue rather than net, so are a cruder tool.

I believe that any attempt to ensure that foreign companies earning revenue in Canada are subject to a ‘level playing field’ tax burden would get the same response from the U.S. They’ll tax the personal income of non-resident citizens living completely overseas, but they aren’t big fans of measures to ensure their businesses operating overseas are fairly taxed alongside those countries’ domestic businesses. So a certain amount of U.S. pissiness is inevitable.

If you believe the best COA is to ensure U.S. corporate revenue in Canada is directly taxed before it leaves the country, the DST seems in practical terms to have been pretty close to that. Other than shifting the statutory tax burden to the individual income of the consumers before they even spend it, how would you propose achieving what you suggest?

In any case the DST question is academic now; the issue is getting rolled into the larger overall trade negotiations. Which isn’t objectively bad. But I think we’ll continue to see the U.S. strongly resist efforts by other countries to make sure they aren’t leveraging the business models their tech sector dominated to avoid taxation for foreign operations to the detriment of domestic business they compete with.

My message to the LPC, pick a lane and a direction, and stick to it. Once they do, the rest of the party, Trudeau and his ways are long F-ing gone, get on with the new program, or get out.

That seems to be what’s happening. Of course PMMC is going to face resistance, but he basically saved the party from defeat in what should have been an unwinnable election. He has a fair bit of political capital. He also has external factors that are conducive to relatively radical policy shifts.

You know when you’re driving, you miss an exit, and the GPS says “recalculating”? I think that’s happening in the LPC right now, as tends to happen very occasionally in any major political party. The CPC haven’t really gone through their own since the merger. It might be time.
 
That seems to be what’s happening. Of course PMMC is going to face resistance, but he basically saved the party from defeat in what should have been an unwinnable election. He has a fair bit of political capital. He also has external factors that are conducive to relatively radical policy shifts.

You know when you’re driving, you miss an exit, and the GPS says “recalculating”? I think that’s happening in the LPC right now, as tends to happen very occasionally in any major political party. The CPC haven’t really gone through their own since the merger. It might be time.
Thats a good analogy.

My personal views (if I had a secret power to control things), I want PMMC to get at least 2 years to try and right the ship. That could happen and maybe longer, but if there are some in his crew that are anchors on him, yikes, the other three parties will pick an opportunity and force an election, especially after I would guess, early to mid 2026.
 
I think I see an identity crisis emerging in the LPC amongst its MPs
-Carney and his line are very economic thinking, looking at big business deals, bringing money to Canada were possible, quietly letting things go that aren't worth the fight (like the DST)
-The Trudeau acolytes which are still chasing hugs and kisses and rainbows, environmental extremist, everyone welcome to Canada because tolerance and diversity
-The Misplaced NDP crowd are out to tax the rich! Tax the hell out of them! More social programs! More government employment
-The Anything but Conservative crowd includes people you look at and wonder how in the F did they ever get elected? Other than the brand name. Ayra Chandra (although gone) and Ya'ra Saks are two that come to mind.

There may be more factions but when Nathaniel Erskine-Smith was quit out loud and public on two occasions now, its just the start. Having the finance minister say the DST would NOT be lifted only for it to be lifted.

My message to the LPC, pick a lane and a direction, and stick to it. Once they do, the rest of the party, Trudeau and his ways are long F-ing gone, get on with the new program, or get out.
I honestly think that PMMC is in line with where the bulk of the LPC is looking, as well as most of their supporters.

He will have the summer to bring his caucus into line. I think most of them will see the hardliners "values" fade to the background in favour of staying in Parliament.

The goal for them in minority so far is to keep things afloat. They can get support from the CPC if they stay within the centre. The NDP is no longer a credible partner and has outlived their usefulness, so pandering to them isn't a good look.

Lots of time between now and when Parliament resumes to see where they land as a government.
 
Thats a good analogy.

My personal views (if I had a secret power to control things), I want PMMC to get at least 2 years to try and right the ship. That could happen and maybe longer, but if there are some in his crew that are anchors on him, yikes, the other three parties will pick an opportunity and force an election, especially after I would guess, early to mid 2026.
I could see the NDP wanting an election to improve their position, but I’m not sure when they’ll be able to afford one.

CPC objectively did reasonably well seat wise. They’ll run the risk of weakening their position if they jump the gun before Carney does something to become vulnerable.

I think for a couple years the opposition will be in ‘watch and see’ mode while trying to replenish party coffers.
 
What do you mean by “if we want to tax money going abroad, we should do it ourselves before it leaves the country”.
Corporate entities in Canada buying or brokering services from abroad report amounts of purchases (monthly, annually) from corporate entities not in Canada and pay a tax. Entities operating digitally and dealing in micropayments do track those micropayments accurately.

Placing an administrative burden (compliance) firmly on our side of a border should promote the objective of encouraging more use of domestic suppliers. It also removes the administrative and fiscal irritants from the other side of a border. Whether or not the other side of a border is "reasonable" is irrelevant to the diplomatic friction.
But I think we’ll continue to see the U.S. strongly resist efforts by other countries to make sure they aren’t leveraging the business models their tech sector dominated to avoid taxation for foreign operations to the detriment of domestic business they compete with.
Most countries, having achieved a competitive advantage, should be expected to act to preserve it. If Canadian political parties are reluctant to give up some things they hold dear to improve our competitive positions, that's on Canada.
 
Most countries, having achieved a competitive advantage, should be expected to act to preserve it. If Canadian political parties are reluctant to give up some things they hold dear to improve our competitive positions, that's on Canada.

Yes, I do believe I literally just said we should expect that.
 
Yes, I do believe I literally just said we should expect that.
Sure. We might differ on whether we view that pressure as positive or negative. To be clear, I favour Canada being pushed to cope with perceived problems internally.
 
Back
Top