- Reaction score
- 9,032
- Points
- 1,260
LOL.
Liberal (Minority/Majority) Government 2025 - ???
- Thread starter Altair
- Start date
MilEME09
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 8,695
- Points
- 1,210
We haven't seen any deal yet, its premature to scream we are losing sovereignty over this
wasn't trying to make that argument, i was merely pointing out even if transparent, most canadians wont notice. Many critics will also use Canadians lack of paying attention to sow misinformation as well
- Reaction score
- 8,268
- Points
- 1,260
Good. You have saved time. You have declared it a bad deal before seeing it. Makes sense. Avoids any pesky requirement to judge the thing on its actual merits.. Way better to go just with feels, and not let facts get in the way.
I will continue to wait to see the thing before I judge it, as I do in every aspect of my life.
But you do you.
- Reaction score
- 13,640
- Points
- 1,160
I think a number of Canadians are expecting Canada to get a sweetheart deal meanwhile not facing the disadvantages, or assuming they'll be minor.
The rules Norway signed onto aren't particularly appealing. Sounds like some of what Trump was trying to squeeze us into.
Ah, sorry. It's bad enough the LPC can approve something like this regardless what happens at any parliament debate, it would be great if we atleast get an accounting of it.
MilEME09
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 8,695
- Points
- 1,210
bit of a jump to call it approval, its a proposal, but politicians, just like your platoon commander giving orders, like to talk in definites.
- Reaction score
- 12,386
- Points
- 1,040
A decades-long general observation: when corporations screw up, politicians are quick to bring them (and individuals within, if any can be pegged) to account. Politicians are much less quick to bring accountability to either themselves or public services.
I conclude that it is preferable (possibly vital to public interests) to have private entities doing things at arm's length from the enforcement power than to have the enforcement power and the entities effectively under control of the same people.
- Reaction score
- 12,386
- Points
- 1,040
See also: Hong Kong.
- Reaction score
- 12,386
- Points
- 1,040
An amusing aspect to all of this has been watching the general attitude in Canada flip from disapproval of "foreigners buying our country (infrastructure, corporations)" to "here, have anything you want".
- Reaction score
- 12,386
- Points
- 1,040
Either such a deal is going to require some non-zero amount of "you have to follow EU regulations in respect of..." or it's not. If it's not - if it's just some agreement to increase the percentage of stuff covered by CETA - then fine. No kind of special membership is needed for that, though. No kind of special membership is actually needed for any agreements (treaties) to improve trade flows - all the details can be in the treaties.
With regard to security rather than trade, we already have NATO, which could be adapted in whatever respects necessary if the US decided to make a full exit.
With regard to fiscal management, Canada should want no part of - not any fraction of - the arrangements that allow fiscally incontinent countries to indulge themselves at the expense of other countries.
With regard to diplomacy and foreign policy, it would be practically pointless and probably retrograde to tie ourselves into European interests at the same time as we are insisting on being masters of our own interests against Trump's belligerency.
I find it approximately impossible to imagine any kind of deal with the EU that has a non-zero amount of that, and I don't want any of it. From my position, it's easy to prejudge.
Here we are, trying to deal with a trading partner who has suddenly - and most likely only temporarily - become a pain in the ass, and people figure part of the solution might be to get stuck in deeper with other trading partners.
- Reaction score
- 9,032
- Points
- 1,260
Not me, I've never been against foreign investment (exception being some Chinese in certain industries). We've lacked the chutzpah to do it ourselves for the last 3ish decades. Our banks are case in point, very risk adverse for CDN projects, too worried about NIMBYism and upsetting this group or that group.
- Reaction score
- 5,962
- Points
- 1,160
Yes, correct, but we will all bear the consequences except for those men who have strong opinions and personal motives, but nothing to lose if they are wrong.
"The communications from Carney's PMO around the EU "associate membership" story have been shambolic.
After conveniently timed polling on the EU question, the public reaction to the WSJ article about Carney seeking "associate membership" in the EU was enough to prompt damage control efforts from the PMO and to walk back the reporting that same day in the Canadian media.
Days later, Ursula Von Der Leyen endorsed Canada's "associate membership" in the EU, while Carney intentionally avoided that language in his own speech.
It has now been accepted by Canadian and international media that Carney is essentially seeking "associate membership" while his own government officials are trying to downplay the label.
The story is basically out of control. But politicians like the Messiah Carney leave little to chance, and there can be little doubt that this new front has been opened and it would be astonishingly naive to wish away that many months of negotiations have already occurred and a comprehensive draft- but by no means a final draft - have already been worked out.
Canadians are right to be confused about this and have every right to question what all of this will mean for them.
Why on earth would rational and objective Canadians be nothing but suspicious of a PM and PMO who have not been open and transparent our even truthful about the relationships we already have that are breaking down and crucially, an objective understanding why they are breaking down.
This is clearly a case of booting out the Devil you know and embracing the Devil you are told you need. But they are potentially the same, which is to say they are not for us or for Canada. We all know that. Our Threat Model and our Trust Model cannot just be whatever a PM conjures up and presents as fate or faith. No, we need more information and we need to be the ones who have final say."
No, the codified central role of the U.S. is such that the mechanics of NATO could not function following a U.S. exit. It would not be a matter of everyone else adapts some stuff and NATO is still NATO. There would need to be a complete replacement treaty framework.
- Reaction score
- 9,032
- Points
- 1,260
So the joining of the JEF in essence would live on if the US pulled out of NATO and we would be part of an 11 nation coalition HQ'd in the UK built around a 10k rapid deployment force, who's primary focus would the Arctic, North Sea, Scandinavia and the Baltic security. Does that summarize it?
Not sure, I’m not really read up on JEF. But I can see JEF membership and growth as one conceivable hedge against NATO weakening.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 20,996
- Points
- 1,260
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 20,996
- Points
- 1,260
This isn't worth saving IMHO.
Poor woman.
Poor woman.
- Reaction score
- 12,386
- Points
- 1,040
I doubt such a "need" exists, although undoubtedly the opportunity would tempt a lot of people to pretend there is one for purposes of advancing various agendas right down to basic grifting. There is a rational path and an irrational path that could be taken. The rational path is to minimize changes; the irrational one is for everyone to throw up their hands and claim everything has to be completely redone. I don't concede that there are no people competent to take a rational approach and avoid re-inventing the entire wheel.
- Reaction score
- 5,962
- Points
- 1,160
Well one thing that could come out of an EU arrangement is Canadian access to (for example) Germanys excellent health care and a change in our rules to allow private service delivery like many European countries. The Soviet style we have is - as you say- not worth saving.
- Reaction score
- 12,386
- Points
- 1,040
"We can't do this ourselves" is a weak reason to support entangling ourselves with the EU's much greater laboratory of dysfunction. Canada doesn't need outside help to change its own rules, although external events can sometimes push countries to do things they should have been doing without being prodded.
MilEME09
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 8,695
- Points
- 1,210
welcome to women's health care in this country, the system and doctors dont care. My wife had her Gall bladder removed, started getting pain right after, for five YEARS they brushed her off, then told her it was in her head, then the ER labeled her as a drug seeker. Then finally a female ultrasound tech believed her and checked where her gall bladder used to be, sure enough the old ducts were filled with gall stones causing pain. got her in for surgery and she was finally better.
Similar threads
