Document suggests that Larry Brock, who has harried Liberals over alleged ethics violations, did not notify the ethics commissioner of his financial liabilities.
So, what prevents the PMO from saying to the Chief Electoral Officer "oh, wait, we can't have advance polls on those dates, those are major Christian religious holidays, just like the Hindu one we tried to avoid on October 20.". Nothing.
(2) An advance polling station shall be open from 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. on Friday, Saturday, Sunday and Monday, the 10th, 9th, 8th and 7th days, respectively, before polling day, and shall not be open at any other time.
The CPC is not the party of national defense. They like to pretend they are, but even under Harper the most they spent was 1.38% (averaging around 1.18%). Trudeau actually spent more than the Conservatives at a average of 1.3% with the peak spending of 1.4%. We don't have a party which takes national defense seriously and we haven't for several decades. 1987 was the last year we spent over 2% of GDP on defense. 2% isn't even enough, that is assuming everything was ok, right now everything needs replacing and refurbishing. Realistically we should be spending 3-5% for the next decade to get us back to where 2% would be acceptable.
Military expenditures data from SIPRI are derived from the NATO definition, which includes all current and capital expenditures on the armed forces, including peacekeeping forces; defense ministries and other government agencies engaged in defense projects; paramilitary forces, if these are...
www.macrotrends.net
The chart as percentage of GDP is enlightening. Basically 60's took it seriously, the 80's slowed down but still stayed around 2%, then the slow steady decline until we get to today.
A CPC minority wouldn't be able to do anything. The Liberals changed the law so you can't lower a classification by OIC, only increase it. Without changing the firearms act (which with a minority government is unlikely to happen) the most they could do is extend the amnesties, maybe allow usage during the amnesties, and allow the transfer of handguns again.
The CPC is not the party of national defense. They like to pretend they are, but even under Harper the most they spent was 1.38% (averaging around 1.18%). Trudeau actually spent more than the Conservatives at a average of 1.3% with the peak spending of 1.4%. We don't have a party which takes national defense seriously and we haven't for several decades. 1987 was the last year we spent over 2% of GDP on defense. 2% isn't even enough, that is assuming everything was ok, right now everything needs replacing and refurbishing. Realistically we should be spending 3-5% for the next decade to get us back to where 2% would be acceptable.
Military expenditures data from SIPRI are derived from the NATO definition, which includes all current and capital expenditures on the armed forces, including peacekeeping forces; defense ministries and other government agencies engaged in defense projects; paramilitary forces, if these are...
www.macrotrends.net
The chart as percentage of GDP is enlightening. Basically 60's took it seriously, the 80's slowed down but still stayed around 2%, then the slow steady decline until we get to today.
A CPC minority wouldn't be able to do anything. The Liberals changed the law so you can't lower a classification by OIC, only increase it. Without changing the firearms act (which with a minority government is unlikely to happen) the most they could do is extend the amnesties, maybe allow usage during the amnesties, and allow the transfer of handguns again.
If you're talking about this thread, that should read
"Disaffected (former) CPC members are disgusted at 30 page "platform" that is almost 1/3 candids of Poilievre, 1/2 rehashed blog post, and is extremely superficial, with essentially zero work to connect the policy ideas to the fiscal impact"
An Elections Canada poll worker in the Greater Toronto Area has been reassigned to an administrative position after multiple complaints.
ottawa.citynews.ca
I realize that dishonest people exist in pretty much every profession or job. And when that happens for serious cases of dishonesty the person is usually fired. Or worse. In the case of this person who intentionally tried getting people to change their voting intentions, she was simply taken away from direct contact with voters and re-assigned to desk work, Maybe she has her union protecting her but as far as I’m concerned she should be fired from her job and thrown in jail. She has violated one of the most sacred of institutions as far as I’m concerned.
Not sure on that…which is why I mentioned the possibility of her being in a union. In which case she is probably getting her union rep in to defend her. Regardless, she should absolutely never be put in a position of public trust. I read elsewhere that the person is a female but didn’t use that source since a paywall may apply.
If you're talking about this thread, that should read
"Disaffected (former) CPC members are disgusted at 30 page "platform" that is almost 1/3 candids of Poilievre, 1/2 rehashed blog post, and is extremely superficial, with essentially zero work to connect the policy ideas to the fiscal impact"
Couldn't be bothered to stand behind his ideas and explain/ defend them, quantify their impacts, discuss how they will interact and be part of a bigger plan. Nothing. "Here's my blogs reformatted (again) and a 2 lazily laid out charts (that have been vetted by TOP MEN, so we don't need to explain in more detail), with 8 pages worth of pictures of me to try and stretch the page count."
The man is the other side of the same unserious coin that Trudeau lives on.
Discussion of the fiscal multipliers of government investment in time of economic downturn, broken down by investment category, referenced to results from the 08-09 recovery.
A discussion differentiating the planned capital and operating investment in the CAF, in both cash and accrual terms.
Discussion of the fiscal multipliers of government investment in time of economic downturn, broken down by investment category, referenced to results from the 08-09 recovery.
Page 62. It's still pretty high level, but is infinitely more in depth than "this going to be rocket fuel, trust me"
Edit- they also have their full accounting in a separate document. I won't harp on it being 5 pages to the CPC's two because most of that is extra spending line items- but the formatting, the way they're communicating information, including things like debt to GDP% for various spending measures- it's just overall a much better document.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
globalnews.ca
