Liberal (Minority/Majority) Government 2025 - ???

[Furniture]

Does your familiarity with Ottawa go back before ‘fix the split’ or is that too far back?

Too far back for me, I got here in '19.

Edit: Oh God... Why didn't anyone think of diverting through traffic out of the core rather than just adding lanes?

 

[brihard]

Too far back for me, I got here in '19.

Edit: Oh God... Why didn't anyone think of diverting through traffic out of the core rather than just adding lanes?

Oh man. So, used to be the exit for 174 westbound onto St Laurent wasn’t split off after Blair and combined with the 417 eastbound exit like it is now. It was a totally normal off ramp… after the merge of westbound 417/147. So traffic coming westbound on 417 from Innes/Walkley/Hunt Club would join the 174 just as it does now, but you had the option to try to cut hard right across the joining 174 lanes to make the St Laurent exit. In anything more than light traffic it was a batshit insane exercise in cutting across three lanes that had a tendency to turn Kamikaze. ‘Fix the Split’ was the big slogan in Ottawa transit for years and years.

 

[PrairieFella]

That this topic is pretty cleanly split along partisan and rural/urban lines indicates that most are likely approaching it from a partisan perspective, rather than considering it on it's merits alone.

Faster and easier commuting between the largest cities in the country is a good thing. Even I, raised more rural than most*, can see why HSR makes sense.

HSR, alongside LRT, busses, etc., is far more efficient than yet another road leading to the same 5-10 choke points. How many more lanes leading into the 174/417 interchange, 417/Carling interchange, or 417/416 interchange does Ottawa need?

Sometimes the right solution is the mix of two solutions. @Brad Sallows' more busses, and @ytz's more rail. They aren't mutually exclusive, and since busses are a municipla/provincial issue, the Feds putting money into interprovincial/intermunicipal transit makes sense.

* I grew up a mile outside of a hamlet of 300... The closest "town" had less than 3000.

Im with you on that 100%. I currently live in Winnipeg but resided most of my life on a farm NE of the city and will return when I can afford it - I will prpbably never benefit from this but I can see the utilitarian good for a very large percentage of my fellow countrymen. Its not a "fuck you I got mine" situation.

 

[Maxman1]

Readers interested in HSR may find this discussion of interest,

21 pages

Thread 'High Speed Train Coming?-split from boosting Canada’s military spending"'

19 Feb 2025

This is where any possible new defense money has been allocated - a desperate legacy that Trudeau is trying to build for himself before he shuffles off to his newest teaching assignment.

Canada is getting high-speed rail

The Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, today announced that Canada is developing a high-speed rail network in the Toronto-Quebec City corridor.

www.pm.gc.ca

• Czech_pivo
• Replies: 1,225
• Forum: Canadian Politics

• 

I had forgotten about that post.

 

[ArmyRick]

That this topic is pretty cleanly split along partisan and rural/urban lines indicates that most are likely approaching it from a partisan perspective, rather than considering it on it's merits alone.

Faster and easier commuting between the largest cities in the country is a good thing. Even I, raised more rural than most*, can see why HSR makes sense.

HSR, alongside LRT, busses, etc., is far more efficient than yet another road leading to the same 5-10 choke points. How many more lanes leading into the 174/417 interchange, 417/Carling interchange, or 417/416 interchange does Ottawa need?

Sometimes the right solution is the mix of two solutions. @Brad Sallows' more busses, and @ytz's more rail. They aren't mutually exclusive, and since busses are a municipla/provincial issue, the Feds putting money into interprovincial/intermunicipal transit makes sense.

* I grew up a mile outside of a hamlet of 300... The closest "town" had less than 3000.

To reiterate a point I made earlier (a few post ago), I would be ok for the most part with an HSR IF the financial books were in order (they are a terrible mess and the extravagant spending has NOT slowed down at all under the LPC). I also picked up on another good point, this project definitely needs consultation at provincial and municipal levels before any moves are made (it appears that this is being rammed down the throats).

The pipelines and LNG to international customers beyond the USA issue? Is much different, all the leg work has been done over and over again, its blatant federal government stalling and dithering on the issue. And that is a MUCH higher priority to the us and the global community.

On that topic, Donald's beatdown on Iran had one again opened a golden opportunity (and a clear message) for us to steam ahead full throttle on piepelines/oil and gas, and here we are ho-hum, twiddle our fingers and make lots of lame excuses and justifications.

Go Liberal Canada, lets shoot for 11th place in a ten horse race.

 

[ytz]

That this topic is pretty cleanly split along partisan and rural/urban lines indicates that most are likely approaching it from a partisan perspective, rather than considering it on it's merits alone.

As I pointed out earlier. There was cross-party support until basically PP chose to make it partisan last week. The CPC had it in their policy platform. O'Toole had it in his platform. And the biggest long time proponent was Peterborough's Conservative MP who pushed this during the Harper era (where the original idea started).

And also like I posted earlier. Polling does not show this divided along partisan lines either. The majority of conservatives support this. Loud does not equal numerous.

 

[PuckChaser]

Do you have this on scheduled send? It stops being mildly amusing when its posted twice in 18 hours.

 

[lenaitch]

Readers interested in HSR may find this discussion of interest,

21 pages

Thread 'High Speed Train Coming?-split from boosting Canada’s military spending"'

19 Feb 2025

This is where any possible new defense money has been allocated - a desperate legacy that Trudeau is trying to build for himself before he shuffles off to his newest teaching assignment.

Canada is getting high-speed rail

The Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, today announced that Canada is developing a high-speed rail network in the Toronto-Quebec City corridor.

www.pm.gc.ca

• Czech_pivo
• Replies: 1,225
• Forum: Canadian Politics

• 

Maybe a bored Mod on a quiet holiday weekend could carve HSR posts out of here. About 180 posts.

 

[mariomike]

April 2, 2026

Doug Ford weighs in on Federal politics.

Doug Ford praises Mark Carney and appeals for a majority government ahead of byelections​

The prime minister will secure a majority government if his Liberals win two of the three byelections.

Doug Ford praises Mark Carney and appeals for a majority government ahead of byelections

The prime minister will secure a majority government if his Liberals win two of the three byelections.

www.thestar.com

 

[Maxman1]

Do you have this on scheduled send? It stops being mildly amusing when its posted twice in 18 hours.

I forgot I posted it earlier.

 

[brihard]

The pipelines and LNG to international customers beyond the USA issue? Is much different, all the leg work has been done over and over again, its blatant federal government stalling and dithering on the issue. And that is a MUCH higher priority to the us and the global community.

Which of these ‘leg work done’ projects is currently sitting awaiting federal approval? I wasn’t aware there was a consortium with one of those projects tabled and ready to advance save for federal dithering. Some LNG projects are underway or recently complete. Kai Lisims LNG in B.C. is currently at the Major Projects Office but has only been there since November; that’s not ‘dithering’ on a project of this scope, and thus far the feds have been favourable.

For oil pipelines, Alberta has said they hope to table a project proposal in the next few months, but currently there’s not one for the feds to approve.

So, I’m not seeing a bunch of federally backlogged oil and gas projects at present. Granted, past conditions made past projects die on the vine or not get proposed. With the change in government in the past year, the regulatory conditions appear to be tangibly improving. That still takes time to manifest as projects seeking approval.

 

[ArmyRick]

April 2, 2026

Doug Ford weighs in on Federal politics.

Doug Ford praises Mark Carney and appeals for a majority government ahead of byelections​

The prime minister will secure a majority government if his Liberals win two of the three byelections.

Doug Ford praises Mark Carney and appeals for a majority government ahead of byelections

The prime minister will secure a majority government if his Liberals win two of the three byelections.

www.thestar.com

Fragile majority. If only three MPs are not in the house for an important vote, then they lose that vote. And Nathan Erskine-Smith is heavily rumoured to run for provincial liberal leadership. And the odds of NO MPs stepping down for other reasons? Fragile majority.

 

[ArmyRick]

So, I’m not seeing a bunch of federally backlogged oil and gas projects at present.

Your not but many others are. Not just ordinary people. Plenty of people in the energy industry have said it over and over again.

Which of these ‘leg work done’ projects is currently sitting awaiting federal approval?

Could not tell you the specifics, I don't work in the office, but many in Alberta have said, the leg work has been done and re-done

I guess you haven't seen the news lately where it was stated PM MC faiuled to meet the Alberta MOU deadline?

 

[brihard]

Your not but many others are. Not just ordinary people. Plenty of people in the energy industry have said it over and over again.


Could not tell you the specifics, I don't work in the office, but many in Alberta have said, the leg work has been done and re-done

It should be easy enough to name a project. I did. I think you’re confusing ‘projects ready to move’ with what I said about the sector needing to recover from the regulatory and policy approaches of the previous government and kick things off again under the new one. If you’re going to claim these projects are sitting there but for dithering, you can name one or more of them to back the claim.

I guess you haven't seen the news lately where it was stated PM MC faiuled to meet the Alberta MOU deadline?

You’re now moving the goalposts from what I was specifically commenting on, but in any case yes I have. Both the PM and the premier of Alberta still seem pretty happy with the work underway, a couple major points have been satisfied, a couple need a bit more work. I’m glad they were motivated by an unusually aggressive timeline and that they’re close. I’ve not see a walk back on Smith’s assertion that they hope to put a pipeline project forward for proposal and regulatory consideration this summer.

Further info on the MOU progress and the work yet to be done can be found here: Prime minister doesn’t expect to meet MOU deadline with Alberta

 

[ArmyRick]

ou’re now moving the goalposts from what I was specifically commenting on

Whatever. I don't care how you view my statement. Period. I took the time to do a quick google AI search and a shit ton of projects are showing at various near ready states (from just waiting government greenlights to do have some more leg work), I was going to quote it. Then I stopped. Alot of work to copy and paste, then I decided F it, better way to address it, in your own statement.

sector needing to recover from the regulatory and policy approaches of the previous government and kick things off again under the new one.

PREVIOUS Government? Those regulations (shackles) are STILL THERE. And PM MC is NOT using C5 to override them or by pass them.

 

[Czech_pivo]

Your not but many others are. Not just ordinary people. Plenty of people in the energy industry have said it over and over again.


Could not tell you the specifics, I don't work in the office, but many in Alberta have said, the leg work has been done and re-done

I guess you haven't seen the news lately where it was stated PM MC faiuled to meet the Alberta MOU deadline?

Typically in the business world unrealistic timelines are created and set. Why? In order to create some sense of urgency, deliverables and expectations and to hold some feet to the fire. When these things come down the line from the C-suites, those with experience know that the timeline is a farce and that its completely unobtainable, useless some powerful pixy dust is applied. So, what everyone does is, hold the appropriate meetings, discuss the deliverables, arrange them in order of importance and nature sequencing and assign individuals to those deliverables and then walk away and let the process begin. After the first few weeks/months the deliverables start to slip because they were never realistic to begin with, possible cuts to the deliverables are discussed and the project goes from 'Green' to 'Trending Yellow', but the end date does NOT change. A few more weeks/months go by and the project status has moved from 'Trending Yellow' to 'Yellow' status and the C-suites start to sit up and notice. The project is then 'rebased lined' and a new delivery date is then established. At this point it can go either way - the new timeline is actually achievable IF everyone pulls their own weight and no inside politics take over OR the new timeline is still completely out to lunch.

We are at the point on the MOU's with Alberta where the 're-baselining' will be occurring. As I mentioned above, from here it can go either way - actual achievable timelines are created or unrealistic, unachievable ones will again be set.

 

[ArmyRick]

And for reference, Trudeau/CARNEY's Anti-energy laws

"Key legislation and policies described by critics as "anti-energy" include:

• Bill C-69 (2019): Established a new Impact Assessment Act and the Canadian Energy Regulator Act. It expanded assessments to include environmental, health, social, and economic impacts, which critics argued added insurmountable delays and uncertainty to infrastructure projects.
• Bill C-48 (2019): The Oil Tanker Moratorium Act banned oil tankers carrying over 12,500 tonnes of oil from stopping at ports on British Columbia's northern coast, effectively preventing projects like the Northern Gateway pipeline.
• Bill C-12 (2020): The Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act enshrined into law the target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to net-zero by 2050, requiring a significant shift away from fossil fuels.
• Clean Electricity Regulations (2023): Draft regulations intended to phase out the use of fossil fuels in electricity generation by 2050.
• Oil and Gas Subsidies Phase-Out: A move to eliminate "inefficient" fossil fuel subsidies, with a deadline set for 2025."

 

[ArmyRick]

We are at the point on the MOU's with Alberta where the 're-baselining' will be occurring. As I mentioned above, from here it can go either way - actual achievable timelines are created or unrealistic, unachievable ones will again be set.

Without Trudeau era stuipid laws (That Carney won't repeal) the MOU would be unnecessary

Your awfully optimistic but if past behaviour of the Trudeau-Carney Liberals is any indication it will be glacially paced ir there is any movement at all

 

[ArmyRick]

Mods, should some of these recent post made be bumped over to Pipelines thread?

My point here was priorities of HSR vs Pipelines for the LPC not to deep dive into pipelines

 

[brihard]

Whatever. I don't care how you view my statement. Period. I took the time to do a quick google AI search and a shit ton of projects are showing at various near ready states (from just waiting government greenlights to do have some more leg work), I was going to quote it. Then I stopped. Alot of work to copy and paste, then I decided F it, better way to address it, in your own statement.

Ok so name one that’s ready to progress save for federal regulatory approval please. I did and it wasn’t hard to find- though blind reliance on AI may not get you there.

PREVIOUS Government? Those regulations (shackles) are STILL THERE. And PM MC is NOT using C5 to override them or by pass them.

Yes, previous government. There’s been quite a bit of turnover and a very clear change in political will and policy approaches.

And for reference, Trudeau/CARNEY's Anti-energy laws

"Key legislation and policies described by critics as "anti-energy" include:

• Bill C-69 (2019): Established a new Impact Assessment Act and the Canadian Energy Regulator Act. It expanded assessments to include environmental, health, social, and economic impacts, which critics argued added insurmountable delays and uncertainty to infrastructure projects.
• Bill C-48 (2019): The Oil Tanker Moratorium Act banned oil tankers carrying over 12,500 tonnes of oil from stopping at ports on British Columbia's northern coast, effectively preventing projects like the Northern Gateway pipeline.
• Bill C-12 (2020): The Canadian Net-Zero Emissions Accountability Act enshrined into law the target of reducing greenhouse gas emissions to net-zero by 2050, requiring a significant shift away from fossil fuels.
• Clean Electricity Regulations (2023): Draft regulations intended to phase out the use of fossil fuels in electricity generation by 2050.
• Oil and Gas Subsidies Phase-Out: A move to eliminate "inefficient" fossil fuel subsidies, with a deadline set for 2025."

Prime Minister Carney was neither a member of Parliament nor a member of the government for any of those. The law that has passed during his tenure - C-5, you mentioned it - included establishing the MPO, which is simply awaiting a tabled proposal for an oil pipeline at this point, and which is already considering a major LNG project. Again, that’s the one I mentioned by name.

I’ll also point you to the ‘one project, one assessment’ agreement the Feds and Alberta have recently reached under PM Carney and minister Hodgson. That’s a major, major policy shift for environmental and impact assessments from the Feds.

Co-operation Agreement between Alberta and Canada on Environmental and Impact Assessment - Canada.ca

Co-operation Agreement between Nova Scotia and Canada on Environmental and Impact Assessment

www.canada.ca