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

[Brad Sallows]

Not an insurmountable engineering challenge and it doesn't require a runway length to handle a heavy, just a regional jet with reasonable pax/cargo capacity.

See also: Hong Kong.

 

[Brad Sallows]

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".

 

[Brad Sallows]

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.

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.

 

[Czech_pivo]

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".

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.

 

[Cloud Cover]

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.

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."