Politics in 2016

[Altair]

The "10 billion deficit during election" that grew to "29 billion after election"?  That Liberal word?

Pass.  I don't know if I'd believe them if they said the sky was blue during the day and air has oxygen in it.

that's fine.

Don't expect me to believe your truthiness however.

I'll chalk this up as insufficient evidence to come to a reasonable conclusion either way.

 

[Journeyman]

I'm not going to respond to the tangential stuff that I got involved in earlier.....

By "tangential stuff," you mean where Oldgateboatdriver showed, point by point,  that you didn't know what you were talking about?  Ya, good call walking away from that.
    op:

 

[Eye In The Sky]

that's fine.

Don't expect me to believe your truthiness however.

I'll chalk this up as insufficient evidence to come to a reasonable conclusion either way.

Truthiness??  Are you kidding?

Aug 2015 - Liberals promise $10-billion yearly deficits to kick-start economy

"The Liberal Party is promising to run deficits of up to $10-billion a year over the next three years..."

March 2016 - Bill Morneau sets Canada on path for near-record deficits, growing to more than $29B over next fiscal year

Canada is headed for a string of near-record deficits...after eking out a $1.9 billion surplus in the previous fiscal year during the final months under the Conservatives, the Liberal party will return the country to shortfalls...growing to over $29 billion the next fiscal year.

 

[ballz]

Mrs Trudeau is a free human being who should be free to do what she wishes. She should not be tied to her husband's occupation, and have her life ruled by her husband's aspirations. The idea of someone suddenly having legislated official duties because of something their husband wanted / did is rather silly of us to even consider.

That said, if we acknowledge that she is a free human being who can decide for herself whether she wants to stay home with the kids, go pursue a career in something else, or use her husband's occupation as an excellent platform to influence things she believes are important... then we have to acknowledge that the taxpayer's don't owe her a dime to pursue whatever it is she wishes. She also doesn't owe the taxpayer's a second of her time in return.

 

[Kirkhill]

Well, when it comes to "who elected them to work for the electorate?" type of staff, does PMO count?

It does count.  A relevant question might be though was whether the PM felt he was getting suitable product from the neutral civil servants who were supposed to be assisting the Government of the Day.

 

[The Bread Guy]

It does count.  A relevant question might be though was whether the PM felt he was getting suitable product from the neutral civil servants who were supposed to be assisting the Government of the Day.

Fair one, but that also then raises the question about how much political input from partisan supporters does any GoD need.  And how much do political appointees know about the machinery of government  (if partisan advice is replacing technical advice)?  And nobody calls for PMO people to be paid out of party coffers, either.

She also doesn't owe the taxpayer's a second of her time in return.

And stand by for the "she's too high-and-mighty to attend public function x" accusations right after taking that position.  Remember the "can't win" thing, like hubby with "go vs don't go to Ft. McMurray"?

 

[Eye In The Sky]

Not going to Ft Mac = bad optics, lack of a GAFF about Harpers 'stompin grounds'.  Going to Ft Mac to take selfies with fire fighters - bad optics, appears like a campaign trail trip.

If he can't 'win either way', it because his actions have stereotyped him to date IMO.

I'd have been politely surprised if it had happened in a way that showed what (IMO) the PM should have shown;  concern for the residents, a sense of compassion and and understanding that THIS is the type of stuff we need to spend tax dollars on, not tossing it away to every hand that is out internationally.

:2c:

 

[Altair]

Truthiness??  Are you kidding?

Aug 2015 - Liberals promise $10-billion yearly deficits to kick-start economy

"The Liberal Party is promising to run deficits of up to $10-billion a year over the next three years..."

March 2016 - Bill Morneau sets Canada on path for near-record deficits, growing to more than $29B over next fiscal year

Canada is headed for a string of near-record deficits...after eking out a $1.9 billion surplus in the previous fiscal year during the final months under the Conservatives, the Liberal party will return the country to shortfalls...growing to over $29 billion the next fiscal year.

No, I am not kidding.

The deficit is larger than they said it would be. Fine. That doesn't mean the trudeau's are spending more on their household than the harpers did.

Unless you can find something saying that they do, yes, to me me it's truthiness.

 

[Altair]

Not going to Ft Mac = bad optics, lack of a GAFF about Harpers 'stompin grounds'.  Going to Ft Mac to take selfies with fire fighters - bad optics, appears like a campaign trail trip.

If he can't 'win either way', it because his actions have stereotyped him to date IMO.

I'd have been politely surprised if it had happened in a way that showed what (IMO) the PM should have shown;  concern for the residents, a sense of compassion and and understanding that THIS is the type of stuff we need to spend tax dollars on, not tossing it away to every hand that is out internationally.

:2c:

The budget has a 6 billion dollar contingancy fund for just this kind of event.

 

[The Bread Guy]

I'd have been politely surprised if it had happened in a way that showed what (IMO) the PM should have shown;  concern for the residents, a sense of compassion and and understanding that THIS is the type of stuff we need to spend tax dollars on, not tossing it away to every hand that is out internationally.

:2c:

• Sympathy for/impressed with the evacuees?  Check.
• Federal commitment?  Says more EI's on the way for those affected by the fire - check and check.
• “The federal government has your back ... Canada will be there for you.”?  Check - although admittedly still no details of how much/how it'll flow yet, so very much worth haunting him on.
• Pretty-pro-Tory columnist in pretty Blue media outlet says, "not much to see here"?  Check.
• Statement saying we should spend more on emergencies here than on foreign aid/support?  Fail - but there's something about walking and chewing gum @ the same time, too ... *

* - And no, it appears the feds may not be spending more on Syrian refugees than on Fort McMurray.

 

[Jarnhamar]

The deficit is larger than they said it would be. Fine.

I'm always impressed when Liberals non-chalantly dismiss the extra 19 billion dollars Trudeau is responsible for so far. Over 3 billion sent overseas in the first month of office alone. People need to relax and stop worrying about money so much, we have plenty to go around.

 

[George Wallace]

I'm always impressed when Liberals non-chalantly dismiss the extra 19 billion dollars Trudeau is responsible for so far.

[

Amusing isn't it.

 

[Altair]

I'm always impressed when Liberals non-chalantly dismiss the extra 19 billion dollars Trudeau is responsible for so far. Over 3 billion sent overseas in the first month of office alone. People need to relax and stop worrying about money so much, we have plenty to go around.

I'll hold your hand on this one.

When I say the deficits are larger than they said it would be, fine, I was conceding the point to Eye in the sky.

Way to take it out of context though, we'll done.

 

[jmt18325]

I'm not the one who made the statement, it's up to you to prove your facts. I'm not going to sell your argument for you.

There is an official statement stating that they have the same household budget.  You're the one that needs to prove otherwise.

 

[jmt18325]

By "tangential stuff," you mean where Oldgateboatdriver showed, point by point,  that you didn't know what you were talking about?  Ya, good call walking away from that.
    op:

I have time today if you'd like.  I didn't then.

 

[jmt18325]

And police officers everywhere argue they shouldn't need a warrant to enter a house and inspect it. That's why we don't let police officers dictate those rules. What if all statisticians said that they need laws to force people to answer their questions on voting intentions? Would that make such law right? And BTW, did you know that statistics Canada removed all questions on income from the census this year? Know why? Because they found out that the data given to Revenue Canada is better and more complete, so they will use that set of data. Now here is the interesting thing: the data for 95% of the questions asked on the census form is already in various government data bases, in more complete and precise form, and could be accessed by StatsCan if they wanted to. Does this sound like a good reason to force Canadian to participate in a census to get info the government already has under penalty of law - fines and prison, when, BTW, no other western country does?

So lets peel away the straw men that begin your argument (as if somehow, the census is just like those other things - we can all come up with ridiculous hyperbole) and deal with the end.  Yes - they started using CRA data instead of asking their own questions related to income because there was better data available.  Don't you think then, that if there was better data available, that they could legally access, that they'd use it?  Delving into conspiratorial nonsense really adds nothing.

Where do you get that this was explained to him. First of all it is not impossible: The easy straightforward answer of doing this while maintaining profitability has been given to Post canada: delivery on alternate days (i.e. every second day). What has been explained to Trudeau, and properly so, is that Post Canada is a Crown Corporation with it's own board: For him as Pm to interfere with their decisions on how to run their corporation would be illegal - in fact removing those operations from the boot of the political party in place is the very reason crown corporations were invented to start with.

And yet there was a promise to restore door to door.  In response to the Trudeau win, we saw the plan to end door to door pause, awaiting word from above.  Now we see that there will be a study, examining multiple options.  The study speaks to exactly what I'm talking about with this government - data is more important than foolish promises they made without the benefit of said data.

Are you joking? The military purchases billions of dollars of stuff every year. Sure, some big ticket items (and smaller ones, like boots  :nod seem to get bogged down, but that does not mean that no purchases are ever made.

Some big ticket items?  It's more like every singe large procurement program, other than those that were single sourced.  That speaks to very poor management at both DND and Procurement.

Moreover, you honestly think that the public should be consulted on the type of main battle tank we should purchase or the colour of our uniforms, or the amount of ammunition stocks we should have for a given weapons system?

Of course, I didn't say that, and the government isn't asking that.  The public consultations are also only a small part of the review.  Experts, allies, academics, and military leaders all all being consulted.

And what requests did Alberta make of the government of Canada exactly?

Air support for transport.  In answer the government provided a CC-130j, and had a CC-177 and CC-150 on standby.  They also sent a CH-147 when logistics support that could get to more remote places was needed.  On top of this, the federal government sent emergency supplies, including 20,000 cots.

First of all, forest fires are not a Federal jurisdiction - as a result of which Canada has no resources to provide for those.

Funny that I never said that.  I'm not sure who you were aiming that at.

It is the various provinces that have agreements between them to share forest fire fighting equipment.

That's correct - it's coordinated through an office in Winnipeg.

Second of all, the Federal government has standing protocols to assist the provinces in disasters, including special funds, AND ALL OF THESE REQUESTS ARE PROCESSED BY THE CIVIL SERVANTS WHOSE JOB IT IS TO EXECUTE THESE PROTOCOLS (including assistance by the military). Absolutely nothing of that requires any intervention by the politicians whatsoever.

And yet it has to be approved by someone in the political chain.

These very same protocols and funds were used by the Conservatives, including Mr. Harper for the Calgary floods, and for international disasters (such as the earthquake in Tibet) exactly the same way. How does that prove that Harper acted on his own, while Trudeau listened to experts?

You mean Nepal, not Tibet.  In that case, there was most certainly political involvement from both countries, as the military can't go there without permission - so, no.

Shows how little you know about bills. ABSOLUTELY EVERY SINGLE bill put before parliament  is crafted by experts: They work for the government and are civil servants.

That's almost a funny statement.  If that were true of all Harper bills, you wouldn't see so many of them being shot down by the SCOC.

No one else drafts bills, even if the advice of external experts is sought on the results of the bills.

I'm sure there's no political input whatsoever 

Second, the Harper government had not yet tabled ANY legislation on the subject, though you may be certain that some had been crafted and prepared for introduction shortly after the election, so you have nO idea what a Harper bill would have proposed.

Harper had named a panel of 3 experts - all 3 of which spoke out in the SCOC court case against allowing assisted suicide.

Moreover, since the same civil servants helped draft both, and they were working from the same Supreme Court decision, I am willing to bet that there would be a 95% + commonality between the two.

In other words, you don't know.

 

[jmt18325]

"The Liberal Party is promising to run deficits of up to $10-billion a year over the next three years..."

So, first of all, we now know that the deficit won't be that bing (though Fort McMurray will certainly make it less small that it would have been).  Many experts are now calling for a deficit in the $20B range. 

Second, the Liberals actually added less spending than they promised during the campaign.  Their infrastructure plan is smaller.  Their child benefit plan is smaller.  Many promises were deferred, etc.  That tells us that all 3 leaders were wrong with their projections.  It tells us that, taking out the Liberals ~$9 - 10B, that Harper would have been staring down a deficit in the ~$10B range, as would Mulcair.

 

[jmt18325]

Not going to Ft Mac = bad optics, lack of a GAFF about Harpers 'stompin grounds'.  Going to Ft Mac to take selfies with fire fighters - bad optics, appears like a campaign trail trip.

If he can't 'win either way', it because his actions have stereotyped him to date IMO.

You realize, I hope, that it's only in certain circles (bitter New Democrats and Conservatives) that he can never win, right?

I'd have been politely surprised if it had happened in a way that showed what (IMO) the PM should have shown;  concern for the residents, a sense of compassion and and understanding that THIS is the type of stuff we need to spend tax dollars on, not tossing it away to every hand that is out internationally.

So, lets examine what he did:

- made several speeches on the issue, about how Canadians were behind the people involved
- immediately spoke to Premier Notley by phone to convey his support
- put his Public Safety Minister on the file, ensuring that all doors for assistance were open.
- said he wouldn't go to Alberta until his presence wouldn't cause a disruption.
- after 10 days (only 2 days later than the Premier of Alberta and the Mayor of Wood Buffalo), toured Fort McMurray and got a sense of everything that had happened.
- after 11 days, visited a refugee centre, taking no media with him (other than his own photographer and writer), and met with the affected people and the volunteers looking after them.
- pledged federal support to help rebuild.

He couldn't have handled it much better.

 

[ModlrMike]

You forgot this part:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5Fgp-KihIA

 

[Bird_Gunner45]

You realize, I hope, that it's only in certain circles (bitter New Democrats and Conservatives) that he can never win, right?

So the 61% of Canadians who didn't vote for him? I could comment on how his 39% represents a clear mandate to implement a change to the political system, doctor assisted suicide, and legalized marijuana while the 39% vote for the conservative was an attack on democracy, but that's another discussion for another day.

First off, I voted Liberal this election... BUT... his reactions to the Paris attacks, Brussels attacks, and the Fort Mac situation have given me the impression that he is unable to think well on his feet aside from making snide remarks. He was able to meet Prince Harry for a photo op with wounded vets (though didn't go to the actual games) and a photo op with Alex Trebek while the Fort Mac situation was on. Than his wife complained how she needed more taxpayer funded help for whatever it is she thinks her job is while her husband was off talking to people who had lost their houses. Trudeau even had an awkward smile and treated his speech in Fort Mac like it was a campaign stop by focusing on the hypothetical of what the conservatives would have done.

Finally... they promised deficits of no more than $10 billion and delivered closer to $30 billion in deficits with no clear way back. For you to state that the NDP and conservatives would have been similar is silly since we'll never know what either did. We (since I voted Liberal) won the election, now it's time to own it and stop blaming the past government for everything and treating everything like a campaign stop. Trudeau's new to the job, and to be honest, seems awkward at actual governing and more at home with campaigning... people ought to give him a bit of a break on this, but he and his supporters have to own some too.

Harper was plenty vilified, so the same people that vilified him have little in compassion from me for crying that their champion is being vilified by the "bitter" people outside of their government.