- Reaction score
- 4,622
- Points
- 1,260
If you mean the Ethics Comm'n'r probe, I stand to be corrected, but I doubt if it'll be NOT mentioned during any campaign, and I doubt the digging will stop.Fishbone Jones said:
Run Up to Election 2019
- Thread starter Fishbone Jones
- Start date
https://www.thepostmillennial.com/the-biggest-threat-of-election-interference-comes-from-michael-wernick-not-russia/
The biggest threat of election interference comes from Michael Wernick, not Russia
by Mika Ryu Mar 12
<snip>
That being said, Wernick will serve as the head of a panel of government employees who will monitor this year's election campaign, on the lookout for fake news and foreign interference. This is even after his disastrous Justice Committee testimony, and calls from the NDP for him to be fired.
That includes what Wernick himself called the "vomitorium" of social media, which has become an important aspect of staying informed of current events in Canada.
Earlier this month, the Ministry of Democratic Institutions defended their choice not to remove Wernick from the panel, saying that they have "great confidence in the integrity of Canada's public service."
As if those facts are not troubling enough, recent events have done nothing to improve the apparent trustworthiness of the "Critical Election Incident Public Protocol Panel".
It is already hard enough to trust the government to monitor social media during an election, but it might become even harder, considering who else will be on the panel.
<snip>
Is this a man who has the calm and nerve to make thoughtful and unbiased decisions concerning the boundaries of political public discourse during an election campaign?
Do the Liberals' still have such hubris that they would expect Canadians to let this one go?
https://www.thepostmillennial.com/truth-and-reconciliation-commissioner-calls-out-trudeau-for-reconciliation-facade/
Truth and Reconciliation commissioner calls out Trudeau for reconciliation "façade"
by Travis Gladue-Beauregard Mar 12
<snip>
https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/columnists/cohen-wilson-raybould-and-philpott-are-finished-as-liberals
Cohen: Wilson-Raybould and Philpott are finished as Liberals
Andrew Cohen
Updated: March 12, 2019
What do Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott want? Where does this all go, now that they’re gone from cabinet?
Will they bring down the government of Justin Trudeau, in a very Canadian coup? Or, more likely, is this effectively the end of their short, unhappy lives as Liberals?
Justin Trudeau is responding, fitfully, and retrenching, slowly. He is not leaving. He and Gerald Butts, his former principal secretary, now offer a counter-narrative: This is a managerial problem, not a moral one. This is vanity, not virtue.
Trudeau needs a return to the status quo ante. Fast. With Parliament off this week, as it was last week, he has bought time and relief from the anger of the opposition.
<snip>
Both will run in the next election. Both will lose if their party does (learning, as every MP does, that it isn’t about them). Or, they will win and return to the back benches. Neither will be ministers again under this prime minister.
Amid the ruins, they may tell themselves that it was all worth it, that it is better to be right than in cabinet. As Liberals, though, they’re done.
https://nationalpost.com/opinion/chris-selley-for-the-ndp-in-quebec-the-dream-is-over
Chris Selley: For the NDP in Quebec, the dream is over
The nationalism to which Layton successfully appealed doesn't exist any more. What's left is simply incompatible with a Canada-wide progressive movement
Chris Selley March 12, 2019 8:28 PM EDT
<snip>
Today the governing Coalition Avenir Québec, successor to the ADQ, vows to bring in legislation that would, among other things, make it illegal for the turban-wearing Singh to work as a public school teacher.
<snip>
The problem with that is a significant chunk of the nationalist voters Singh is after in Quebec see the entire controversy - literally - as an anglophone hate-plot perpetrated by the Rest of Canada on francophone Quebecers.
<snip>
The biggest threat of election interference comes from Michael Wernick, not Russia
by Mika Ryu Mar 12
<snip>
That being said, Wernick will serve as the head of a panel of government employees who will monitor this year's election campaign, on the lookout for fake news and foreign interference. This is even after his disastrous Justice Committee testimony, and calls from the NDP for him to be fired.
That includes what Wernick himself called the "vomitorium" of social media, which has become an important aspect of staying informed of current events in Canada.
Earlier this month, the Ministry of Democratic Institutions defended their choice not to remove Wernick from the panel, saying that they have "great confidence in the integrity of Canada's public service."
As if those facts are not troubling enough, recent events have done nothing to improve the apparent trustworthiness of the "Critical Election Incident Public Protocol Panel".
It is already hard enough to trust the government to monitor social media during an election, but it might become even harder, considering who else will be on the panel.
<snip>
Is this a man who has the calm and nerve to make thoughtful and unbiased decisions concerning the boundaries of political public discourse during an election campaign?
Do the Liberals' still have such hubris that they would expect Canadians to let this one go?
https://www.thepostmillennial.com/truth-and-reconciliation-commissioner-calls-out-trudeau-for-reconciliation-facade/
Truth and Reconciliation commissioner calls out Trudeau for reconciliation "façade"
by Travis Gladue-Beauregard Mar 12
<snip>
https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/columnists/cohen-wilson-raybould-and-philpott-are-finished-as-liberals
Cohen: Wilson-Raybould and Philpott are finished as Liberals
Andrew Cohen
Updated: March 12, 2019
What do Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott want? Where does this all go, now that they’re gone from cabinet?
Will they bring down the government of Justin Trudeau, in a very Canadian coup? Or, more likely, is this effectively the end of their short, unhappy lives as Liberals?
Justin Trudeau is responding, fitfully, and retrenching, slowly. He is not leaving. He and Gerald Butts, his former principal secretary, now offer a counter-narrative: This is a managerial problem, not a moral one. This is vanity, not virtue.
Trudeau needs a return to the status quo ante. Fast. With Parliament off this week, as it was last week, he has bought time and relief from the anger of the opposition.
<snip>
Both will run in the next election. Both will lose if their party does (learning, as every MP does, that it isn’t about them). Or, they will win and return to the back benches. Neither will be ministers again under this prime minister.
Amid the ruins, they may tell themselves that it was all worth it, that it is better to be right than in cabinet. As Liberals, though, they’re done.
https://nationalpost.com/opinion/chris-selley-for-the-ndp-in-quebec-the-dream-is-over
Chris Selley: For the NDP in Quebec, the dream is over
The nationalism to which Layton successfully appealed doesn't exist any more. What's left is simply incompatible with a Canada-wide progressive movement
Chris Selley March 12, 2019 8:28 PM EDT
<snip>
Today the governing Coalition Avenir Québec, successor to the ADQ, vows to bring in legislation that would, among other things, make it illegal for the turban-wearing Singh to work as a public school teacher.
<snip>
The problem with that is a significant chunk of the nationalist voters Singh is after in Quebec see the entire controversy - literally - as an anglophone hate-plot perpetrated by the Rest of Canada on francophone Quebecers.
<snip>
- Reaction score
- 2,294
- Points
- 1,160
I would have expected the Liberals to wait until October to hold the election as scheduled, in the hopes that this would all blow over, so recent rumours of a May election somewhat surprised me.
The only reason to try it early, that I can see, is that they expect things to get worse. That matches their continuing efforts to suppress a second round of testimony from Jody Wilson-Raybould, and makes me curious. What is it that they truly fear? What horror lurks in the dark recesses of Liberal minds?
Snap elections can also be risky, and don't always work out in favour of the snappers.
It could already be too late for them, anyway:
https://www.campaignresearch.ca/single-post/2019/03/13/Prime-Ministers-approval-rating-plunges-in-wake-of-SNC-Lavalin-Affair
Prime Minister's approval rating plunges in wake of SNC-Lavalin Affair
March 14, 2019
Eli Yufest
In the aftermath of Jody Wilson-Raybould's testimony to the House of Commons Justice Committee, Campaign Research conducted a national public opinion poll of 1,893 Canadians to investigate their views on the upcoming federal election. A plurality (43%) believe that the government has done a bad job and should not be re-elected. Couple that with the 10% of Canadians that say the government has done a good job but it's time to give someone else a chance, and a majority of Canadians now want to see a change of government.
The country is seemingly divided along geographic lines, with Atlantic Canada and Quebec leaning Liberal (37%, 29%, respectively) and Ontario and everything West of it supporting the Conservatives. For example, the Conservatives continue to lead in seat-rich Ontario over the Liberals (40% vs. 34%) among decided voters. The Conservatives also now hold a lead in BC (30% vs. 27%). In short, the Conservatives maintain a strong lead over the Liberals with a national result of 36% vs. 30%
Justin Trudeau's personal brand and approval has taken a significant hit since the start of 2019, with a -10% decline. Conversely, Andrew Scheer's approval rating has surpassed Trudeau's for the first time in March, since we began tracking. For the second straight month, Trudeau's disapproval score has been over 50%. Of particular concern for Trudeau is the 60% of baby boomers that disapprove of him. Turning perceptions around of this key, more-likely-to-vote demographic is of paramount importance if Trudeau will win the election later this year.
Given the SNC-Lavalin controversy, we also asked about approval ratings for Jody Wilson-Raybould. In short, she received higher approval scores than any of the three main party leaders. Overall, 45% of Canadians approve of the job she is doing as a member of parliament and former attorney general. This relatively strong score likely speaks to the believability or favourability Canadians feel towards to her.
When asked who would make the best prime minister, Canadians selected Andrew Scheer over Justin Trudeau for the first time in our tracking. This number is likely the most worrisome for Trudeau because if Scheer is now being seen as a viable substitute as prime minster, this could prove disastrous for the Liberals during the election.
<snip>
Christie Blatchford: Liberal sheep may be ready to move on from LavScan, but I'm not
I am reminded of the Gomery inquiry. Quid pro quos, greasy influence over civil servants, too much power in the PMO: It all seems awfully familiar, doesn't it?
Christie Blatchford
March 13, 2019 8:19 PM EDT
<snip>
The only reason to try it early, that I can see, is that they expect things to get worse. That matches their continuing efforts to suppress a second round of testimony from Jody Wilson-Raybould, and makes me curious. What is it that they truly fear? What horror lurks in the dark recesses of Liberal minds?
Snap elections can also be risky, and don't always work out in favour of the snappers.
It could already be too late for them, anyway:
https://www.campaignresearch.ca/single-post/2019/03/13/Prime-Ministers-approval-rating-plunges-in-wake-of-SNC-Lavalin-Affair
Prime Minister's approval rating plunges in wake of SNC-Lavalin Affair
March 14, 2019
Eli Yufest
In the aftermath of Jody Wilson-Raybould's testimony to the House of Commons Justice Committee, Campaign Research conducted a national public opinion poll of 1,893 Canadians to investigate their views on the upcoming federal election. A plurality (43%) believe that the government has done a bad job and should not be re-elected. Couple that with the 10% of Canadians that say the government has done a good job but it's time to give someone else a chance, and a majority of Canadians now want to see a change of government.
The country is seemingly divided along geographic lines, with Atlantic Canada and Quebec leaning Liberal (37%, 29%, respectively) and Ontario and everything West of it supporting the Conservatives. For example, the Conservatives continue to lead in seat-rich Ontario over the Liberals (40% vs. 34%) among decided voters. The Conservatives also now hold a lead in BC (30% vs. 27%). In short, the Conservatives maintain a strong lead over the Liberals with a national result of 36% vs. 30%
Justin Trudeau's personal brand and approval has taken a significant hit since the start of 2019, with a -10% decline. Conversely, Andrew Scheer's approval rating has surpassed Trudeau's for the first time in March, since we began tracking. For the second straight month, Trudeau's disapproval score has been over 50%. Of particular concern for Trudeau is the 60% of baby boomers that disapprove of him. Turning perceptions around of this key, more-likely-to-vote demographic is of paramount importance if Trudeau will win the election later this year.
Given the SNC-Lavalin controversy, we also asked about approval ratings for Jody Wilson-Raybould. In short, she received higher approval scores than any of the three main party leaders. Overall, 45% of Canadians approve of the job she is doing as a member of parliament and former attorney general. This relatively strong score likely speaks to the believability or favourability Canadians feel towards to her.
When asked who would make the best prime minister, Canadians selected Andrew Scheer over Justin Trudeau for the first time in our tracking. This number is likely the most worrisome for Trudeau because if Scheer is now being seen as a viable substitute as prime minster, this could prove disastrous for the Liberals during the election.
<snip>
Christie Blatchford: Liberal sheep may be ready to move on from LavScan, but I'm not
I am reminded of the Gomery inquiry. Quid pro quos, greasy influence over civil servants, too much power in the PMO: It all seems awfully familiar, doesn't it?
Christie Blatchford
March 13, 2019 8:19 PM EDT
<snip>
- Reaction score
- 17,818
- Points
- 1,010
CBC is reporting that the Clerk of the Privy Counsel has resigned. He stated that there is no way that he can appear impartial to the opposition parties going into a federal election.
Guess that opening monologue to the Justice Committee was not such a great idea, after all.
The body count from SNC-Lavalin keeps piling up....
Guess that opening monologue to the Justice Committee was not such a great idea, after all.
The body count from SNC-Lavalin keeps piling up....
- Reaction score
- 2,294
- Points
- 1,160
Interestingly, if Trudeau calls a snap election after the budget (expected to do so); with this letter Wernick appears to be attempting to establish clean hands and no knowledge about that. He has referenced the election several times in a resignation letter?
"Recent events have led me to conclude that I cannot serve as Clerk of
the Privy Council and Secretary to Cabinet during the upcoming election
campaign. Therefore, I will be taking steps to retire from the public service well
before the writ of election is issued.
One of the key roles of the Privy Council Office is to be ready to assist
whichever government Canadians elect in October. It has been my privilege to
work with the transition teams of three prime ministers. It is now apparent that
there is no path for me to have a relationship of mutual trust and respect with
the leaders of the Opposition parties. Furthermore, it is essential that during
the writ period the Clerk be seen by all political parties as an impartial arbiter of
whether serious foreign interference has occurred.
Therefore, I wish to relinquish these roles before the election. It is
essential that Canadians continue to see their world leading public service as
non-partisan and there to provide excellent services to Canadians and the
governments they elect.
The timing of my retirement is something we should discuss, as your
Government will have a busy Cabinet agenda until the end of the Parliamentary
session, and you will want to seek advice on how best to address succession."
"Recent events have led me to conclude that I cannot serve as Clerk of
the Privy Council and Secretary to Cabinet during the upcoming election
campaign. Therefore, I will be taking steps to retire from the public service well
before the writ of election is issued.
One of the key roles of the Privy Council Office is to be ready to assist
whichever government Canadians elect in October. It has been my privilege to
work with the transition teams of three prime ministers. It is now apparent that
there is no path for me to have a relationship of mutual trust and respect with
the leaders of the Opposition parties. Furthermore, it is essential that during
the writ period the Clerk be seen by all political parties as an impartial arbiter of
whether serious foreign interference has occurred.
Therefore, I wish to relinquish these roles before the election. It is
essential that Canadians continue to see their world leading public service as
non-partisan and there to provide excellent services to Canadians and the
governments they elect.
The timing of my retirement is something we should discuss, as your
Government will have a busy Cabinet agenda until the end of the Parliamentary
session, and you will want to seek advice on how best to address succession."
- Reaction score
- 4,622
- Points
- 1,260
One place I've seen: this suburban Montreal weekly - while I can take or leave the unnamed political guesses, this bit of detail, if true & reported correctly, clicks for me ...PPCLI Guy said:
Caveat: depending on the "material" in question, this could be Elections Canada being safe as well as possibly political folks.
I don't know if I'd be as definite as saying "expected", though. Although someone smarter than me around these parts made a similar prediction ;D
- Reaction score
- 4,915
- Points
- 1,160
The snap election claim made a run through a few online-only media outlets, but articles were pulled a few hours later. Sources likely not credible.
- Reaction score
- 4,622
- Points
- 1,260
In case you're interested, here's the Budget 2019 page for when it's tabled this afternoon & the Finance Canada Twitter feed for the info-machine highlights./
- Reaction score
- 4,622
- Points
- 1,260
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 60
I know this is going to make me unpopular, but I unequivocally support Andrew Scheer. Mainly for his stance on Bill C-71
- Reaction score
- 4,381
- Points
- 1,260
Jed said:
if gun stuff is your defining issue for Canada.....and the exercise of your franchise. Otherwise, not so much.
When other single issue Canadians vote to support their single issue, are they just as virtuous? LGBTQ2 rights? Animal Rights? Feminism? Proportional Votes? Environmentalists?
ballz
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 444
- Points
- 910
PPCLI Guy said:
Yes, although I don't see it being a matter of "virtue," but if they feel those issues are so important that all other issues combined are not as important to them, that's democracy.... the argument that anyone's single issue isn't important enough is a self-defeating argument. It's simply based on disagreeing that that particular issue is important enough to be worth a "single issue" vote, despite the fact that there are undoubtedly circumstances which would, at some point, have us all become single issue voters... the whole point of having a vote is that no one else gets to decide what issues you *should* care about, and just *how much* you should care about them.
I suspect there are plenty of people who have had their life completely ruined because they are LGBTQ2 who have plenty of good reason that is above my judgement to vote solely for the party who they think will fix the single most destructive thing in their life.
If someone literally thinks the world is going to end in short order due to our failure to act on global warming, why wouldn't they be a single issue voter?
And a vote for something someone deeply and sincerely believes is critical to a properly functioning democracy? Like proportional representation or say, I dunno... the independent judiciary system
... if they think it's going to literally end our democracy... why would it be unreasonable to think that one single issue like that *could* be worth the sum of all other issues?Similar threads
