Amazon has whacked our affiliate account. Hosting Donations/Commitments $2063 of $1920 (Sept 13/18). In Hand $1466 (Lump sum payments minus paypal graft). Paypal Donation Link Here

Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

For discussion of religion and politics

Moderators: LawBeefaroni, $iljanus

User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 7600
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by Max Peck » Thu Nov 05, 2015 8:48 pm

So, about that whole "legalizing marijuana" thing...
Image
Time and tide melt the snowman.

There are worlds out there where the sky is burning, where the sea's asleep and the rivers dream, people made of smoke and cities made of song. Somewhere there's danger, somewhere there's injustice and somewhere else the tea is getting cold. Come on, Ace, we've got work to do.
-- The Doctor

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 60568
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Snooze

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by Isgrimnur » Thu Nov 05, 2015 8:58 pm

silverjon wrote:
Rumpy wrote:Heh oops, guess whoever compiled the list miscounted somewhere. Still amazing.
Or, and I hate to say this, based their count on the number of gentlemen wearing turbans.

Sohi does not. His seat was closely contested, so it was very exciting to see him take office, taking our lefties where we can get them. And now he's a minister.
Which is why I edited in the Maybe. I was unaware that there were males that didn't, which led me to research and find confirming links, as the initial story appeared to conflate Indo-Canadian with Sikhs.

Trust, but verify, etc.
Silver - 1k

User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 7600
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by Max Peck » Thu Nov 05, 2015 9:08 pm

Another great story. "Karma or kismet" indeed. :)

Video from 1983 conference shows father of Jody Wilson-Raybould telling Trudeau his daughter wants to be PM
Enlarge Image
A 32-year-old video of an exchange between First Nations leader Bill Wilson, the father of newly sworn-in federal Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould, and then prime minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau, the father of newly sworn-in PM Justin Trudeau, is making the rounds on Facebook. The exchange took place at the 1983 constitutional conference on native issues in Ottawa. In the video, Wilson tells Pierre Trudeau, "I have two children in Vancouver Island, both of whom for some misguided reason say they want to be a lawyer. Both of whom want to be the prime minster." There are chuckles in the room as Wilson pauses, and then adds. "Both of whom, prime minister, are women." At this point, the chuckles turn to laughter. The camera cuts from Wilson to Trudeau who is reclining in his chair directly across the large table. "Tell them I'll stick around until they're ready," Trudeau replies, as the room erupts into even louder laughter. After a long pause Wilson fires back, "Well, Mr. prime minister, if you're sincere ... I can have one of them on a plane this evening."

Reached in Kamloops, Bill Wilson told CBC News he remembers the exchange like it was yesterday. "Trudeau being the kind of obstreperous guy that he was got into a bit of a confrontation with me," he recalls. "I got stopped a thousand times in airports over the next 10 years. People would go, 'you're the kid that put Trudeau down!'" Wilson said seeing his daughter Jody appointed justice minister three decades later by Pierre's son, is "karma or kismet."

"Trudeau was, without a doubt, the most brilliant white guy I ever met in my life," said Wilson. "It looks like the young guy has a chip off the old block." Jody Wilson-Raybould was 12-years-old at the time of the exchange, and according to her father, watched it live on television at home in Campbell River, B.C. He said when it comes to the vision of his daughter becoming the first aboriginal prime minister, "she's as close as anyone's ever got."

"I was worried my daughter might end up in the a--hole of cabinet which is Indian affairs and be absolutely useless," he added. "I'm obviously very pleased."
Time and tide melt the snowman.

There are worlds out there where the sky is burning, where the sea's asleep and the rivers dream, people made of smoke and cities made of song. Somewhere there's danger, somewhere there's injustice and somewhere else the tea is getting cold. Come on, Ace, we've got work to do.
-- The Doctor

deucalion
Posts: 78
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2005 9:13 am
Location: Middle of Nowhere, SK

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by deucalion » Thu Nov 05, 2015 11:39 pm

Max Peck wrote:Bains could not say what the penalty would be for refusing to fill out the compulsory questionnaire, but said there will be a "robust" communication plan. The vast majority of Canadians understand the importance of this data and want to participate in the process, he said, noting that 93.5 per cent of the population filled out the forms last time.
Really? 93.5% of the population filled out a compulsory questionnaire last time and he finds this evidence that all Canadians want to participate in the process - a compulsory process. Not sure if I agree with that. The fact that it is compulsory rubs me the wrong way because IMHO much of the most important information is available on tax returns, payroll records etc that should be available to the government.

Anyway of course I will participate when it comes my turn but I find this process somewhat heavy handed.

User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 7600
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by Max Peck » Fri Nov 06, 2015 12:11 am

deucalion wrote:
Max Peck wrote:Bains could not say what the penalty would be for refusing to fill out the compulsory questionnaire, but said there will be a "robust" communication plan. The vast majority of Canadians understand the importance of this data and want to participate in the process, he said, noting that 93.5 per cent of the population filled out the forms last time.
Really? 93.5% of the population filled out a compulsory questionnaire last time and he finds this evidence that all Canadians want to participate in the process - a compulsory process. Not sure if I agree with that. The fact that it is compulsory rubs me the wrong way because IMHO much of the most important information is available on tax returns, payroll records etc that should be available to the government.

Anyway of course I will participate when it comes my turn but I find this process somewhat heavy handed.
It needs to be compulsary because if the data is from a self-selected population it isn't as useful for producing statistics that will be useful in formulating good public policy.

Here's an editorial from Feb 2015 that tried to explain why it matters.
It’s like pulling government policies out of a black hole.

That’s what groups as varied as the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, doctors, charities, city planners, educators, economists, business leaders, scientists, academics, pollsters, civic activists and ordinary citizens alike have been arguing since the Harper government ditched the long-form census back in 2010.

Without the detailed statistical data contained in it – about employment, education income and much more – governments have less information with which to develop social and economic policies. That means key decisions by all levels of government are being made more and more on ideology and guess-work, rather than hard statistical evidence. Policy-makers are groping in the dark.

So it was good news this week when both municipal and federal politicians shone a new spotlight on the issue. They are right to do so.

The evidence is mounting that the Harper government’s decision to do away with the compulsory long-form census and replace it with a voluntary National Household Survey – which cost $22 million more to produce – is costing Canada dearly.

Not that the government wasn’t warned. The problems with the household survey were apparent to experts from the get-go.

First, it’s voluntary, so compliance is down. The response rate for the 2006 long-form census was 93.5 per cent, compared to 68.6 per cent for the National Household Survey. That rate was so low that Statistics Canada withheld information on more than 1,000 smaller communities because the information was statistically unreliable.

Second, certain population groups are more likely than others to fill out a voluntary form. Those who fill out a voluntary form tend to be better educated, well-to-do and urban; that leaves big gaps of knowledge about disadvantaged and minority groups.

In the end, those trying to plan for the future must make decisions without a firm base of statistical evidence about how our society is changing. Transit experts will end up guessing where they should put new bus routes; school boards can’t be so sure where they might need a new school; public health officials won’t know where to expand services.

The Harper government has remained oblivious to criticism on this issue. But pressure is mounting from politicians and the public to reverse the mistake of 2010.

First up this week was a private member’s bill to bring back the long-form census sponsored by Liberal MP Ted Hsu. While he did not get the votes he needed to support it, his bill drew much-needed attention to the issue.

A second private member’s bill, from Conservative MP Joe Preston, is due for debate in March — and there’s reason to hope it may get more attention in Parliament.

That’s because Preston’s bill may overcome opposition in Conservative party ranks by removing two aspects of the long-form census that were problematic for the Harper government: the threat of jail time for those who didn’t fill it out, and automatic public disclosure of the information after 92 years.

Also this week, Toronto Mayor John Tory raised the issue at a meeting of the country’s so-called big-city mayors. Many of them have already gone on record demanding the long-form census be brought back.

Tory’s point was simple but telling: “I believe you should try to have the best possible evidence in front of you when you are making important decisions.”

It sounds obvious, but those sentiments contrast sharply to ones espoused by some in the Harper government. When he was justice minister, Defence Minister Rob Nicholson said: “We don’t govern on the basis of statistics, we govern on the basis of what we hear from the public.”

If that’s the case, it should be abundantly clear by now – even to the government – that the public wants the long-form census brought back for 2016.
Time and tide melt the snowman.

There are worlds out there where the sky is burning, where the sea's asleep and the rivers dream, people made of smoke and cities made of song. Somewhere there's danger, somewhere there's injustice and somewhere else the tea is getting cold. Come on, Ace, we've got work to do.
-- The Doctor

deucalion
Posts: 78
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2005 9:13 am
Location: Middle of Nowhere, SK

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by deucalion » Fri Nov 06, 2015 12:39 am

Max Peck wrote: It needs to be compulsary because if the data is from a self-selected population it isn't as useful for producing statistics that will be useful in formulating good public policy.

Here's an editorial from Feb 2015 that tried to explain why it matters.
It’s like pulling government policies out of a black hole.
Good point. I can see that getting good information is important whether I agree that the government will actually use it in a meaningful way or not. I still feel that much of the most important information is already available to the government via tax returns etc (income level, marital status, kids, address, etc) and having a long form census feels like overkill to me and an invasion of privacy but I realize I am in the minority here so I will withhold further comment.

Though if the government wants its citizens invested in the process of governing then I do not see why they do not make voting mandatory as well.

User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 7600
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by Max Peck » Fri Nov 06, 2015 1:27 am

deucalion wrote:
Max Peck wrote: It needs to be compulsary because if the data is from a self-selected population it isn't as useful for producing statistics that will be useful in formulating good public policy.

Here's an editorial from Feb 2015 that tried to explain why it matters.
It’s like pulling government policies out of a black hole.
Good point. I can see that getting good information is important whether I agree that the government will actually use it in a meaningful way or not. I still feel that much of the most important information is already available to the government via tax returns etc (income level, marital status, kids, address, etc) and having a long form census feels like overkill to me and an invasion of privacy but I realize I am in the minority here so I will withhold further comment.

Though if the government wants its citizens invested in the process of governing then I do not see why they do not make voting mandatory as well.
Heh, I was actually thinking something along that line when I noticed that the response rate to the NHS (68.6%) was pretty close to the voter turn-out for the election. At any rate, compulsary voting is not unheard of, and might not be a bad thing if it got voter turnout from 69% in a really good year to 93% or thereabouts. :)

However, there is a difference between wanting citizens to be involved in their own governance, and needing an accurate picture of the country's demographics in order to plan out public policy. If the people who need that information tell me that they can't get it without a proper census, then I'm inclined to believe them. I mean, the Chief Statistician appointed by Harper in 2008 quit his position because the change from a mandatory to a voluntary survey was so damaging, and his predecessor (appointed by Mulroney) publicly stated that he would have quit if the change had been pushed through on his watch. I also don't see it as an invasion of privacy, given that the raw information is not publicly released for 92 years -- and only if you consent to the release of your personal information as of the 2006 census (Statistics Act, para 18.1). Besides, if the necessary information really were already available in other forms as you say, then what privacy has been invaded? If the real problem is that you don't trust your own government with the basic facts of your existence, I can't help you. Hell, after a decade of Harper, I can't even really blame you.
Time and tide melt the snowman.

There are worlds out there where the sky is burning, where the sea's asleep and the rivers dream, people made of smoke and cities made of song. Somewhere there's danger, somewhere there's injustice and somewhere else the tea is getting cold. Come on, Ace, we've got work to do.
-- The Doctor

User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 7600
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by Max Peck » Fri Nov 06, 2015 10:49 pm

Here's another great piece by Neil Macdonald that I missed until tonight. I never thought I'd start becoming a fan of a journalist; maybe it's because he writes like a newspaperman. :)

A very public swearing-in: Justin Trudeau's biggest selfie day ever
Well, that was all so earnest you almost expected to see cartoon bluebirds and bunnies appear the way they did in those old Disney movies, shyly returning our new prime minister's love. Before Justin Trudeau plunged into the selfie ocean outside Rideau Hall, he provoked cheers by declaring that "the future of our country is deeply wrapped up in a positive future for our young people," and that the "diversity that makes this country so strong is a diversity of views that will carry us forward." Also, Canada will strive "always to be a positive voice on the world stage, building the kind of future not just for Canadians, but for everyone on this planet that we know people expect."

OK. Good to know. I don't mean to sound mingy on such an auspicious occasion, I just want to try to keep applying the same journalistic template. I mean, imagine the ridicule if Stephen Harper had said any of the foregoing? That said, there's a reason everybody at Rideau Hall, from the PM to the VIPs in the audience to the crowd standing outside, were so happy-looking they could have made a Pharrell Williams video: the whole event was done right, period, end of story. That's it, that's all.

Of course the public should be invited to the swearing-in of a new government, and of course there should be big screens showing the exercise in democracy unfolding, and what better way is there for the PM and his new cabinet to arrive than by strolling up the driveway through the crowd on a lovely fall day? Watching it all, you had to wonder why it hasn't always been this way. It is in America; the president takes his oath on the steps of the Capitol with a million or so people on the National Mall, and he gets out of the limo and mixes on the way back to the White House. For that matter, why doesn't the outgoing prime minister attend the swearing-in of the new one? The Americans rightfully make a point of staging a peaceful, public transfer of power, something that is a rather recent phenomenon in the history of government. The former president is always a few seats away when the new one raises his hand.

And of course there should be as many women as men in cabinet. Or more, for that matter. And of course there should be a healthy percentage of ethnic ministers, too. Whites are a minority in two of the country's largest cities, after all. As Trudeau shrugged and said in the nicest moment of his news conference (another refreshing thing, these news conferences of his): "Because it's 2015." What possible argument is there to the contrary?

The merit-and-experience thing? That argument was never grounded in reality. First of all, as was noted in today's coverage, and as has been demonstrated many times over the decades, merit is hardly the deciding factor in making it to cabinet. Sometimes it's not a factor at all. If you're the only MP in the caucus from, say, Saskatchewan, you're in. The whole country needs a seat at the big table.

Second, Canada has a permanent public service, composed of non-partisan experts, whose job it is to provide the minister with good policy options. The minister's job is to listen, and then reflect the will of the government. Just about any MP can do that, to one extent or another. Expertise is not necessary. Remember the scene in Yes, Minister when the hapless minister, Jim Hacker, asks Bernard, his public-servant principal secretary, where his loyalty would lie "when the chips are down," and Bernard answers: "Minister, it is my job to see that the chips stay up." Just so. The point is that while it's nice for a cabinet minister to be a brilliant leader or a policy wonk, she (or he) doesn't have to be.

There is one portfolio, though, where the minister has to know his department's onions. Which is why it's probably a good thing that Bill Morneau, the new minister of finance, is a former corporate CEO and ran an economics think-tank. He would know the difference between fiscal and monetary policy (don't laugh; a lot of politicians don't, nor a lot of reporters either for that matter). Numbers are pitiless rocks upon which election promises can shatter. Paul Martin discovered that when he arrived at Finance in 1993 determined to cancel the GST. The patient Brahmins at the department explained reality to him; Martin yelled and swore and is rumoured to have thrown something at one point, but it didn't matter. The tax stayed. And Martin, a former CEO himself, went on to do a pretty credible job of turning around the government's finances.

Morneau is likely going to find himself in much the same position. His boss gave him some political room by making it clear during the campaign that a Liberal government would run a "modest" deficit for the first few years. But Stephen Harper's government was already on track for a deficit this fiscal year, according to the parliamentary budget officer, perhaps even a more-than-modest one. Which means that in order for the government to keep all its election promises, Trudeau and Morneau may have to run quite a substantial deficit. And as any former finance minister will tell you, once you run one, it's really hard not to run another. By then, of course, the indulgent smiles will have faded, and nobody will applaud wildly when the prime minister proclaims his intention to "earn Canadians' trust by demonstrating that we trust Canadians."

For the time being, though, good on Justin Trudeau. Reporters should happily declare a pro-transparency, pro-inclusiveness, pro-democracy bias. Opening up the club's doors should be taken as an absolute, not just relative, good.
Time and tide melt the snowman.

There are worlds out there where the sky is burning, where the sea's asleep and the rivers dream, people made of smoke and cities made of song. Somewhere there's danger, somewhere there's injustice and somewhere else the tea is getting cold. Come on, Ace, we've got work to do.
-- The Doctor

User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 7600
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by Max Peck » Fri Nov 06, 2015 11:24 pm

OK, now this is just getting weird...

Justin Trudeau joyfully mobbed by federal civil servants
Things have transformed. Just two days after Justin Trudeau's cabinet was sworn in, it's become a different world for a political reporter. And the civil service is behaving differently too.

Friday morning, CBC News heard that there was an orientation meeting for new cabinet ministers in Ottawa. After some snooping around, a crew ended up at the Lester B. Pearson Building on Sussex Drive, home to offices for the Foreign Affairs Department. Confronted by security, crew members fully anticipated they would never make it past the gatekeepers and pondered saying they just wanted a muffin from the cafeteria. Instead, the crew was truthful, we identified ourselves as working for CBC News and said we were going in to wait for a meeting to end. The security official spoke into his sleeve and then said: "Go ahead in." We went inside and someone else asked us what our business was. We said confidently that we were there to wait for the meeting to end. We were then directed by a pleasant official to the comfy couches in the lobby. Soon a friendly bureaucrat approached us, introduced himself and asked if we had everything we needed. Then two more officials gave us their business cards.

This was not the usual reception. But then something truly unexpected happened.

Word went out that ministers would be making a statement about U.S. President Barack Obama's decision to reject the Keystone XL pipeline, which would have carried oil from the Prairies to Gulf Coast refineries. But it wasn't clear who would be doing the talking. Dozens of staffers lined the conference hall. They were mostly women, all holding their smartphones at the ready. They were waiting to see Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. Several cabinet ministers left the meeting. Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould was hugged as she made her way out. Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan, Agriculture Minister Lawrence MacAulay and Science Minister Kirsty Duncan left too. They were all cheered.

Foreign Affairs Minister Stéphane Dion went to the microphone to answer questions from reporters. At one point, a reporter asked why some women in cabinet were making less money than their colleagues. Some in the crowd booed. Dion said that wasn't the case. "They are full ministers. They will work with us," he said. Dion answered a few more questions. Then he left. The crowd of assembled civil servants waited some more.

Suddenly there was a buzz and the crowd moved forward. Trudeau appeared and began to make his way out of the building. He was swarmed. Many took photos and even selfies along the way. The prime minister was hugged. Cheers erupted. He smiled, waved and stopped by the door. He thanked the crowd for supporting the members of his cabinet, who had just left. Then he continued: "We're going to need every single one of you to give us, as you always do, your absolute best." They applauded and cheered some more. Some yelled back: "You've got it." One longtime staffer nearby said he'd never seen anything like it. Not in all of his years.

Enlarge Image

And it might not be the only instance of a crowd forming to welcome a minister Friday. On Facebook, a photo circulated of civil servants at another location waiting to greet Sajjan.
Enlarge Image
Time and tide melt the snowman.

There are worlds out there where the sky is burning, where the sea's asleep and the rivers dream, people made of smoke and cities made of song. Somewhere there's danger, somewhere there's injustice and somewhere else the tea is getting cold. Come on, Ace, we've got work to do.
-- The Doctor

User avatar
tjg_marantz
Posts: 14629
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 12:54 pm
Location: Queen City, SK

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by tjg_marantz » Sat Nov 07, 2015 3:05 am

It's refreshing after ten years of that other fucktard.
Home of the Akimbo AWPs

User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 7600
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by Max Peck » Sun Nov 08, 2015 8:30 pm

Unmuzzled federal biologist Facebook post goes viral
A Facebook post from the mother of an unmuzzled B.C. biologist has gone viral, shedding more insight into the changes in the control of information since the new federal government took office last week. Jody Paterson, the mother of a fisheries biologist with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, shared a "spirit-lifting" message from her son in a Facebook post on Friday. Paterson quoted a status update her son made on his personal Facebook account, where he announced that his DFO supervisors told him the muzzle order on scientists had been lifted. He said the changes were announced by his supervisors at an all staff meeting on Thursday.
Enlarge Image
Time and tide melt the snowman.

There are worlds out there where the sky is burning, where the sea's asleep and the rivers dream, people made of smoke and cities made of song. Somewhere there's danger, somewhere there's injustice and somewhere else the tea is getting cold. Come on, Ace, we've got work to do.
-- The Doctor

User avatar
Vorret
Posts: 9514
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Drummondville, QC

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by Vorret » Mon Nov 09, 2015 6:00 pm

It's hard not to feel great about those little things. It's only been a few weeks and we're already seeing PROGRESS.

Yay! :horse:
Isgrimnur wrote:
His name makes me think of a small, burrowing rodent anyway.

User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 7600
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by Max Peck » Mon Nov 09, 2015 7:40 pm

Vorret wrote:It's hard not to feel great about those little things. It's only been a few weeks and we're already seeing PROGRESS.
Actually, it will be one week as of Wednesday -- the actual transition occurred on 4 Nov. It's been a few days, not weeks.

And yeah, at some time we're going to start bitching and whining because they can't deliver the moon, but it definitely does buoy my spirits to see them hit the ground running and actually keeping promises, even if they're ones that are obviously easy to keep. I'm also impressed that the bureaucracy is able to change course as rapidly as they did here. I was expecting to see significant inertia, especially since a lot of the senior positions are occupied by people that were appointed by Harper. Going from the Minister saying "Make it so!" to implementing a radical policy change down at the working level so quickly is amazing. I'm sure there will be other departments that drag their heels, and other problems that will take a lot of time and effort to fix, but for the first week, I am indeed pretty damned impressed. :)
Time and tide melt the snowman.

There are worlds out there where the sky is burning, where the sea's asleep and the rivers dream, people made of smoke and cities made of song. Somewhere there's danger, somewhere there's injustice and somewhere else the tea is getting cold. Come on, Ace, we've got work to do.
-- The Doctor

User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 7600
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by Max Peck » Tue Nov 10, 2015 5:54 pm

Another fast-moving issue. I'll be impressed if they can actually bring in 25k refugees by year's end. My expectation was that they'd need more time to ramp up and some of the 25k quota for this year would actually be arriving after the new year. Kudos if they pull it off without compromising security/health concerns.

Syrian refugee plan goes to Liberal cabinet Thursday
An expedited roadmap to bring 25,000 Syrian refugees to Canada will be presented to the Liberal cabinet Thursday, but the detailed plan will not include cost estimates. Senior cabinet ministers and top officials from defence, security and intelligence agencies met on Parliament Hill Tuesday to work out an "ambitious" plan for final approval by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his full cabinet.

"We're committed to do this fast, but we're also committed to do it right, to do it well," said Minister of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship John McCallum. "And those involve particularly concerns around security and concerns about health." McCallum said overall costs will depend on how the plan is ultimately implemented, given the "huge number" of parameters, variables and considerations. "What I can guarantee to you absolutely is that we will not keep Canadians in the dark on what the costs are," he said. "And that I can say with 100 per cent certainty."

In addition to stringent security screening, the refugee intake plan also considers dealing with potential health concerns such as tuberculosis, according to Health Minister Jane Philpott. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Antonio Guterres issued a statement welcoming Canada's commitment to resetting 25,000 refugees by the end of the year, calling it a "huge gesture of solidarity" that other countries should follow. He said his agency will be helping the Liberal government identify refugees for resettlement — particularly from Lebanon and Jordan — and facilitating their move to Canada.
Time and tide melt the snowman.

There are worlds out there where the sky is burning, where the sea's asleep and the rivers dream, people made of smoke and cities made of song. Somewhere there's danger, somewhere there's injustice and somewhere else the tea is getting cold. Come on, Ace, we've got work to do.
-- The Doctor

deucalion
Posts: 78
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2005 9:13 am
Location: Middle of Nowhere, SK

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by deucalion » Tue Nov 10, 2015 9:40 pm

Interesting first move by the Liberal government on the environment:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/ ... -1.3311931

The previous Conservative government supposedly didnt care about the environment at all yet put a hold on this initiative pending an independent study for alternative initiatives by the city - yet the new Liberal federal government approved it in short order only days after being sworn in - the Environment Minister Catherine McKenna approved it long distance from Paris. She is there for environmental and climate talks that start 2 to 3 weeks from now...

User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 7600
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by Max Peck » Wed Nov 11, 2015 3:11 am

deucalion wrote:Interesting first move by the Liberal government on the environment:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/ ... -1.3311931

The previous Conservative government supposedly didnt care about the environment at all yet put a hold on this initiative pending an independent study for alternative initiatives by the city - yet the new Liberal federal government approved it in short order only days after being sworn in - the Environment Minister Catherine McKenna approved it long distance from Paris. She is there for environmental and climate talks that start 2 to 3 weeks from now...
You're trying too hard, man. :)

For starters, the previous minister (Leona Aglukkaq) didn't put the dump off indefinitely, she (conveniently) put it off until after the election.
The federal environment minister has officially ordered Montreal to halt its plan to dump eight billion litres of raw sewage into the St. Lawrence River. In an interim order, Leona Aglukkaq said Montreal must not proceed until Nov. 3, to allow a scientific review of the plan. Earlier in the day, Montreal Mayor Denis Coderre said that delaying the planned dump would be "unreasonable", and neither in the public or environmental interest. The mayor told reporters he hoped the issue could be resolved before Oct. 23.
McKenna didn't just sign off on it on a whim. Heck, she even waited for that review that her predecessor wanted.

Montreal sewage dump: Environment minister gives conditional OK
Montreal Mayor Denis Coderre says the city will meet conditions imposed Monday by Canada's environment and climate change minister and proceed with its controversial proposal to dump eight billion litres of raw sewage into the St. Lawrence River as early as this week. Catherine McKenna said earlier Monday that the city could proceed with the dump once it meets strict new conditions for monitoring and minimizing the environmental impact of the dump.

Those conditions include:
  • Improvements to the city's emergency management plan for the dump.
  • Improved visual surveillance of the discharge plume.
  • A more comprehensive cleanup plan for affected areas.
  • Monitoring of the discharge's impact on the river's ecosystem before, during and after the discharge.
  • A comprehensive review of the process leading up to the city's decision to dump the raw sewage.
She said Montreal can proceed with the dump under these conditions up until Dec. 5, 2015. She said the city could proceed "tomorrow" if Environment Canada's conditions are met. Coderre agreed with the conditions and said he was confident city planners could meet them and proceed with the dump. He hinted the dump could start as early as this week. The mayor said the details of how the city would meet Environment Canada's conditions would be addressed at a news conference on Tuesday. "This plan has been the work of experts from the start, and they decided that we didn't have a choice," Coderre said.

Calling the city's plan "far from ideal," McKenna agreed with the findings of an independent panel of scientists that the city's planned release this fall was preferable to an accidental release of waste water caused by Montreal's decaying sewer system. The City of Montreal says the dump is necessary so it can complete essential infrastructure work including repairs to a key sewer interceptor. "The risks of an unplanned discharge are significant and increase over time. It's balancing risk," McKenna noted.
Also, McKenna is in Paris for talks that are going on now in preparation for the UN talks.
Canada's new environment minister is in Paris today taking part in talks with counterparts from a host of countries to lay the groundwork for this month's global climate change summit. Catherine McKenna and her fellow ministers are spending the next three days looking for common ground on key issues in advance of the summit that begins Nov. 30. She'll also have a number of one-on-one meetings, including with French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius.

"Canada agrees the science is indisputable, and we recognize the need for urgent/greater action that is grounded in robust science," McKenna posted to Twitter on Sunday. "Our main goal is to make sure that all human beings can fulfil a healthy, safe sustainable life."

Some 80 leaders will be gathering in the French capital to try to reach a binding agreement on reducing greenhouse gases. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is expected to be joined there by most of the premiers and at least some of the opposition party leaders.
Time and tide melt the snowman.

There are worlds out there where the sky is burning, where the sea's asleep and the rivers dream, people made of smoke and cities made of song. Somewhere there's danger, somewhere there's injustice and somewhere else the tea is getting cold. Come on, Ace, we've got work to do.
-- The Doctor

User avatar
Vorret
Posts: 9514
Joined: Mon Oct 15, 2007 7:37 pm
Location: Drummondville, QC

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by Vorret » Wed Nov 11, 2015 9:44 am

THis will become a bigger problem the older cities get with their old underground infrastructures. Better act now before the problem gets worse and it's not only Montreal, other cities in the world will be problematic at some point as well.
Isgrimnur wrote:
His name makes me think of a small, burrowing rodent anyway.

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 40570
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by GreenGoo » Wed Nov 11, 2015 4:16 pm

First time I've heard someone try to use the fact that showing up early at work to get a jump on things is a negative.

You've had your 10 years. Just wait a little while until the Liberals start robbing us blind again and you can gloat then. It just comes across as sour grapes right now. And almost completely delusional.

Not to mention the Liberals aren't the Green Party. Shitting in our water supply seems to be inline with politicians in general.

deucalion
Posts: 78
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2005 9:13 am
Location: Middle of Nowhere, SK

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by deucalion » Wed Nov 11, 2015 11:12 pm

GreenGoo wrote:First time I've heard someone try to use the fact that showing up early at work to get a jump on things is a negative.
Well true - I do admire that the new Liberal cabinet is obviously excited to make a mark. It just seemed very quick to me to make a judgement only days after becoming assigned to a new post on a complicated issue (Montreal sewer system) that she had very little experience with - while being in Europe on another matter. Hopefully she at least read the file.

The honeymoon period continues I guess.

Having said that if the Liberal government can reverse all the ills of the previous government then that is great because (all appearances aside) I am not a Harper supporter. A Conservative supporter yes - but I thought that Harper developed into an elitist asshole that pretty much guaranteed a loss for the Conservatives with his acts and attitude.

User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 7600
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by Max Peck » Wed Nov 11, 2015 11:50 pm

deucalion wrote:
GreenGoo wrote:First time I've heard someone try to use the fact that showing up early at work to get a jump on things is a negative.
Well true - I do admire that the new Liberal cabinet is obviously excited to make a mark. It just seemed very quick to me to make a judgement only days after becoming assigned to a new post on a complicated issue (Montreal sewer system) that she had very little experience with - while being in Europe on another matter. Hopefully she at least read the file.

The honeymoon period continues I guess.

Having said that if the Liberal government can reverse all the ills of the previous government then that is great because (all appearances aside) I am not a Harper supporter. A Conservative supporter yes - but I thought that Harper developed into an elitist asshole that pretty much guaranteed a loss for the Conservatives with his acts and attitude.
You hope "she at least read the file?" Really?

Read the following article again, then explain to me why you think she might have not understood what was going on. She assessed the situation, took input from the subject matter experts who had studied the problem and made a decision. It's what leaders do.

Montreal sewage dump: Environment minister gives conditional OK
Montreal Mayor Denis Coderre says the city will meet conditions imposed Monday by Canada's environment and climate change minister and proceed with its controversial proposal to dump eight billion litres of raw sewage into the St. Lawrence River as early as this week. Catherine McKenna said earlier Monday that the city could proceed with the dump once it meets strict new conditions for monitoring and minimizing the environmental impact of the dump.

Those conditions include:
  • Improvements to the city's emergency management plan for the dump.
  • Improved visual surveillance of the discharge plume.
  • A more comprehensive cleanup plan for affected areas.
  • Monitoring of the discharge's impact on the river's ecosystem before, during and after the discharge.
  • A comprehensive review of the process leading up to the city's decision to dump the raw sewage.
She said Montreal can proceed with the dump under these conditions up until Dec. 5, 2015. She said the city could proceed "tomorrow" if Environment Canada's conditions are met. Coderre agreed with the conditions and said he was confident city planners could meet them and proceed with the dump. He hinted the dump could start as early as this week. The mayor said the details of how the city would meet Environment Canada's conditions would be addressed at a news conference on Tuesday. "This plan has been the work of experts from the start, and they decided that we didn't have a choice," Coderre said.

Calling the city's plan "far from ideal," McKenna agreed with the findings of an independent panel of scientists that the city's planned release this fall was preferable to an accidental release of waste water caused by Montreal's decaying sewer system. The City of Montreal says the dump is necessary so it can complete essential infrastructure work including repairs to a key sewer interceptor. "The risks of an unplanned discharge are significant and increase over time. It's balancing risk," McKenna noted.
Time and tide melt the snowman.

There are worlds out there where the sky is burning, where the sea's asleep and the rivers dream, people made of smoke and cities made of song. Somewhere there's danger, somewhere there's injustice and somewhere else the tea is getting cold. Come on, Ace, we've got work to do.
-- The Doctor

User avatar
em2nought
Posts: 3397
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 5:48 am

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by em2nought » Wed Nov 11, 2015 11:52 pm

Just keep making nice gold and silver coins up there. :mrgreen: Such pretty coins, should have got the Queen to pose back when she was kinda cute though, like WWII. :wink:
Waiting for the tide to bring me a sail.

deucalion
Posts: 78
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2005 9:13 am
Location: Middle of Nowhere, SK

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by deucalion » Thu Nov 12, 2015 12:50 am

Max Peck wrote:[
Read the following article again, then explain to me why you think she might have not understood what was going on. She assessed the situation, took input from the subject matter experts who had studied the problem and made a decision. It's what leaders do.
Well since you are impugning that my politics make me less than unbiased on this issue ;-) I will point out that the Montreal Mayor is an important Liberal in his own right so that perhaps might have played a part in the quick approval of his plan.

This of course is all IMHO so I have certainly been wrong before and I will be wrong again - but this is all for friendly discussion on this forum right?

User avatar
Rip
Posts: 26884
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 9:34 pm
Location: Cajun Country!
Contact:
Rip’s avatar
Online

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by Rip » Thu Nov 12, 2015 1:22 am

It is, BUT don't be surprised when people get a little pissy. Sometimes they aren't but come off that way. Other times it is just a sign of the friendly viciousness that interaction in the R&P forum here is known for. Don't take it personally.

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 40570
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by GreenGoo » Thu Nov 12, 2015 1:25 am

Rip wrote:It is, BUT don't be surprised when people get a little pissy. Sometimes they aren't but come off that way. Other times it is just a sign of the friendly viciousness that interaction in the R&P forum here is known for. Don't take it personally.
There's a reason most of the forum members don't spend time in this particular subforum. The fact that this is probably the most civilized place on the entire internet to discuss R&P doesn't mean it's civilized. :lol:

In all seriousness, this subforum is where many come to have forceful conversations. Don't be put off if people aren't always mindful of their P's & Q's.

User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 7600
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by Max Peck » Thu Nov 12, 2015 2:35 am

deucalion wrote:
Max Peck wrote:[
Read the following article again, then explain to me why you think she might have not understood what was going on. She assessed the situation, took input from the subject matter experts who had studied the problem and made a decision. It's what leaders do.
Well since you are impugning that my politics make me less than unbiased on this issue ;-) I will point out that the Montreal Mayor is an important Liberal in his own right so that perhaps might have played a part in the quick approval of his plan.

This of course is all IMHO so I have certainly been wrong before and I will be wrong again - but this is all for friendly discussion on this forum right?
Impugn. That word doesn't mean what you think it means. :)

If I was going to use the word "impugn" in a sentence, that sentence might be "No, I'm impugning your ability to make a cogent argument." If I was going to compose a sentence that was meant to convey a belief that your political bias makes you, well, biased then that sentence might be "Yes, I'm implying that your political ideology makes you less than unbiased on this issue."

The technical assessment (you know, by the independent experts to whom the Conservative minister referred the issue just before the election) concluded that a controlled and monitored dump now (which is the best time of year to do it in order to minimize the impact) was better than waiting for an uncontrolled accidental spill. Throwing up the political affiliation of the mayor is just an obvious straw man.
Time and tide melt the snowman.

There are worlds out there where the sky is burning, where the sea's asleep and the rivers dream, people made of smoke and cities made of song. Somewhere there's danger, somewhere there's injustice and somewhere else the tea is getting cold. Come on, Ace, we've got work to do.
-- The Doctor

User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 7600
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by Max Peck » Tue Nov 24, 2015 6:36 pm

Liberals won't meet deadline to bring 25,000 Syrian refugees to Canada by year's end
Government aims to bring 10,000 refugees by Dec. 31, the remainder by March 2016

The Liberal government is extending its deadline to bring 25,000 Syrian refugees to Canada by two months, setting the end of February 2016 as a new target date. While unveiling details of the massive resettlement program today, the government said it will identify all 25,000 selected refugees by Dec. 31, 2015, but only 10,000 will arrive by year's end. "They will include a mix of privately sponsored and government assisted refugees," said Health Minister Jane Philpott in Ottawa on Tuesday. "The remaining 15,000 — mostly government-assisted refugees — it is our goal that they be resettled in Canada in January and February of 2016."

"Full medical exams and security screening will be completed overseas prior to arriving in Canada," the health minister said, adding that "further screening for communicable diseases will be done upon arrival, as is the usual process for all travellers to Canada." Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Minister John McCallum said the extra time was needed to give host communities more time to prepare to receive the refugees. "There are a lot of moving parts here," said McCallum, "so we are happy to take a little more time because that allows us to be more prepared … with places for them to live, more prepared to transfer them almost immediately to places where they can be in the longer term."

The military will be assisting the government here and abroad, said Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan. The Department of Defence will assist immigration officials with the screening and processing of refugees overseas prior to their arrival to Canada. "More specifically, said Sajjan, "we will be assisting with medical screening and with the processing of applications including assistance with the collection of biometrics. Sajjan said the air force is preparing to fly refugees to Canada every 48 hours.

Other highlights of the plan include:
  • The Canadian Armed Forces are preparing to temporarily lodge some refugees. About 6,000 temporary beds will be available.
  • There are 36 identified "destination" cities; 12 in Quebec and 23 in the rest of Canada.
  • Refugees will include complete families, women at risk, gays and lesbians, and single men identified as vulnerable due to membership in the LGBT community or those who are accompanying parents as part of a family.
  • Applicants must be registered with the UN Refugee Agency or the government of Turkey.
  • Transportation will be largely by privately chartered aircraft with military aircraft assisting if necessary.
Time and tide melt the snowman.

There are worlds out there where the sky is burning, where the sea's asleep and the rivers dream, people made of smoke and cities made of song. Somewhere there's danger, somewhere there's injustice and somewhere else the tea is getting cold. Come on, Ace, we've got work to do.
-- The Doctor

deucalion
Posts: 78
Joined: Sun Apr 24, 2005 9:13 am
Location: Middle of Nowhere, SK

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by deucalion » Tue Nov 24, 2015 10:10 pm

Max Peck wrote:Liberals won't meet deadline to bring 25,000 Syrian refugees to Canada by year's end
Government aims to bring 10,000 refugees by Dec. 31, the remainder by March 2016
I am glad that our government reviewed the situation and became more conservative in it's plan. 25,000 refugees by the end of the year was clearly too ambitious.

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 40570
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by GreenGoo » Wed Nov 25, 2015 1:28 am

Lol.

For the record I think every headline I've read since the Liberals took over had said that there was no way Canada was going to meet the 25,000 goal.

User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 7600
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by Max Peck » Thu Nov 26, 2015 3:30 pm

Ah, someone is finally starting to talk about what may emerge as the true defining Federal political issue over the next 4 years: electoral reform. If we actually do see a change from First-Past-The-Post to either preferential ballots or (FSM forbid) proportional representation, then we may never see another Conservative (as the party currently exists) federal government. We only have one right-of-center party, and in a good year they pull in about 40% of the popular vote, with most of the rest going to leftish parties (Liberals, NDP, Green). With a preferential ballot, most of those lefty votes will converge (I doubt that many of those voters will pick Conservative as a second choice) and we'd probably see more Liberal majorities or possibly Liberal/NDP/Green coalitions. With proportional representation, we'd probably see very few majorities (there has been exactly one election in my lifetime that saw a single party break 50% of the popular vote- Mulroney pulled it off in 1984, with 50.03%) and mostly likely we'd see Liberal/NDP/Green coalitions. The wild card, as always, would be Quebec -- the Bloc is orthogonal to the normal left-right spectrum, so Bloc support could go in any or all directions with a preferential ballot, and would bleed off seats in a proportional system (but forming a coalition with the Bloc would likely be political poison outside Quebec).

IIRC, the Liberals have stated a preference for preferential ballots (which would benefit them) while the NDP (and Greens?) have stated that they prefer a form of mixed proportional representation (which would benefit them). I don't recall seeing a Conservative position, but I expect they would prefer the status quo, given that FPTP combined with vote-splitting between the Liberals and NDP has been key to their electoral success. As for the Bloc, I'd guess they would prefer some form of proportional representation since it would likely increase their seat count, but I haven't looked for a position statement.

Change to preferential ballot would benefit Liberals
It is often said that a party that wins an election has little incentive to change the rules that brought it victory. But what if a rule change increases that party's odds of winning again — and by an even larger margin?

A number of options are on the table for the Liberals as they move to fulfil their promise of changing the way Canadians elect their MPs. But based on an analysis of October's federal election results, the system that is the party's preferred option would have delivered Justin Trudeau an even greater victory than he won a month ago.

The ministerial mandate letter sent to Maryam Monsef, Canada's minister of Democratic Institutions, laid out the tasks she will be expected to complete in her new role.

Among other things, she was directed to "bring forward a proposal to establish a special parliamentary committee to consult on electoral reform, including preferential ballots [and] proportional representation." The goal is to make good on Trudeau's pledge that the 2015 federal election would be the last decided via the first-past-the-post system.
Image
Estimates of the results of the 2015 federal election with the implementation of proportional representation and a preferential ballot. (Éric Grenier)
If you're a Conservative supporter, this is the issue you should be talking about and beating the drum over. If I was such a one, I'd be pushing hard for a referendum on the issue and then campaigning using a combination of "keep it simple" and "don't fix what ain't broken." If either reform option does get implemented, the Conservatives would need to veer hard to the center to compete for vote share.

I'd make a joke about how electoral reform would kill the spawn of the Reform Party, but I don't think that anyone who got the reference would think it's funny. ;)
Time and tide melt the snowman.

There are worlds out there where the sky is burning, where the sea's asleep and the rivers dream, people made of smoke and cities made of song. Somewhere there's danger, somewhere there's injustice and somewhere else the tea is getting cold. Come on, Ace, we've got work to do.
-- The Doctor

User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 7600
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by Max Peck » Thu Nov 26, 2015 8:25 pm

Justin Trudeau to pull fighter jets, keep other military planes in ISIS fight
The Liberal government will withdraw Canada's fighter jets from the fight against ISIS, but CBC News has learned that not all military aircraft will be pulled from the mission in Iraq and Syria. The Department of National Defence said Thursday that while the CF-18s will be withdrawn from the U.S.-led coalition combat mission, other planes — two Auroras, which are surveillance aircraft, two transport planes and a Polaris in-flight refuelling plane — will still fly alongside our allies.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has faced criticism at home for withdrawing the jets, but Canada's international allies have not asked the government to reconsider its position, according to a senior adviser to Trudeau. Trudeau sat down for a bilateral meeting with British Prime Minister David Cameron yesterday in London. The adviser, who spoke to reporters on background and on condition that he not be named, said there was "absolutely no pressure for Canada to continue its contribution to the bombing mission."
...
At various meetings over the past couple of weeks, Trudeau has discussed the mission with world leaders. He has been asked to sometimes explain Canada's position, but the adviser said other leaders have been "satisfied" with the response from the prime minister. Canada will not be part of the bombing mission, but will increase the number of military trainers on the ground. There is a strong sense from other allies that training is a "useful contribution," said the adviser. When Trudeau was asked yesterday in London by reporters if he would be giving his allies any sense of when more trainers would arrive or how many Canada would contribute, the prime minister would only say there's a continuing conversation with allies to see how and where Canada can be most useful. Trudeau also made the point that of the 60 counties that make up the coalition, none of them are doing everything.
Time and tide melt the snowman.

There are worlds out there where the sky is burning, where the sea's asleep and the rivers dream, people made of smoke and cities made of song. Somewhere there's danger, somewhere there's injustice and somewhere else the tea is getting cold. Come on, Ace, we've got work to do.
-- The Doctor

User avatar
FishPants
Server WhOOre
Posts: 4372
Joined: Fri Oct 15, 2004 1:38 pm
Location: Canada
fishpants’s avatar
Loading…

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by FishPants » Fri Nov 27, 2015 8:05 pm

Only time will tell what this Trudeau government does to the country, but I can't say I'm all that optimistic. The guy ran a platform announcing a 10b deficit per year -- and the government is never accurate on these projections. I'm worried that he's cutting off our nose despite our face, while neutering our military even further.

I'm glad we're moving forward on the refugees, but I do find it interesting that when Harper said 10k refugees -- Trudeau got his panties in a twist and declared 25k. Huh, looks like it's only going to be 10k this year (because that's all that's feasible).

I've voted all over the map in my years in Canada, but I'm the first to admit I didn't support this government -- and I really believe there's going to be heavy damage done to the country by his fiscally irresponsible policy. Spending more than we're taking in, and jacking taxes up -- this shit isn't working in Ontario, I don't see why it would work at the Federal level. I'm taxed to death already, much more and I'm going to have to look seriously at pulling up stakes and moving elsewhere. I love this country, but not enough to give up more than 50% of my paycheque while there's scandal after scandal in every federal government term (Duffy, Sponsorship scandal.. Gawd).

While the world is enamoured with his looks, nobody is looking at him spending our future away for short term gains.
No.

User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 7600
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by Max Peck » Wed Dec 02, 2015 10:51 pm

Finally, Trudeau is mired in a scandal!

Canada PM under fire for nannies and child care
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has been accused of hypocrisy after it was revealed he was using public money to pay for nannies to look after his children. During Mr Trudeau's campaign, he criticised the Conservative Party's approach to child care benefits. He had argued that rich families didn't need taxpayers' help.

Two nannies were hired as "special assistants" at the prime minister's home under the Official Residences Act. The positions were approved last week by the cabinet, though the nannies will be paid for their work from 4 November - the day Trudeau and his cabinet were sworn in. Conservative party member Lisa Raitt has labelled the use of nannies as "hypocritical" and said that the positions should be funded by Trudeau's salary.

Mr Trudeau took issue with the Conservatives' focus upon child care benefits and income-splitting tax credits. "In these times, [then Prime Minister] Mr Harper's top priority is to give wealthy families like his and mine $2,000," said Mr Trudeau on the campaign trail. "We don't need it. And Canada can't afford it."

The nannies will be paid between $15 and $20 an hour for day shifts, and $11 to $13 for evenings. They were employed to look after Mr Trudeau's three children on 4 November, the day he was sworn into office. "Like all families of prime ministers, a small number of staff provide assistance. Given the nature of the prime minister's responsibilities and his young family, the Trudeaus employ two household employees who, in addition to performing other duties around the house, act as secondary caregivers to the three children," said a representative for the prime minister. Section 7.1 of the Official Residence Act says that "a steward or housekeeper and such other employees" can be hired to manage the prime minister's residence if considered necessary. Mr Trudeau is also entitled to collect around $3,400 as part of Canada's universal child care benefit, though he has said this money will be donated to charity.
Time and tide melt the snowman.

There are worlds out there where the sky is burning, where the sea's asleep and the rivers dream, people made of smoke and cities made of song. Somewhere there's danger, somewhere there's injustice and somewhere else the tea is getting cold. Come on, Ace, we've got work to do.
-- The Doctor

User avatar
Canuck
Posts: 1311
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2005 11:09 am
Location: Tokyo

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by Canuck » Thu Dec 03, 2015 7:17 am

Trudeau is in the wrong (in my opinion) and I agree with his critics. Hopefully he'll repent and this will help keep him grounded and out of real trouble. If this is his worst scandal then it will be a wonderful four years.

User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 7600
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by Max Peck » Thu Dec 03, 2015 11:25 am

Canuck wrote:Trudeau is in the wrong (in my opinion) and I agree with his critics. Hopefully he'll repent and this will help keep him grounded and out of real trouble. If this is his worst scandal then it will be a wonderful four years.
Yeah, from what I can see it looks like it is only an issue because of how he campaigned against child care benefits and income-splitting tax breaks for the "wealthy" (whatever that means). Actually having household staff that provide child-care services (in addition to other duties?) doesn't seem unprecedented for previous PMs with children.
This isn't the first time questions have been raised about whether taxpayers were footing the bill for child care.

The issue arose in May 1984 when then Conservative leader Brian Mulroney was asked by a television interviewer if taxpayers would pay for ''nannies'' for his three children as they did for Trudeau's father, Pierre Trudeau, when he was prime minister.

"No, no," Mulroney replied.

The Canadian Press reported again in November of that year that Mulroney's chief of staff, Fred Doucet, denied the family employed a government-paid nanny while Mulroney was opposition leader, saying the woman was actually a maid who "interfaces with the children in a habitual way."
Child care has even been somewhat controversial for, say, leaders of the opposition who didn't want to pay for it... :)
Lundsgaard began work as a chef at the Opposition leader's residence in 2001 when Stockwell Day hired him.

But after the Harpers arrived in 2002, he claims Harper's wife, Laureen, told him that his cooking would be limited to official functions and wouldn't include the family's private meals.

He alleges he took on other duties for which he was not paid, including babysitting the couple's two children, washing the family car and burying one of Harper's pet cats after it died.
Time and tide melt the snowman.

There are worlds out there where the sky is burning, where the sea's asleep and the rivers dream, people made of smoke and cities made of song. Somewhere there's danger, somewhere there's injustice and somewhere else the tea is getting cold. Come on, Ace, we've got work to do.
-- The Doctor

User avatar
Isgrimnur
Posts: 60568
Joined: Sun Oct 15, 2006 12:29 am
Location: Chookity pok
Contact:
Isgrimnur’s avatar
Snooze

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by Isgrimnur » Thu Dec 03, 2015 11:35 am

Are there treatment programs for child interfacing habits?
Silver - 1k

User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 7600
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by Max Peck » Thu Dec 03, 2015 12:14 pm

Isgrimnur wrote:Are there treatment programs for child interfacing habits?
My understanding is that it wasn't what you think it was:
Image
Time and tide melt the snowman.

There are worlds out there where the sky is burning, where the sea's asleep and the rivers dream, people made of smoke and cities made of song. Somewhere there's danger, somewhere there's injustice and somewhere else the tea is getting cold. Come on, Ace, we've got work to do.
-- The Doctor

User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 7600
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by Max Peck » Sat Dec 05, 2015 3:07 pm

Neil Macdonald shares some choice words on one of our cherished parliamentary traditions, the Throne Speech.

Do we still need throne speeches that date from the age of thrones?
If we want 'real change,' as someone is promising, maybe we rethink some of our slavish traditions

When Justin Trudeau was asked last month why he'd divided his new cabinet strictly according to gender, he famously replied "Because it's 2015." That answer went nuts on the internet, and was admired the world over, especially by women.

Then, Friday, with 2016 almost upon us, an ancient, rather bizarre aristos-versus-proles ritual took place, something our new prime minister, who declares himself the agent of "real change," might want to think about. The Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod marched down the hall and banged on the door of the Commons, and required its members to attend immediately in the Other Place, where the representative of the sovereign had some important things to say. And they did, shuffling quickly down the hall to snag a good spot. Some of them actually got to the gold bar of the Red Chamber, beyond which no Commoner is to pass, where they, all of them sent to Ottawa by voters, had to stand, not sit, and listen.

Meanwhile, on the other side of the bar, seated in cushioned luxury, the people who amount to the hired help listened to the most important member of the hired help, the Governor General, read the speech on behalf of a hereditary monarch who lives in a foreign country. Not all the elected members actually made it into the room. Some had to hang around outside, trying to look dignified in the vestibule.

Sorry, all due respect to tradition and so on, that's just weird. This is, as Prime Minister Trudeau noted, 2015.
After some more thoughts about the tradition itself, he goes on to critique the content of this particular throne speech, culminating in my favourite line for the entire essay:
There were a couple of sharp, un-sunny political shots at the Harper Conservatives. Like the explicit promises not to use government money for political ads and to end big bulldozer omnibus bills. And for there to be no more interference with the organs of Parliament, and to rely on scientific evidence, as opposed to ideology.

Deliciously, it was read out by the same Governor General who read the last throne speech on behalf of the (absent) former PM who did all those things.
The actual Throne Speech can be seen here. If you want to see some of the pomp and ceremony upon which Macdonald casts aspersion, you can rewind a bit from that point.
Time and tide melt the snowman.

There are worlds out there where the sky is burning, where the sea's asleep and the rivers dream, people made of smoke and cities made of song. Somewhere there's danger, somewhere there's injustice and somewhere else the tea is getting cold. Come on, Ace, we've got work to do.
-- The Doctor

User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 7600
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by Max Peck » Fri Dec 11, 2015 8:22 pm

Ah, crap, they pulled the trigger on the TFSA rollback. I was (faintly) hoping we'd get another $10k year for 2016 before they got around to that. Curse these Liberals and their timely follow-through on election promises. ;)

In other money news, our rookie government makes a rookie mistake. :doh:

Liberals' 1st money bill sent to Senate missing essential information
For Canadians who think of the Senate as a sleepy old place where nothing gets done, today might change their minds. This morning, an eagle-eyed senator discovered that the House of Commons passed a key money bill yesterday that was deeply flawed. That set off a flurry of activity as Parliament set about trying to make a fix before it rises for a six-week Christmas break.

Senator Joe Day was looking through bill C-3, a necessary supply bill to ensure the government can spend money, when he noticed it was missing the essential schedules. Those tables of numbers specifically set out how much the government is spending and on what. Without those schedules, the money would not have been able to flow.

Conservative MP Pierre Poilievre raised the matter as a point of order this morning in the House of Commons. "It would appear that we did not actually grant Her Majesty certain sums of money for the federal public administration for the financial year ending March 31, 2016, because the bill was not in fact presented in its complete form, having excluded the schedule which provides for the authorization that the House must actually give." Poilievre reminded his fellow MPs that just yesterday "as is our practice," he asked Treasury Board President Scott Brison whether the bill "was in its usual form." Brison replied that it was. Barely suppressing his glee, Poilievre mentioned how the Magna Carta clearly sets out that the Crown "cannot spend what the people do not approve through their elected representatives in the Commons."

Kevin Lamoureux, parliamentary secretary for Government House Leader Dominic LeBlanc, conceded there was what he called an administrative error in the bill put before the house. "I ask the honourable members of the House for their understanding in this matter and I sincerely apologize for the error and any confusion that this has caused this House and staff."

The corrected version of the bill arrived in the Senate before midday, and was granted royal assent this afternoon.
Time and tide melt the snowman.

There are worlds out there where the sky is burning, where the sea's asleep and the rivers dream, people made of smoke and cities made of song. Somewhere there's danger, somewhere there's injustice and somewhere else the tea is getting cold. Come on, Ace, we've got work to do.
-- The Doctor

User avatar
GreenGoo
Posts: 40570
Joined: Thu Oct 14, 2004 10:46 pm
Location: Ottawa, ON

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by GreenGoo » Fri Dec 18, 2015 1:45 pm

I'd just like to say that the sound bites and quotes from our new PM that I stumble across as I read the news are like a panacea for the excrement I similarly come across from Trump.

I have no idea if Trudeau is going to be good or bad for the country (I'm hopeful) but man, he's like the exact opposite of Trump in all the ways I care about (as a leader and as a person).

I read stuff he's saying and I'm like "Yes, dude. Yes. Exactly right". Intelligent, thought out (seemingly), rational and engaged while keeping the level of discourse reasonable without flying off the handle because it makes good politics. Even the stuff I don't agree with, I can respect what he's saying and the way he's saying it. I'm not his enemy just because we don't agree on stuff. That's a nice change from Harper and especially US politics.

Please note this is not an in-depth analysis of his personality or leadership qualities, just how I perceive him through the cloud of media coverage.

He makes me proud and happy to be a Canadian again, and I gotta tell ya, it feels pretty good. I might not even mind that much when he starts pilfering the public coffers.

User avatar
Max Peck
Posts: 7600
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 8:09 pm
Location: Down the Rabbit-Hole

Re: Canada 2015-19: New Hope or Phantom Menace?

Post by Max Peck » Fri Dec 18, 2015 2:36 pm

There is a point of similarity between Trump and Trudeau -- both of them elicit disparaging comments about their hair. I'm still hearing my more conservative friends making comments about how Trudeau has "nice hair, but..." For some reason, they never find it funny when I point out that Harper was the one who campaigned with a hair stylist in tow. :)
Time and tide melt the snowman.

There are worlds out there where the sky is burning, where the sea's asleep and the rivers dream, people made of smoke and cities made of song. Somewhere there's danger, somewhere there's injustice and somewhere else the tea is getting cold. Come on, Ace, we've got work to do.
-- The Doctor

Post Reply