Canadian Politics Thread

[RupertKBD]

34 minutes ago, Boudrias said:

Suggesting that Smith would manage a APP is dishonest. You have no basis for such an assertion. 

 

I think "dishonest" is a tad overstating it....disingenuous maybe....but I'd argue no more disingenuous than a lot of the problems that Trudeau gets blamed for by his detractors....

 

Bottom line: Fair or not, if you're the leader, you get the blame / credit.

[Boudrias]

25 minutes ago, RupertKBD said:

 

I think "dishonest" is a tad overstating it....disingenuous maybe....but I'd argue no more disingenuous than a lot of the problems that Trudeau gets blamed for by his detractors....

 

Bottom line: Fair or not, if you're the leader, you get the blame / credit.

Fair enough. I am quite convinced we are headed for a fiscal crisis which will be global. (not just Trudeau's fault) I am very disappointed with the quality of our politicians at all levels of government and across the spectrum. I do a lot of community work and am regularly shocked at the poor level of financial competency. It is fertile ground for politicians who want to BS their way through issues. Ultimately it will come home to roost. 

[Bob Long]

1 hour ago, Boudrias said:

Suggesting that Smith would manage a APP is dishonest. You have no basis for such an assertion. 

 

But she would be putting control of it with politicians, and she's the current leader.

 

Isn't this the kind of thing you worry about with Trudeau? Too much control?

[Bob Long]

59 minutes ago, RupertKBD said:

 

I think "dishonest" is a tad overstating it....disingenuous maybe....but I'd argue no more disingenuous than a lot of the problems that Trudeau gets blamed for by his detractors....

 

Bottom line: Fair or not, if you're the leader, you get the blame / credit.

 

How is this disingenuous?

 

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/rachel-notley-ucps-alberta-pension-plan-would-rob-canadians-of-stability

[5forFighting]

19 hours ago, Bob Long said:

 

how so?

Using the power of office to dictate how government agencies work to try to protect him. 

 

If there were nothing to hide, let the RCMP speak. 

[5forFighting]

18 hours ago, Warhippy said:

Like which others in the past?

 

Other PMs?

 

Like the guy trudeau replaced?  Who is potentially going to be replaced by a guy who justified the other guy trudeau replaced doing the same thing while holding a majority?

No, like other investigations of this PM in the past. How could anyone support not getting to the bottom of Chinese money being spent in Canadian elections and the host of others this PM has been involved in. It's disgraceful. It's not Canadian. The polling tells us everything about how the country is feeling. 

[Bob Long]

3 minutes ago, 5forFighting said:

Using the power of office to dictate how government agencies work to try to protect him. 

 

If there were nothing to hide, let the RCMP speak. 

 

ah OK I see the problem. Thats not what happened. 

[Spur1]

2 minutes ago, 5forFighting said:

No, like other investigations of this PM in the past. How could anyone support not getting to the bottom of Chinese money being spent in Canadian elections and the host of others this PM has been involved in. It's disgraceful. It's not Canadian. The polling tells us everything about how the country is feeling. 

So you’re saying that because there is no public inquiry therefore there is no investigation. Wrong. 

[Warhippy]

18 minutes ago, 5forFighting said:

No, like other investigations of this PM in the past. How could anyone support not getting to the bottom of Chinese money being spent in Canadian elections and the host of others this PM has been involved in. It's disgraceful. It's not Canadian. The polling tells us everything about how the country is feeling. 

Oh, so not like OTHER pms in the past but specifically this one?  because the others didn't have legal, ethical and  moral issues as well?  Gotcha.

 

But chinese money being spent?  Fascinating.  You mean like on swaying the elections to both sides or?  

 

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/trudeau-poilievre-among-dozens-of-mps-targeted-by-china-linked-spamouflage-campaign-1.6612872

 

https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/politics/video/russian-trolls-targeting-trudeau-and-election~1785084

 

 

 

But again totally different that this happened this recent election and not at all similar to 2015 right?  Or 2019?

 

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/study-details-ways-russian-and-iranian-trolls-tried-to-influence-canada-s-2015-election-1.5319541

 

https://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/canada-wexit-and-the-federal-election-targeted-in-russian-disinformation-campaign-academics-say

 

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/nato-researcher-warns-of-russian-interference-in-2019-canadian-election/article38124979/

 

Just curious because it appears as though Russia, India Iran and China have been locally and visibly interfering with things since about 2015 or earlier yet it depends on the government du jour because it wasn't an issue in 2015 but is an issue in 2021.

 

So when I ask which investigations I have to know because ti is bvious we are picking and choosing what PM is investigated for what as it appears this is an issue that has been ongoing for some time

[the destroyer of worlds]

Tinfoil hatter PP for ya.  Man, it sucks that sooo many Canadians are voting CON.  This is the last thing we need in a majority government.  FREEDUMB

 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poilievre-anti-vaccine-mandate-bill-1.7007562?__vfz=medium%3Dsharebar

Poilievre touts anti-vaccine mandate bill while promising 'bodily autonomy' for all Canadians

Conservative leader says Canadians should decide for themselves what they put in their bodies

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre rose in the House of Commons Tuesday to urge other MPs to adopt legislation that would prohibit Ottawa from again imposing COVID-19 vaccine mandates on federal workers and the travelling public.

Poilievre first introduced the private member's bill, C-278, last year when he was running for the party's leadership.

It has since been picked up by Conservative MP Dean Allison, a noted anti-mandate critic who, like his leader, supported the trucker convoy that loudly opposed the government's approach to COVID-19.

The legislation is not expected to pass the Commons when it comes up for a vote later today.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said Poilievre is choosing to "wear a tinfoil hat" by backing this sort of "divisive" legislation — a reference to conspiracy theorists. NDP and Bloc Québécois MPs have made similarly dismissive comments.

Poilievre's promotion of the bill, however, suggests the Tories are not yet ready to drop their opposition to the COVID policies that outraged some in the party base.

• Conservatives approve policies to limit transgender health care for minors, end race-based hiring

• Conservative leadership hopeful Pierre Poilievre tables bill to ban COVID-19 vaccine mandates

Poilievre said Prime Minister Justin Trudeau "maliciously divided" and attacked Canadians who shunned the COVID-19 vaccine by imposing an "unreasonable" policy that forced some people to get the shot or face consequences like job losses or additional hurdles at the border.

"He divided, insulted and name-called millions of people right across this country who are patriotic, law-abiding, decent people," Poilievre said of the government's now-defunct vaccine mandate policy.

Trudeau went beyond "guiding and protecting Canadians to punishing people who chose not to take the COVID-19 vaccine," Poilievre said.

Days after announcing the mandate, Trudeau "called an election and attempted to exploit that political moment in order to regain power," Poilievre said.

The policy did feature prominently in the 2021 federal election as the Liberal Party routinely highlighted ex-leader Erin O'Toole's opposition to the mandates.

There hasn't been a COVID-19-related mandate in place since last year, when Ottawa dismantled its regime as the virus became more manageable.

When the vaccination requirement for federal public servants was lifted in June 2022, employees who had been placed on leave without pay had a chance to return to their regular work duties.

Poilievre argued the legislation is necessary now because Ottawa could reimpose its mandates.

Poilievre said he supports "bodily autonomy" and believes all Canadians can decide for themselves what they put in their own bodies.

The vast majority of the party's delegates at a recent policy convention agreed with that position.

About 68 per cent of delegates in Quebec City voted to affirm that Canadians should have "the freedom and right to refuse vaccines."

Adopting this bill, Poilievre said, would be a "recognition that this ugly chapter in our history, of turning Canadians against Canadians and using a public health matter to pull apart our country, is permanently behind us." 

The Liberal government has long defended its vaccine mandate policy as a suite of measures designed to keep people safe from a deadly virus. More than 50,000 Canadians have died of COVID-19, according to public health data.

The government has said it imposed its mandates to encourage more people to take the shots, which have been credited by public health officials with helping the country emerge from the pandemic.

The vast majority of Canadians heeded public health advice and got at least two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine. At last count, about 84 per cent of all people aged five and older are considered "fully vaccinated," according to federal data.

In question period, Trudeau pounced on Polievre's anti-mandate rhetoric.

He said the Conservative leader "doesn't much care about facts" regarding Canada's pandemic response. He said Poilievre "doesn't truly want to accept" that most people in Canada willingly got a shot.

"He has a hidden agenda driven by ideology — an ideology rooted in denying that the government had to act fast in a once-in-a-century moment to keep Canadians safe," Trudeau said.

"He continues to play divisive games to try and divide Canadians on a matter core to public health and public safety. We've always stood up for the safety of Canadians while he chooses to wear a tinfoil hat."

Liberal MP Kevin Lamoureux called the Conservative approach to pandemic management "irresponsible" and "reckless."

"Contrary to what the Conservative Party tries to espouse, vaccinations worked. Vaccinations made a difference," he said during debate on the bill Tuesday.

"I believe that there are some who recognize the importance of public health and see the valuation of vaccinations," Lamoureux said of Conservative MPs. "But a good portion do not, and this is from the leader down."

Liberal MP Chris Bittle said there's no doubt about why Poilievre is pushing this policy.

"We know who they are trying to rally to. They closed down this city for a few weeks. They closed down international borders. They tried to grind the economy to a halt," he said of the trucker convoy.

"In another pandemic, we would not want that party in charge. It is just not worth the risk."

NDP MP Don Davies, the party's health critic, said Poilievre has peddled "misinformation" about this legislation.

The bill would only ban COVID-19 mandates — but some Conservative Party literature has suggested it would prevent future vaccine mandates.

While agreeing with the Conservatives' claim that Trudeau and the Liberals "politicized" Canada's pandemic response, Davies said passing this legislation could tie the hands of the government if COVID-19 returns as a pressing public health threat.

Davies said the decision to impose a vaccine requirement should "always be based on the best available evidence, current science and advice of experts," not Conservative MPs "with little or no background in any of those things." 

Bloc Québécois MP Caroline Desbiens said her party "refuses to buy the conspiracy theories" that the Conservative party is "selling" about vaccine mandates.

She said the bill is Allison's "umpteenth attempt to discredit vaccines."

"COVID-19 was not a conspiracy. It was a tragedy," she said in French.

"The Conservatives' sympathies lie with pandemic deniers. Our entire society could someday have to sacrifice its safety and security to the anti-vax beliefs of a small group of people who are still in denial."

Allison defended the bill, saying it was "wrong to divide and discriminate against Canadians based on a personal medical decision."

"It was wrong for the government to demonize Canadians who did not agree with the heavy-handed approach of imposing unscientific mandates," he said.

The idea that the mandates were "unscientific" is up for debate.

Dr. Theresa Tam, Canada's chief public health officer, has defended the various vaccine mandates. She said in February 2022 that it was "obvious" they worked.

"We saw a plateau in the uptake of vaccines after a really tremendous effort by Canadians, and then after the introduction of vaccine mandates by the various provinces and territories and jurisdictions, we did see an uptick," she said.

But Tam also said a month later that it was time to re-examine the policy because the science showed the primary series of the COVID-19 vaccine — the first two doses — offer very little protection against an Omicron infection, which was by then the dominant strain.

The government then started dismantling the mandates as public health officials started to shift their positions on their effectiveness.

Allison said the mandates "damaged our country like I have never seen before."

"Folks were fired. Folks lost their livelihoods. I cannot believe this actually happened here in Canada," he said.

[Bob Long]

6 minutes ago, the destroyer of worlds said:

Tinfoil hatter PP for ya.  Man, it sucks that sooo many Canadians are voting CON.  This is the last thing we need in a majority government.  FREEDUMB

 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poilievre-anti-vaccine-mandate-bill-1.7007562?__vfz=medium%3Dsharebar

Poilievre touts anti-vaccine mandate bill while promising 'bodily autonomy' for all Canadians

Conservative leader says Canadians should decide for themselves what they put in their bodies

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre rose in the House of Commons Tuesday to urge other MPs to adopt legislation that would prohibit Ottawa from again imposing COVID-19 vaccine mandates on federal workers and the travelling public.

Poilievre first introduced the private member's bill, C-278, last year when he was running for the party's leadership.

It has since been picked up by Conservative MP Dean Allison, a noted anti-mandate critic who, like his leader, supported the trucker convoy that loudly opposed the government's approach to COVID-19.

The legislation is not expected to pass the Commons when it comes up for a vote later today.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said Poilievre is choosing to "wear a tinfoil hat" by backing this sort of "divisive" legislation — a reference to conspiracy theorists. NDP and Bloc Québécois MPs have made similarly dismissive comments.

Poilievre's promotion of the bill, however, suggests the Tories are not yet ready to drop their opposition to the COVID policies that outraged some in the party base.

• Conservatives approve policies to limit transgender health care for minors, end race-based hiring

• Conservative leadership hopeful Pierre Poilievre tables bill to ban COVID-19 vaccine mandates

Poilievre said Prime Minister Justin Trudeau "maliciously divided" and attacked Canadians who shunned the COVID-19 vaccine by imposing an "unreasonable" policy that forced some people to get the shot or face consequences like job losses or additional hurdles at the border.

"He divided, insulted and name-called millions of people right across this country who are patriotic, law-abiding, decent people," Poilievre said of the government's now-defunct vaccine mandate policy.

Trudeau went beyond "guiding and protecting Canadians to punishing people who chose not to take the COVID-19 vaccine," Poilievre said.

Days after announcing the mandate, Trudeau "called an election and attempted to exploit that political moment in order to regain power," Poilievre said.

The policy did feature prominently in the 2021 federal election as the Liberal Party routinely highlighted ex-leader Erin O'Toole's opposition to the mandates.

There hasn't been a COVID-19-related mandate in place since last year, when Ottawa dismantled its regime as the virus became more manageable.

When the vaccination requirement for federal public servants was lifted in June 2022, employees who had been placed on leave without pay had a chance to return to their regular work duties.

Poilievre argued the legislation is necessary now because Ottawa could reimpose its mandates.

Poilievre said he supports "bodily autonomy" and believes all Canadians can decide for themselves what they put in their own bodies.

The vast majority of the party's delegates at a recent policy convention agreed with that position.

About 68 per cent of delegates in Quebec City voted to affirm that Canadians should have "the freedom and right to refuse vaccines."

Adopting this bill, Poilievre said, would be a "recognition that this ugly chapter in our history, of turning Canadians against Canadians and using a public health matter to pull apart our country, is permanently behind us." 

The Liberal government has long defended its vaccine mandate policy as a suite of measures designed to keep people safe from a deadly virus. More than 50,000 Canadians have died of COVID-19, according to public health data.

The government has said it imposed its mandates to encourage more people to take the shots, which have been credited by public health officials with helping the country emerge from the pandemic.

The vast majority of Canadians heeded public health advice and got at least two doses of a COVID-19 vaccine. At last count, about 84 per cent of all people aged five and older are considered "fully vaccinated," according to federal data.

In question period, Trudeau pounced on Polievre's anti-mandate rhetoric.

He said the Conservative leader "doesn't much care about facts" regarding Canada's pandemic response. He said Poilievre "doesn't truly want to accept" that most people in Canada willingly got a shot.

"He has a hidden agenda driven by ideology — an ideology rooted in denying that the government had to act fast in a once-in-a-century moment to keep Canadians safe," Trudeau said.

"He continues to play divisive games to try and divide Canadians on a matter core to public health and public safety. We've always stood up for the safety of Canadians while he chooses to wear a tinfoil hat."

Liberal MP Kevin Lamoureux called the Conservative approach to pandemic management "irresponsible" and "reckless."

"Contrary to what the Conservative Party tries to espouse, vaccinations worked. Vaccinations made a difference," he said during debate on the bill Tuesday.

"I believe that there are some who recognize the importance of public health and see the valuation of vaccinations," Lamoureux said of Conservative MPs. "But a good portion do not, and this is from the leader down."

Liberal MP Chris Bittle said there's no doubt about why Poilievre is pushing this policy.

"We know who they are trying to rally to. They closed down this city for a few weeks. They closed down international borders. They tried to grind the economy to a halt," he said of the trucker convoy.

"In another pandemic, we would not want that party in charge. It is just not worth the risk."

NDP MP Don Davies, the party's health critic, said Poilievre has peddled "misinformation" about this legislation.

The bill would only ban COVID-19 mandates — but some Conservative Party literature has suggested it would prevent future vaccine mandates.

While agreeing with the Conservatives' claim that Trudeau and the Liberals "politicized" Canada's pandemic response, Davies said passing this legislation could tie the hands of the government if COVID-19 returns as a pressing public health threat.

Davies said the decision to impose a vaccine requirement should "always be based on the best available evidence, current science and advice of experts," not Conservative MPs "with little or no background in any of those things." 

Bloc Québécois MP Caroline Desbiens said her party "refuses to buy the conspiracy theories" that the Conservative party is "selling" about vaccine mandates.

She said the bill is Allison's "umpteenth attempt to discredit vaccines."

"COVID-19 was not a conspiracy. It was a tragedy," she said in French.

"The Conservatives' sympathies lie with pandemic deniers. Our entire society could someday have to sacrifice its safety and security to the anti-vax beliefs of a small group of people who are still in denial."

Allison defended the bill, saying it was "wrong to divide and discriminate against Canadians based on a personal medical decision."

"It was wrong for the government to demonize Canadians who did not agree with the heavy-handed approach of imposing unscientific mandates," he said.

The idea that the mandates were "unscientific" is up for debate.

Dr. Theresa Tam, Canada's chief public health officer, has defended the various vaccine mandates. She said in February 2022 that it was "obvious" they worked.

"We saw a plateau in the uptake of vaccines after a really tremendous effort by Canadians, and then after the introduction of vaccine mandates by the various provinces and territories and jurisdictions, we did see an uptick," she said.

But Tam also said a month later that it was time to re-examine the policy because the science showed the primary series of the COVID-19 vaccine — the first two doses — offer very little protection against an Omicron infection, which was by then the dominant strain.

The government then started dismantling the mandates as public health officials started to shift their positions on their effectiveness.

Allison said the mandates "damaged our country like I have never seen before."

"Folks were fired. Folks lost their livelihoods. I cannot believe this actually happened here in Canada," he said.

 

this asshat is fine with blood on his hands. 

 

[Gurn]

And just like that, the Liberals win the next election.

[King Heffy]

7 minutes ago, Gurn said:

And just like that, the Liberals win the next election.

Yup.  That garbage may play well with the idiots who make up PP's base, but is going to immediately turn off the civilized majority of Canada.  This alone makes him unfit to hold any public office, let alone PM.

[Bob Long]

17 minutes ago, Gurn said:

And just like that, the Liberals win the next election.

 

You'd think so, but I think most people are done with JT. They need to pick a replacement, and soon. 

 

Personally I'd love to see Mark Carney but I'm sure there are a few others to pick from. 

[Warhippy]

22 minutes ago, Gurn said:

And just like that, the Liberals win the next election.

Not a chance.

 

Sorry bud.  Minority at the absolute best of odds but people are looking at their wallets and that's what drives people more than anything else.

 

To them COVID is long gone.  But they're spending $100 every time they leave to get milk and regardless of the truth that will always lie at the feet of the current body in the chair

[Satchmo]

4 minutes ago, Warhippy said:

Not a chance.

 

Sorry bud.  Minority at the absolute best of odds but people are looking at their wallets and that's what drives people more than anything else.

 

To them COVID is long gone.  But they're spending $100 every time they leave to get milk and regardless of the truth that will always lie at the feet of the current body in the chair

I totally agree.

 

I'm just not sure that it's a given that a change in government colours will be the golden ticket to fiscal salvation, given that governments of all stripes all over the world are dealing with the same stuff we are.  

 

I also doubt that the shrinkflation loving and price gouging f**ks that run our companies and banks are all liberals.

[Warhippy]

1 minute ago, Satchmo said:

I totally agree.

 

I'm just not sure that it's a given that a change in government colours will be the golden ticket to fiscal salvation, given that governments of all stripes all over the world are dealing with the same stuff we are.  

 

I also doubt that the shrinkflation loving and price gouging f**ks that run our companies and banks are all liberals.

Nothing Poiliverre promises will help because much like this proposal it doesn't jive with reality.

 

Provinces enacted almost all major health mandates including major health care workers via provincial health boards.  People, corporations and companies are dictating housing prices and builds not the government.  Grocers and corporations are setting the price of food and essential staples not the government.  Oil and gas producers are setting the price of fuel and thus the price of transportation; not the government.

 

But the idiocy likes buzz words so Justinflation and carbon tax must mean that it's all trudeau's fault.

 

Nothing will change under a new government because things do not get cheaper.  Ever.  

[Gurn]

1 hour ago, Warhippy said:

Not a chance.

 

Sorry bud.  Minority at the absolute best of odds but people are looking at their wallets and that's what drives people more than anything else.

 

To them COVID is long gone.  But they're spending $100 every time they leave to get milk and regardless of the truth that will always lie at the feet of the current body in the chair

Time will tell, but I think people will vote for the safer party, and that is blatantly, obviously not the Conservative side.

Between the Con's covid, and women's rights stance I think they are hosed, especially if Justin decides to step down.

Just under a year to go, till the next vote. Lots of time yet.

[RupertKBD]

37 minutes ago, Gurn said:

Time will tell, but I think people will vote for the safer party, and that is blatantly, obviously not the Conservative side.

Between the Con's covid, and women's rights stance I think they are hosed, especially if Justin decides to step down.

Just under a year to go, till the next vote. Lots of time yet.

 

I was hoping this would happen, but IMO he missed the perfect opportunity to do so when Sophie dumped him....

 

"Spend more time with my kids", etc., etc.,....then hand the reins off to Chrystia or Melanie.....

[Satchmo]

58 minutes ago, Gurn said:

Time will tell, but I think people will vote for the safer party, and that is blatantly, obviously not the Conservative side.

Between the Con's covid, and women's rights stance I think they are hosed, especially if Justin decides to step down.

Just under a year to go, till the next vote. Lots of time yet.

 

17 minutes ago, RupertKBD said:

 

I was hoping this would happen, but IMO he missed the perfect opportunity to do so when Sophie dumped him....

 

"Spend more time with my kids", etc., etc.,....then hand the reins off to Chrystia or Melanie.....

I think maybe JT, and definitely the Liberal Party,  can see the writing on the wall.   I've thought for a while now that he can look the look and talk the talk but not enough else.

 

And my main bellwether?  My wife now seems to agree.   As goes my wife, so goes the nation...

Edited October 25, 2023 by Satchmo

[The Arrogant Worms]

[aGENT]

4 hours ago, Gurn said:

Time will tell, but I think people will vote for the safer party, and that is blatantly, obviously not the Conservative side.

Between the Con's covid, and women's rights stance I think they are hosed, especially if Justin decides to step down.

Just under a year to go, till the next vote. Lots of time yet.

 

 

I just wish I had someone to vote for, instead of against.

[6YPE]

My two cents, even though none of you give a shit... my perspective is this...

 

There is no choice, only the illusion of choice. One party is about fiscal responsibility (cons), one party is about spending and social programs (libs) and the NDP is about whatever gets them into the game. Out side of those couple major issues they are all the same, they work for corporate lobbyists and don't work for the people who voted for them and have zero accountability for their decisions. I personally have no trust in any of them to do what's best or right for Canada or Canadians, the entire system is broken. 

 

[the destroyer of worlds]

So it seems that the only party members to vote Yea were CONs.

 

 

By a vote of 114-205, MPs agreed to drop the private member's bill, C-278, that Poilievre first introduced last year when he was running for the party's leadership.

 

 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poilievre-anti-vaccine-mandate-bill-1.7007562

MPs defeat Pierre Poilievre-backed anti-vaccine mandate bill

Conservative leader says Canadians should decide for themselves what they put in their bodies

[Bob Long]

15 minutes ago, the destroyer of worlds said:

So it seems that the only party members to vote Yea were CONs.

 

 

By a vote of 114-205, MPs agreed to drop the private member's bill, C-278, that Poilievre first introduced last year when he was running for the party's leadership.

 

 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poilievre-anti-vaccine-mandate-bill-1.7007562

MPs defeat Pierre Poilievre-backed anti-vaccine mandate bill

Conservative leader says Canadians should decide for themselves what they put in their bodies

 

 

if nothing else we know what they will do in power, if they manage to get it.