Canadian Politics Thread

[the destroyer of worlds]

1 minute ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Taxpayer funded police organizations should have better things to do than to spend their time knocking on people’s doors to hand out “information”. Not to mention all the resources it takes to monitor social media accounts.
 

If they knocked on my door because of an amber alert or some other emergency that’s completely different. 

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

 

Getting the message out to people is not a waste of time.  Plenty of the FREEDUMB CONVOY protests were peaceful.  Didn't blockade or inconvenience citizens of their cities (the one here in PG was in the CN Centre parking lot).  

 

When they don't get the message, that's when there is a problem.  That costs money.  Lots of money.  Both directly and indirectly.

 

So no, it's not a waste of time or money to tell people who are seriously considering going to protest what they can and can't do as well as giving them the hint that cops will be paying attention.  I'd rather the tomb of the unknown soldier not get urinated on.  

[Elias Pettersson]

5 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

Part of the police's job is to prevent crime.  A large part of the role of a police liaison officer in a school is precisely to hand out information, but I would argue it's a more efficient use of tax dollars to use a proactive approach in the hopes of reducing the likelihood of a crime being committed.

If the police simply wanted to hand out information, they could do it in a much more efficient way. Postings on Facebook, emails, etc. if they have access to the Facebook group why not simply post a notice on that group?  Why take the massive step of finding out where these people live, and then go right to their house and knock on their front door with their children watching?  

[King Heffy]

2 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

If the police simply wanted to hand out information, they could do it in a much more efficient way. Postings on Facebook, emails, etc. if they have access to the Facebook group why not simply post a notice on that group?  Why take the massive step of finding out where these people live, and then go right to their house and knock on their front door with their children watching?  

Think about how stupid the average convoy attendee was.  Now consider whether or not they'd listen without the cops showing up.  As it is, they used the kid gloves on that parasite.

Edited June 4 by King Heffy

[Elias Pettersson]

7 minutes ago, the destroyer of worlds said:

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

 

Getting the message out to people is not a waste of time.  Plenty of the FREEDUMB CONVOY protests were peaceful.  Didn't blockade or inconvenience citizens of their cities (the one here in PG was in the CN Centre parking lot).  

 

When they don't get the message, that's when there is a problem.  That costs money.  Lots of money.  Both directly and indirectly.

 

So no, it's not a waste of time or money to tell people who are seriously considering going to protest what they can and can't do as well as giving them the hint that cops will be paying attention.  I'd rather the tomb of the unknown soldier not get urinated on.  

I agree. The cops can post information on websites, Facebook, they can even send our emails to get their message across. 
 

Spending the time to research where a person lives and then invading their privacy by knocking on their front door while their kids are watching simply to have out information is wrong. 
 

We can agree to disagree though as nothing will change my mind on this. 

[Elias Pettersson]

1 minute ago, King Heffy said:

Think about how stupid the average convoy attendee was.  Now consider whether or not they'd listen without the cops showing up.  As it is, they used the kid gloves on that parasite.

So everyone who attended the convoy protest is a parasite and low IQ? 

[King Heffy]

2 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

So everyone who attended the convoy protest is a parasite and low IQ? 

Yes.

[Elias Pettersson]

1 minute ago, King Heffy said:

Yes.

Oh God…   

[4petesake]

32 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

Thanks for being honest about it. She joined a Facebook group that was going to attend the Freedom Convoy. So the cops started to follow that group and show up at everyone’s house to give them “information”. 
 

That sounds like police overreach to me and only what would be done in a Communist country. But at least you can objectively see this for yourself. 
 

The problem with Heffy and others is that they don’t seem to understand that the script can easily be flipped if the Conservatives take government. 
 

This is why we have the Constitution. It’s supposed to protect us against unlawful governments. And this is why bill C-63 needs to really be examined. Because once it turns into law it can be used against the very people who voted for it. 

 

…but this was a Conservative government and done without C-63. Thomas Carrique is the Commissioner of the OPP and was appointed by the  Ford government and this was his reasoning -

 

On March 24, 2022, Carrique testified before the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security that the OPP's intelligence bureau identified a threat associated with the Freedom Convoyprotest in Ottawa on February 7, one week before the federal government invoked the Emergencies Act". He stated that the demonstrations constituted a "provincial and national emergency", and that the "situation and the associated events simultaneously taking place across Canada required unprecedented national collaboration to prevent injury, preserve life and protect critical infrastructure."^[

 

 

[the destroyer of worlds]

Naw, the pigs should have just stood on the sidelines and did nothing.  Oh...Wait.  (For most of the Freedumb convoy protests)

[Elias Pettersson]

1 hour ago, 4petesake said:

 

…but this was a Conservative government and done without C-63. Thomas Carrique is the Commissioner of the OPP and was appointed by the  Ford government and this was his reasoning -

 

On March 24, 2022, Carrique testified before the House of Commons Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security that the OPP's intelligence bureau identified a threat associated with the Freedom Convoyprotest in Ottawa on February 7, one week before the federal government invoked the Emergencies Act". He stated that the demonstrations constituted a "provincial and national emergency", and that the "situation and the associated events simultaneously taking place across Canada required unprecedented national collaboration to prevent injury, preserve life and protect critical infrastructure."^[

 

 

 

You can make the argument that the Ontario Police are under the jurisdiction of the Ford Government, which is fair.  But you will never convince me that the Trudeau Liberal government didn't have a hand in this, considering the convoy was right in front of the Federal Parliament buildings and the Emergencies Act was enacted by Trudeau only a few days later...

 

In any event, as for C-63, people should understand that this bill if enacted needs to be fair to everyone, not just based on your political preferences.  Reason why is if there is a change in government, then the new government could potentially use it unlawfully against their political opponents.  As such, I doubt it gets passed as it is now, I am sure there will be several amendments to it before it gets passed...

[Satchmo]

8 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 

You can make the argument that the Ontario Police are under the jurisdiction of the Ford Government, which is fair.  But you will never convince me that the Trudeau Liberal government didn't have a hand in this, considering the convoy was right in front of the Federal Parliament buildings and the Emergencies Act was enacted by Trudeau only a few days later...

 

In any event, as for C-63, people should understand that this bill if enacted needs to be fair to everyone, not just based on your political preferences.  Reason why is if there is a change in government, then the new government could potentially use it unlawfully against their political opponents.  As such, I doubt it gets passed as it is now, I am sure there will be several amendments to it before it gets passed...

ignoring the convoy stuff as speculation.

 

Why put so much on government in your potential scenario and ignore the courts?  

[Elias Pettersson]

6 minutes ago, Satchmo said:

ignoring the convoy stuff as speculation.

 

Why put so much on government in your potential scenario and ignore the courts?  

 

Because once it becomes law then the courts have to enforce it.  So the law has to be fair for both sides.  Also, judges are elected by lawmakers, so there is always a chance these judges are going to make decisions based on political ideology.  Roe v Wade was literally overturned in this exact scenario.

 

The biggest problem I have with this bill in reference to hate crime, is that it can be very subjective.  I mean if I say something nasty on Twitter, who gets to decide if I am going to be charged with a hate crime?  Who is going to be the one interpreting my words?  The police?  Crown Counsel?  Who is the final arbiter on this decision?  

[Optimist Prime]

3 hours ago, Elias Pettersson said:

  Not on purpose my friend. Is it to make a point. 
 

'I thought this was a free country': Canadian woman slams cop for hounding her at home when she posted on Facebook that she might attend Freedom Convoy protest 

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10520533/amp/Canadian-woman-slams-cop-hounding-home-Facebook-post.html

 

 

I am surprised she did this, the cop, unless the timeframe lines up with the emergencies act, but not why I am replying. I don't think there is anything wrong with that interaction, but It seems perhaps poor judgement if this was before the convoy was there laying siege to Ottawa. 

 

Why I am replying is that I can 100% confirm the woman's question "are the cops looking at social media posts?" To paraphrase her. 

 

Yes. The answer has been yes for as long as there has been communication over distance.  I am shocked people are shocked by this. "Are you using what I said against me?" Yes. Obviously. 

 

The fact she is shocked someone read what she wrote makes me question her intelect. The pamphlet maybe more related to the words she used than the event she was talking about.

[Satchmo]

21 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

 

Because once it becomes law then the courts have to enforce it.  So the law has to be fair for both sides.  Also, judges are elected by lawmakers, so there is always a chance these judges are going to make decisions based on political ideology.  Roe v Wade was literally overturned in this exact scenario.

 

The biggest problem I have with this bill in reference to hate crime, is that it can be very subjective.  I mean if I say something nasty on Twitter, who gets to decide if I am going to be charged with a hate crime?  Who is going to be the one interpreting my words?  The police?  Crown Counsel?  Who is the final arbiter on this decision?  

Yes, the courts will enforce it just like any law.  Not sure I accept the argument though I was curious to get your answer.   Curious enough to ask even though I know we will all be better off if we just wait for more readings  of the bill.   

 

 

Edited June 4 by Satchmo

[Optimist Prime]

11 minutes ago, Elias Pettersson said:

I mean if I say something nasty on Twitter, who gets to decide if I am going to be charged with a hate crime?  Who is going to be the one interpreting my words?  The police?  Crown Counsel?  Who is the final arbiter on this decision?  

In general you can be an ass if you wish, but there is 3xact wording to answer your question in the very law you claim to know about. 

You could say 'Fuckin Elbonians', not a hate crime, but maybe 'we need to to kill any Elbonian that comes to Canada' that could be a hate crime, but even that on its own might not pass the threshold.

 

Here is an excerpt

"

.35

Any person charged under section 319(2) of the Criminal Code has available four special defences set out in section 319(3). These defences are that:

• the communicated statements are true;
• an opinion or argument was expressed in good faith and either concerned a religious subject or was based on a belief in a religious text;
• the statements were relevant to a subject of public interest and were on reasonable grounds believed to be true; and
• the statements were meant to point out matters that produce feelings of hatred toward an identifiable group and were made in good faith for the purpose of their removal.

The reverse onus on the accused persons to prove that their statements were true was found to be a justifiable limitation on the right to be presumed innocent under section 11(d) of the Charter.36 These special defences are not available to those charged under sections 318 and 319(1) of the Criminal Code.

Sections 320 and 320.1 of the Criminal Code provide that a judge may, on reasonable grounds, issue an order for the confiscation of hate propaganda in any form, including data on a computer system. Hate propaganda is defined in section 320(8) as any writing, sign or visible representation advocating or promoting genocide, or the communication of which would be an offence under section 319. By implication, this material has to target identifiable groups. To be seized, material must simply be shown to be hate propaganda – it need not be shown to be dangerous. The consent of the Attorney General is required before these seizure and confiscation provisions can be used."

 

 

Link here to some good info

https://lop.parl.ca/sites/PublicWebsite/default/en_CA/ResearchPublications/201825E

[Gurn]

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/pharmacare-bill-passes-in-the-house-of-commons-heads-to-the-senate/ar-BB1nzbWK?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=5387887c0ea8403eb0f77511bbed8b9e&ei=49

"

OTTAWA — The Liberals' pharmacare bill is headed to the Senate after passing third reading in the House of Commons.

The bill was the result of careful and lengthy negotiations between the Liberals and the New Democrats as a key element of their political pact to prevent an early election.

The legislation would see the federal government offer first-payer coverage of some contraceptive and diabetes medications, and sets the stage for a future full-fledged universal pharmacare program.

It's not yet clear exactly what drugs will be covered, since they will be the subject of negotiations with provincial and territorial governments.

Once the bill is passed, Health Minister Mark Holland can begin those formal negotiations with provinces and territories to deliver the program, which is expected to cost $1.5 billion over five years.

The goal is that Canadians will be able to access the contraceptive or diabetes drugs or supplies by showing their health card, whether they have insurance coverage or not.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 3, 2024.

[DSVII]

Ontario is exhibit A on our need to be wary about handing a majority to conservative populists in the wake of an ineffectual liberal leader. 

 

https://www.thestar.com/politics/provincial/terrible-deal-doug-ford-attacked-over-possible-1-billion-price-tag-for-liberalized-booze-sales/article_90b481e4-21bf-11ef-a6f2-6f0733e31613.html

 

 

Under fire for what opposition rivals charge is a “billion-dollar booze boondoggle,” Premier Doug Ford is firing back.

Ford is defending his decision to spend hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayers’ money to liberalize alcohol sales a little more than a year earlier than scheduled.

While Ford maintains it will cost $225 million to end the ”master framework agreement” this fall with The Beer Store, owned by Labatt, Molson and Sleeman, critics argue the tab could ultimately be three or four times higher.

 

That’s due to an additional $375 million in rebates to The Beer Store as well as foregone tax revenue and a 10 per cent discount for the retailers that will buy products from the LCBO, which could cost the provincial liquor monopoly $150 million a year.

“Everyone from the wine growers to the wine producers, the beer producers, they’re all for it. The only people who aren’t for it are the NDP and the Liberals,” the Progressive Conservative premier told the legislature Monday.

“Each and every one of you, why don’t you give us your word you’ll never show up to a convenience store, you’ll never show up to a retail store,” he said, goading New Democratic and Liberal MPPs across the chamber floor.

“Never going to happen — never, ever going to happen.”

 

NDP Leader Marit Stiles said “people are shaking their heads at this terrible deal” at a time when more than 2.3 million Ontarians can’t find a family doctor.

“A billion dollars to get out of a deal that was going to expire in a year? Something doesn’t smell right about this. We know it, the people of Ontario know it. We’re not going to stop fighting to find out more,” said Stiles.

 

“This smells just like the Greenbelt,” she said, referring to the Tories’ $8.28-billion land swap scandal now under investigation by the RCMP.

Liberal Leader Bonnie Crombie said all Ontarians should be paying attention to Ford’s booze gambit since they are footing the bill.

“Let’s be very clear what’s happening here ... taxpayers’ money is being used to expedite a deal one year,” said Crombie, adding Ford is “using your money whether you believe the numbers are $225 million (and) I think they’re closer to $1 billion ... it’s your money.”

“This is a billion-dollar booze boondoggle. This is a significant problem when we have priorities of Ontarians that are not being addressed,” she said, pointing to the need for more doctors and other health-care professionals.

“Nobody is asking for more access to beer and spirits at the corner store. What they’re asking for is access to a family doctor. Let’s get our priorities right"

 

Green Leader Mike Schreiner said “the premier’s putting booze before beds for hospitals.”

“I mean, the fact you have 2.3 million Ontarians without lack access to a family doctor and this guy ...  is wasting a billion dollars to put booze in corner stores one year early — it’s outrageous.”

With buzz about an early election next spring, a year ahead of the scheduled June 2026 vote, Schreiner said Ford is clearly under the gun.

“He’s feeling the pressure of delivering on a promise that he’s failed to deliver on for six years — and now he’s willing to spend a billion dollars of our money to further his own political ends.”

Edited June 4 by DSVII

[bolt]

[Optimist Prime]

47 minutes ago, bolt said:

Filled up yesterday... I don't know what skullduggery those feds have cooked up now but my premium gas, the best available at my local station, was $2.099 a litre.

The cheapest since march 2nd, which was one month BEFORE that hell of a tax. 

 

you can't make this stuff up. Florida Man mad at tax that paves roads and build hospitals, ignores Gas Company literally robbing him blind. Film at 11.

 

EDIT: down a full 10 cents a litre from May 23rd fillup. The tax increase was 3.3 cents a liter...the industry swing was ten cents in a little over a week. LOL. 

[Optimist Prime]

Interesting to see the polling breakdowns this morning, the Liberal Party is back in the lead in the Maritimes and Quebec and among Women Voters. 

The Conservative Party overall has a 15 point lead on them. down 25% on their highest lead in the last six months. 

[the destroyer of worlds]

51 minutes ago, bolt said:

It's all his fault.  All of it.  Liberals are the reason for the taxes we pay.   LOLOLOL

 

Tax cut do not pay for themselves.  Tell us exactly how much we're going to get with the CONs tax cuts.  Then tell us how much those tax cuts will cut revenue.  Lost revenue that will result in service cuts.  The amount of time you lot go on and on about taxes, it should be very easy for ya to tell us what we win with a CON tax cut.  

 

So tell us, how much cash I'm going to get.  

[Warhippy]

10 minutes ago, Optimist Prime said:

Filled up yesterday... I don't know what skullduggery those feds have cooked up now but my premium gas, the best available at my local station, was $2.099 a litre.

The cheapest since march 2nd, which was one month BEFORE that hell of a tax. 

 

you can't make this stuff up. Florida Man mad at tax that paves roads and build hospitals, ignores Gas Company literally robbing him blind. Film at 11.

 

EDIT: down a full 10 cents a litre from May 23rd fillup. The tax increase was 3.3 cents a liter...the industry swing was ten cents in a little over a week. LOL. 

In the valley it's insanity.  in a 30 minute drive you go from 1.74.9 down to 1.59.9

 

But sure, t's the tax

[King Heffy]

1 minute ago, the destroyer of worlds said:

It's all his fault.  All of it.  Liberals are the reason for the taxes we pay.   LOLOLOL

 

Tax cut do not pay for themselves.  Tell us exactly how much we're going to get with the CONs tax cuts.  Then tell us how much those tax cuts will cut revenue.  Lost revenue that will result in service cuts.  The amount of time you lot go on and on about taxes, it should be very easy for ya to tell us what we win with a CON tax cut.  

 

So tell us, how much cash I'm going to get.  

Going to be real interesting to see how we meet our NATO obligations with tax cuts.

[Bure_Pavel]

The Fraser Institute: Prime Minister Trudeau’s redistribution economics doesn’t add up

 

https://thehub.ca/2024/06/04/jason-clemens-jake-fuss-and-milagros-palacios-trudeaus-redistribution-economics-doesnt-add-up/

 

"Simply put, the Trudeau government’s policies, which focused on government-led prosperity and moving income around instead of growing incomes, has led to a decline in living standards and economic malaise. Canadians are struggling when we should be leading the world in growth and prosperity. The only way to reverse our economic decline is to embrace a markedly different approach to policy, focused on economic growth through entrepreneurship, investment and innovation."

 

 

[Satchmo]

1 minute ago, Bure_Pavel said:

The only way to reverse our economic decline is to embrace a markedly different approach to policy, focused on economic growth through entrepreneurship, investment and innovation

Nice words.   Got a plan to make that happen?  One with clear and concise details?