Sign in to follow this  

Post Election Topics / Tactics

Recommended Posts

If the mother lied and is still alive, give her the boot; there should be no immigration exception for people that mislead to further their ambitions, they are cheats.

How long did it take the authorities to investigate the mother's application and discover the lie?

There's a message here in respect of the vetting process as it has existed and the reliability of the background checks being performed on muslim refugees currently.

The doctrine of Taqiyya has apparently been employed to support the Islamic Hegira for a while now.


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

During the Election Mr Trudeau cried out against the nasty Conservatives who were taking away Citizenship from Canadians, now it seems PM Trudeau has changed his stance.

Trudeau government revoking citizenship at much higher rate than Conservatives

Liberals say revocations target fraud, but government accused of hypocrisy following Maryam Monsef case

By Evan Dyer, CBC News Posted: Oct 09, 2016 5:00 AM ET Last Updated: Oct 09, 2016 5:00 AM ET


The Liberal government says it is targeting fraud. But lawyers representing some citizens targeted for citizenship revocation say they're seeing cases that don't fit that description. (Sean Kilpatrick/Canadian Press)

The Trudeau government used powers granted by the Harper government's controversial citizenship law to make 184 revocation decisions without legal hearings between November 2015 and the end of August. About 90 per cent of the decisions resulted in a negative finding and the loss of a person's citizenship.

The numbers show that the Trudeau government has used the law far more aggressively than the Harper government itself.

But in a Federal Court filing late Friday, the government said it would not grant a moratorium on revocation cases, and added that claims by some that the system was revoking large numbers of citizenship are speculative.

Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau made the sanctity of citizenship an issue in last year's federal election.

"A Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian," Trudeau said in a leaders' debate three weeks before storming to victory.

He used it to dress down Stephen Harper for passing Bill C-24, a law that aimed to strip dual citizens of their Canadian passports if they were convicted of crimes of terrorism, treason or espionage against Canada, or took up arms against Canada.

Immigrant communities rallied to the Liberal Party, concerned that Canadians born overseas would be reduced by C-24 to an insecure second-class status.

Once elected, one of the Liberals' first acts was to repeal the parts of C-24 that applied to those convicted of terrorism-related crimes, ensuring that they can keep their Canadian passports.

But the Trudeau government left intact other parts of the law that allow the government to strip citizenship from other holders of Canadian passports for misrepresentation.

The 184 revocation decisions of the first 10 months of the Trudeau government nearly match the total number of decisions over a 27-year period between 1988 and the last month of the Harper government in October 2015.

Revocations increase as Trudeau takes office

Although the powers being used come from a law passed by Stephen Harper's Conservatives, the law has been used much more aggressively under Trudeau.

In the first full month of the law's operation, June 2015, only three revocation decisions were made. None were made in July or August, two in September and two more in October.

The Trudeau cabinet was sworn in on Nov. 4, 2015. That month saw 21 revocation decisions. The following month there were 59. The year 2016 averaged 13 decisions a month up to Aug. 31, the latest data CBC News has been able to obtain.

The monthly average under the Harper government from 2013 to 2015 was only 2.4 cases a month, some under the auspices of C-24 and some under rules that existed previously.

Citizenship revocation decisions by year (in persons)

  2013 2014 2015 2016 (8 months)
January       13
February   4 7 25
March     17 7
April     5 14
May   5 16 18
June 4 1 3 7
July       10
August       10
September   4 2  
October   1 2  
November 4   21  
December 7   59  
Total 15 15 132 104

Source: Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada

Liberals accused of hypocrisy

In recent days, following revelations that the birthplace of one of its own cabinet ministers was misrepresented on her passport documents, the government has said it is open to reforming the system.

But in the preceding months, it had used the revocation measures at an unprecedented rate.

"The Liberals criticized these provisions when they were in opposition," says Laura Track of the B.C. Civil Liberties Association. "They said they were going to fix it. And yet they have been using it even more than the Conservatives did."

The government says the revocation decisions are being taken to protect the integrity of the citizenship system and are aimed at cases of fraud.

Question Period 20160531

Democratic Institutions Minister Maryam Monsef's place of birth was listed as being in Afghanistan on her passport documents, but she recently learned she was actually born in Iran. (Adrian Wyld/Canadian Press)

Nancy Caron of Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada said "many cases that are being processed for revocation are as a result of large-scale investigations into possible residence fraud."

The department carried out those investigations with Canada Border Services Agency and the RCMP. Investigations led by those agencies have resulted in the conviction of immigration consultants who helped individuals obtain citizenship illegally.

"The revocation process is then undertaken to determine whether the individuals associated with these investigations, fraudulently obtained their Canadian citizenship through having intentionally misled the government of Canada about key aspects of their citizenship application such as concealing past criminal activities or submitting false documents to demonstrate residence in Canada when in fact they were not living in Canada‎. Many of the decisions to revoke citizenship that have been made since May 2015 directly result from those investigations," Caron said in an email to CBC News.

Monsef case an uncomfortable parallel

But lawyers representing some citizens targeted for revocation say they're seeing cases that don't fit that frame.

The B.C. Civil Liberties Association says those targeted for revocation include at least two young adults who came to Canada as infants, grew up in the country and have broken no laws, but who are now being stripped of citizenship because the government says one of their parents misrepresented facts on their original application years ago.

In one case, a young man who arrived in Canada at nine months of age said he has been issued with a notice of revocation because his father had failed to report a criminal conviction in his country of origin when the family immigrated to Canada.

NDP MP Jenny Kwan has advocated for an appeals process to be developed so Canadians having their citizenship revoked could fight the decision. (Jonathan Hayward/Canadian Press)

He did not wish to speak to CBC News and said he wished to remain anonymous.

The case bears similarities to that of Liberal Minister of Democratic Institutions Maryam Monsef, who says it was her mother who misrepresented her country of birth when she immigrated to Canada. A spokesperson for Monsef recently said she would update her Canadian passport.

Another citizen being assisted by BCCLA was targeted for revocation because she had declared herself single on her application for permanent resident status when she had left a husband behind in Iran. The woman, who also wished to remain anonymous, said she was fleeing an abusive marriage with an older man and considered herself single.

No moratorium: Federal government

When the Trudeau government introduced legislation to repeal Bill C-24, New Democrat MP Jenny Kwan attempted to introduce amendments in committee that would have addressed the problem of people losing citizenship without any opportunity for a hearing.

But the Liberal chair of the immigration committee ruled those amendments out of scope, and the machinery of revocation without a hearing has continued to operate, and would continue to operate in the future under C-6, the Liberal government's replacement for C-24, which has passed the House and is now in the Senate.

Immigration Minister John McCallum told the Senate that he would consider a moratorium on revoking citizenship until an appeal process can be devised. (Adrian Wyld/Canadian Press)

Immigration Minister John McCallum recently told the Commons that C-6 was not intended to change the parts of C-24 that deal with misrepresentation, but suggested that the government may be open to the idea.

"C-6 adheres to our fundamental election commitment that a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian, and it revokes citizenship revocation for criminal acts applied to dual citizens alone. That was the central focus of the bill.

"Citizenship revocation for misrepresentation is under consideration and we are considering further lines of appeal."

The BCCLA has gone to Federal Court seeking a stay in further revocation cases pending a constitutional challenge.

McCallum has suggested the government might consider a moratorium on revocations — but that suggestion seemed to be put to rest with the government's response Friday.

In the meantime, lawyers who work in the field say they continue to be approached by citizens who have received notices of intent to revoke their citizenship in recent weeks.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Immigrants, if they believe that Trudeau is acting like Trump, will respond in the next election. In the US, you can vote against a republican president, while still vote for a republican senator. In Canada, it's all or none. You may hate the leader, but like your MLA, but it's usually the leader we vote for, hence the party. 

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

A Party is too big a community imo.

For instance; when the local guy is elected to office it's because the majority of voters, a relatively small number of people overall, feel the candidate shares their political perspective and expect he will carry their sentiments forward.

Consider the process that led to the failure of the proposed Meech Lake Accords. I recall watching the Manitoba Legislative Assembly during a critical vote in respect of the Accords. Just prior to casting her own vote, one of the MLA's informed the legislative body of her experience while she was at home with her constituency over the previous two weeks. She reported that pretty much everyone with an opinion had made contact just to let her know they expected her to cast her vote against the Accords. Sadly, she voted against her constituents, but only after recognizing their wishes and then claiming she had to go with her heart regardless. In fact, it's probably safe to assume her heart had little to do with the position reached and it's more likely she was 'whipped' into shape, a routine & accepted practice, which unfortunately has the effect of muting constituencies and defeating the base ideals of a representational democracy.


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Time to tighten the pursestrings but with the Liberals do so?

TD Bank expects Canada to run larger deficits over next five years — $16B more — than Trudeau budgeted

LARS HAGBERG/AFP/Getty ImagesEconomists at TD Bank estimate that Justin Trudeau and Bill Morneau will be looking at a larger deficit as the finance minster prepares a budget update.

Canada will run larger deficits than Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government has projected amid a weakening revenue outlook, limiting its scope for additional spending measures, according to a report from Toronto Dominion Bank.

The country is on track to run a deficit of $34 billion in the current fiscal year, almost $5 billion more than forecast in the government’s March budget, the report calculated. Over the next five years, Canadian deficits are tracking $16 billion more than forecast.

TD’s fiscal estimates suggest the revenue outlook is worse than even the very conservative projections made by Finance Minister Bill Morneau in his budget, and will limit his ability to ramp up additional spending. Morneau met Thursday with private-sector economists as he prepares his fiscal update.

“We would caution against implementing additional measures that would drive the deficit profile significantly above the status-quo,” the TD report said.

TD said nominal gross domestic product is growing at a pace of 3 per cent to 3.5 per cent through 2020, roughly one percentage point lower than the government’s budget estimates. That represents an annual loss of about $10 billion in revenue by 2020.

Lower interest rates also have mixed impact, the report found. While lowering public debt charges, lower rates also increase pension liabilities for the federal government, which Toronto Dominion Bank estimated at $3 billion per year.

The bank doesn’t project debt-to-GDP ratios to move much beyond 32 per cent over the next five years.

Bloomberg News

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

History does repeat: updated 

Luke 2:1-19King James Version (KJV)

And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a decree from Caesar Trudeau that all of Canada should be taxed.

(And this taxing was first made when Notley  was Premier of Alberta.)

And all went to be taxed, every one into his own Province. :lol:

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Time to eliminate the photo ops and attend to business.

'There seems to be a paralysis': Trudeau government has backlog of more than 300 appointments

Insiders say 'the centre' has been 'overwhelmed'

By Elizabeth Thompson, CBC News Posted: Oct 17, 2016 5:00 AM ET Last Updated: Oct 17, 2016 5:00 AM ET

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's government has accumulated a backlog of more than 300 appointments in its first year in office. (Sean Kilpatrick/Canadian Press)

Elizabeth Thompson
Senior Reporter

Award-winning reporter Elizabeth Thompson is no stranger to covering Parliament Hill. A veteran of the Montreal Gazette, Sun Media and iPolitics she currently works with the CBC, specializing in investigative reporting and data journalism. Know something she should look into? E-mail or DM her on Twitter at @LizT1.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his cabinet have accumulated a backlog of more than 300 appointments that are due to be filled, a CBC News investigation has found.

Almost 20 per cent of governor in council (GIC) appointments, which include roles with Crown corporations, port authorities, agencies and tribunals, are currently vacant or occupied by a Conservative appointee whose term is past its expiry date.

Overall, 170 GIC positions are listed as vacant. Another 116 are past their appointment's expiry date but the incumbent has been allowed to remain in the role until he or she is either replaced or renewed.

Currently, 61 federally appointed judge positions are vacant, including one seat on the Supreme Court of Canada.

In the Senate, 20 per cent of the 105 seats are empty. The government has pledged to fill the 21 spots "by the end of the year." Three more senators are due to retire in January.

Taking a toll

In some cases, incumbents have been temporarily renewed only a day or two before their appointments were set to expire because the government had not yet launched the process to find a replacement.

For example, Graham Fraser's appointment as commissioner of official languages, which was set to expire Sunday, was extended Thursday for two months. The government has yet to issue a job posting to find his successor.

Graham Fraser's appointment as commissioner of official languages was extended Thursday for two months, only days before it was set to expire. (Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press)

The backlog has taken a toll on the operations of some boards and government bodies.

The CRTC hasn't been able to hold a planned hearing on French music since November because it doesn't have the necessary three French-speaking commissioners.

The parole board, where 21 per cent of positions are currently vacant, says it's being stretched, with its remaining part-time board members putting in additional hours to ensure the work is done.

Alberta judges warned a Senate committee in late September that the 61 vacant judge positions could affect court proceedings, saying the province's justice system is so backlogged they are now setting trial dates for 2018. Last week, an Edmonton judge stayed a murder charge against Lance Matthew Regan, citing delays in bringing the case to trial caused in part by the backlog in Alberta's justice system. 


Liberal government insiders privately point to the Prime Minister's Office and the Privy Council Office as the source of the problem, saying "the centre" has been "overwhelmed."

The government is confident the problem will be resolved soon. It says the backlog was caused in part by the decision to overhaul the appointments process and bring in a more open, balanced, merit-based system. The new system is now up and running and vacancies are being filled, officials say.

"Before it was just people being picked based on partisan connections or who was friends with who," said Liberal MP Mark Holland, parliamentary secretary to the minister of democratic institutions.

'There seems to be a paralysis within this government about making decisions.'- Michael Cooper, Conservative deputy justice critic

"Now, we have Canadians from all walks of life stepping forward and saying they want to serve — many with absolutely extraordinary backgrounds — and it takes time to go through those."

There are 25 job postings on the government's GIC website, some of them for multiple positions. While some are full-time positions with six-figure salaries, others are part-time jobs that come with per diem payments.

Opposition critics say the appointments backlog is symptomatic of a bigger problem with Trudeau's government.

Conservative MP Michael Cooper says the appointments backlog is part of larger problem the Trudeau government has in making decisions. (CBC News)

"There seems to be a paralysis within this government about making decisions … and it appears to extend to decisions respecting appointments," said Michael Cooper, Conservative deputy justice critic.

"This really goes to the effective functioning of boards, agencies, commissions and Crowns, so it's very serious."

NDP justice critic Murray Rankin, a former administrative law professor, is troubled by the vacancies.

"This is a real crisis in administrative justice in Canada," he said, adding the Trudeau government has had a year to make appointments. "A lot of these agencies do important work."

NDP MP Murray Rankin says the appointments backlog is a 'crisis in administrative justice.' (Adrian Wyld/Canadian Press)

Stephen Harper's government went on an appointment spree in the weeks leading up to the last election, not only filling most of the positions that were vacant but making 49 "future appointments" of individuals whose terms weren't due to be renewed until well after the election.

Privy Council officials say when Trudeau took office, there were very few "critical" appointments that had to be made right away.

The Liberal government decided to reform the system and make part-time appointments subject to the same kind of formal selection process used in the past for full-time appointments.

"Until the new approach has been implemented, appointments or re-appointments will only be made to positions essential to government business or to those that deliver important services to Canadians," Trudeau said in a press release on Feb. 25 to announce the new selection process.


A search of orders in council adopted by the Trudeau government revealed that the terms of 98 appointees were renewed for only a year while the government drafted its new appointments policy. The government made another 30 stopgap appointments of less than a year to deal with appointments that were about to expire.

'A remarkable response'

The first job posting drafted under the new process was published at the end of April — nearly six months after the government was sworn in — and an online portal has been set up to allow candidates to apply for open positions.

By the end of September, there were approximately 2,700 applications for just over 50 job competitions.

"It has been a remarkable response," Holland said. "The Canadians that are stepping forward to fill these positions and are looking to serve has been absolutely remarkable."

Liberal insiders say the time it took to set up the new system coupled with the sheer volume of applications have contributed to the backlog. They say the new system only got up and running in earnest toward the end of the summer.

While the number of appointments that fall under each minister's responsibility varies, some ministers, such as Finance Minister Bill Morneau and Trudeau himself, have very few appointments that are vacant or past their expiry date.

Transport Minister Marc Garneau, whose portfolio has the greatest number of GIC appointments, has the most vacant or past their expiry date, with 72.

Transport Minister Marc Garneau has more appointments to fill than any other minister. (Adrian Wyld/Canadian Press)

Canadian Heritage Minister Mélanie Joly has 28 vacant positions to fill while Indigenous Affairs Minister Carolyn Bennett has 22, including the treaty commissioners in both Manitoba and Saskatchewan.

Marc Roy, spokesman for Garneau, points out that some of the 72 positions on the GIC website that fall under Garneau's responsibility are selected by provincial or municipal governments, not the federal government.

He said the minister's office is working closely with the Prime Minister's Office and Privy Council Office "to manage vacancies in a speedy and efficient manner, triaged according to the most pressing needs."

As for the judicial appointments, the government would only say they will be filled "soon."

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Reality is setting in....Canada's Trade Minister leaves European trade talks in deal. (Between her and Stephane Dion, And the pm, we now look like amateurs.)

Trudeau ambivalent to changing voting system after promising to change it. 

Bombardier laying off 2000 in Quebec, hints at creating jobs in Mexico.

Budget estimates $6 billion over first estimate, while promising modest $10 billion during the election.

Smiles and selfies won't cut it anymore.

  • Like 2

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

And now we are going to be kind to criminals,  I say bring back the debtors prison or forcing the criminal to work off their debt.  This new legislation is all about punishing the victim rather than the criminal

Jody Wilson-Raybould gives judges discretion to waive victim fines for poor criminals

Previous Conservative government doubled fee and made it mandatory in 2013

By Kathleen Harris, CBC News Posted: Oct 21, 2016 11:39 AM ET Last Updated: Oct 21, 2016 2:27 PM ET

Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould announced today the government is repealing a mandatory victims' surcharge. Under a bill tabled today, judges will have discretion to waive the fee when an offender does not have the financial means to pay. (The Canadian Press / Adrian Wyld)



Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould is giving judges the ability to waive victims' surcharges when offenders don't have the money to pay.

After tabling a bill in the House of Commons to repeal the mandatory fine imposed by the Conservatives, Wilson-Raybould said the change gives judges discretion in cases where the offender faces financial hardship due to unemployment, family supports or homelessness.

Judges will be required to provide an explanation for their decision to waive the fine.

The federal victim surcharge was introduced in 1989 as a way to make offenders more accountable and to offset some of the costs of funding victims' programs and services.

Prior to 2013, judges had the ability to waive the fine when the offender was too poor to pay, but the Conservatives made it mandatory and doubled the amount judges were required to impose.

Taking responsibility

Wilson-Raybould said the amounts will remain in the legislation as a way to ensure the offender takes responsibility for recognizing the impact of their crime.

"We believe that offenders that have the ability to pay, should pay and that money goes directly to supporting victims in provinces and territories," she said. "But we also believe we need to have a fair justice system that recognizes that people come before the justice system and have varying circumstances."

Sue O'Sullivan, federal ombudsman for victims of crime, said the changes make sense in light of a number of Charter challenges before the courts. But she called for clear parameters around financial hardship and ongoing monitoring of hard data to ensure waiving the surcharge does not become routine.

"We have the principles of sentencing, we also can't lose sight of this accountability to victims," she said. "The principles of reparation and accountability need to be upheld out of respect for victims."

Judges should also consider "fine option programs" so offenders can contribute through community service if they can't afford to pay.

'Step in right direction'

Mary Campbell, a criminal justice expert and former director general of the corrections and criminal justice directorate at Public Safety Canada, questioned why governments fund victims' services "off the backs of indigent offenders," but said making the charge discretionary is a "step in the right direction."

"Making the surcharge mandatory was one of the many just stupid ideas from the last government," she told CBC News. "No one supported it, including many judges. People are convicted without a dime to their names and are then saddled with a debt that they can never pay."

One of the consequences has been that the offender could not apply for a pardon, since all parts of the sentence, including monetary charges, must be fulfilled before the waiting period for a pardon can even start to run.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Malcolm said:

 This new legislation is all about punishing the victim rather than the criminal.

How is the victim punished under this new legislation?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Airband said:

How is the victim punished under this new legislation?

Being kind to the criminal is exactly that IMO.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

"People are convicted without a dime to their names and are then saddled with a debt that they can never pay."

S cuse me???  Maybe this consideration about repaying a debt, taking something from someonelse, that doesn't belong to you or that you have no legal right to, should enter your thought process before you commit a crime!   Jesus! 

Why should a criminals problem become somebody else's?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you cannot not pay a court imposed fine, you can always do the time.

How long will it be before no one will admit to voting Liberal?

  • Like 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems the times are changing or perhaps the original polls were wrong or maybe this one is.:D

Who wants legal marijuana? Not so many Canadians as once thought, survey finds

‎Today, ‎October ‎27, ‎2016, ‏‎4 hours ago | Brian Hutchinson


A large majority of Canadians wants marijuana to be legalized and made available for sale to every adult in the country, regardless of medical need. Right?

Maybe not. A new survey conducted by a major financial advisory company and obtained by the National Post ahead of its release casts some doubt on that piece of conventional wisdom. Deloitte LLP surveyed 5,000 Canadians 19 years and older this summer and found that only 40 per cent favour marijuana legalization, with almost as many opposed, throwing shade on one of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s key campaign promises from the 2015 federal election.

In B.C., the province most closely associated with pot production and consumption, 42 per cent of people surveyed were in favour of legalization, with 33 per cent opposed. Next door in Alberta, more people were actually opposed to legalization than in favour of it. In Ontario, 40 per cent were in favour with 36 per cent opposed, while Quebeckers were almost evenly divided.

The Deloitte findings seem at odds with results from similar but smaller surveys conducted earlier this year by other firms, when as many as 75 per cent of respondents nationwide said they supported legalization.

The latest survey comes just ahead of a final report from the federal Task Force on Marijuana Legalization and Regulation, to be delivered next month to Trudeau and his cabinet. Chaired by former Liberal cabinet minister Anne McLellan, the nine-person task force is meant to “provide advice for the design of a new legislative and regulatory framework” for recreational pot.


Trudeau may never turn back from his commitment to make Canada the first G7 country to allow casual marijuana consumption, but implementing the scheme will be complicated. Legislation based on the McLellan report is supposed to be introduced in parliament next spring, but Canadians won’t be buying from government-sanctioned pot shops for some time yet.

Canada’s existing international treaty obligations may have to be “adjusted,” as bureaucrats working on the file acknowledged, in a briefing note sent to the prime minister and obtained earlier this year by The Canadian Press. But that’s just one of the serious challenges that will keep recreational pot on the back-burner.

Who will be allowed to grow marijuana that’s meant for the casual consumer? Where will it be sold, in what form, and at what potency? How much tax will Ottawa apply to the recreational-use product? What role will the provinces play? And what is the point — and predicted outcome — of all this?

According to Trudeau and his ministers responsible, the main objective behind legalization is the removal of criminal elements from pot production and sales. That could work. But don’t expect a big windfall to follow. Placing high taxes on legal pot would simply return consumers to the underground market.

Sean Gallup/Getty ImagesEven in B.C., the province most closely associated with pot production and consumption, only 42 per cent of people surveyed were in favour of legalization, and 33 per cent opposed.

Washington State fell into the “tax-the-hell-out-of-it” trap when it legalized recreational pot two years ago, and the black market flourished. State authorities had to scale back their marijuana taxation rates in order to direct consumers into sanctioned pot shops. Even so, illicit marijuana sales still account for about 28 per cent of the entire market, says Rick Garza, director of the Washington State Liquor and Cannabis Board.

Deloitte asked its 5,000 respondents — 1,000 of whom identified themselves as current recreational pot consumers — to name their preferred retail channel for legal weed. One-quarter of those surveyed chose “pharmacies,” while 18 per cent said they prefer privately owned pot shops, and another 18 per cent picked “new government-owned marijuana retailers.” Existing government and private liquor stores, groceries and supermarkets were less popular options.

Perhaps it’s little wonder the Shoppers Drug Mart retail chain announced this week it has applied for a federal licence to sell medical marijuana to patients with a prescription.

Currently, Canada’s 40,000-plus medical marijuana patients with valid prescriptions are allowed to grow their own weed, buy from other individual growers with personal-use permits, or purchase from large-scale, highly scrutinized and regulated “licensed producers” who distribute their products using mail delivery only.

There are no federally approved, bricks-and-mortar pot shops in Canada at present, only illicit dispensaries in such places as Vancouver and Toronto. Should a chain such as Shoppers get a toehold in the medical marijuana distribution network, asking permission to sell recreational pot seems a logical next step.

If there’s one thing on which everyone seems to agree, the appetite for weed remains strong, despite warnings from the McLellan task force and others about potentially adverse impacts to health. Deloitte reports that based on its survey results, the annual market for legal weed in Canada ranges from $4.9 billion to $8.7 billion, which is in line with projections from financial analysts. Deloitte also sees a “potential upside” of at least $22.6 billion per year in Canada, should marijuana be legalized.

And that is why government-approved pot is coming to a neighbourhood near you, eventually, like it or not.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Democratic socialism or... Why the Trudeau government will be a one shot dog and pony show.


Edited by Jaydee
  • Like 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

New Senate "non partisan approintments".

My question is where are the average Canadians? Seems that the openings were filled with "Elite" with no thought to the rest of us. Now follows a news article on the appointments:

John Ivison: New Senate appointments signal partisan politics by other means
John Ivison | October 31, 2016 | Last Updated: Nov 1 9:10 AM ET
Governor General David Johnston delivers the speech from the throne in the Senate Chamber on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, Friday December 4, 2015.

THE CANADIAN PRESS/Sean KilpatrickGovernor General David Johnston delivers the speech from the throne in the Senate Chamber on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, Friday December 4, 2015..
You don’t have to be a card-carrying Liberal to be named as an independent senator,  but it appears increasingly as if you have a better chance of becoming one if you are a prominent small-l liberal.

Only one of the six new senators appointed to represent Ontario in the Senate is a regular contributor to the Liberal Party of Canada – former Scotiabank vice-chairman Sarabjit Marwah has donated $2.400 to the Liberals since 2010.

But a pattern is emerging. The list of 15 senators appointed in the past week by the Trudeau government is sprinkled with human rights activists, women’s issues experts and social workers.

They may not be swivel-eyed partisans, in the manner of appointees in days gone by. And they are a massive improvement on the Harper government’s habit of providing a second feast at the public trough for failed election candidates.

But stacking the Senate will fellow travellers is as sure to undermine its legitimacy as the previous tactic of providing a soft, ermine-covered landing for hacks, flacks and bagmen.
Bay Street stalwarts Howard Wetston and Sabi Marwah make list of Senate appointments
Trudeau expected to name six new Ontario senators, including first female commissioner of the OPP
The new appointees are, doubtless, men and women of ability and integrity.

But their associations with organizations like the Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund and the Association of Black Social Workers do not suggest diverse political opinion.

Marwah is the only representative of the business community in the new tranche and he’s a regular contributor to the Liberal party.

Senior Grits will splutter into their macchiati at the very idea that political bias is at play, pointing out that the latest list includes a former female head of the Canadian Association of Police Chiefs (Gwen Boniface) and the ex-head of the Ontario Securities Commission (Howard Wetston).

The case for the defence is that the recommendations are made by an independent advisory board and based on merit.

Yet the appointments are still made by the prime minister and we have no idea who was rejected. More than 2,700 people applied to fill the 21 vacancies in the 105-seat upper house.

Further, the advisory board itself has all the hallmarks of a politically homogenous cabal — an elite band of Order of Canada recipients, academics, senior lawyers and charity workers.

The nominees were always going to mirror the appearance of those who nominated them.

The problem, of course, is how do you define political independence? No two people could ever agree on how it can be achieved.

But reaching, or at least appearing to reach, that state of grace is crucial at this juncture in the Senate’s history.

The British House of Lords has already gone down this road. The existence of unaligned “crossbenchers” has changed the character of debates in the upper house.
Crossbenchers act like a jury, sitting in judgment of the arguments made by opposing sides and have an important influence on the tone and even outcome of debates.

The Senate is entering a brave new post-Westminster system world where the idea of a clear delineation between government and opposition becomes a thing of the past.

By the time Justin Trudeau has finished, the independent senators will hold a plurality of 44 seats, outnumbering the 40 Conservatives and 21 independent Liberals.

As Sen. Stephen Greene and researcher Christopher Reed wrote recently, the death of the Westminister system should not be mourned.

“No longer operating under the adversarial system of government versus opposition … the Senate can better fulfil the role the Fathers of Confederation intended” – that is, a chamber removed from the electoral process and the short-term focus of the political arena.

But that only works if the appointment process is seen as being beyond reproach.

After two batches of senatorial appointments, the concern is that we are about to see the continuation of partisan politics by other means.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Another comment re the "New senators"


Christie Blatchford: New Senate appointments just more of the same

‎Today, ‎November ‎1, ‎2016, ‏‎1 hour ago | Christie Blatchford

With slavish regard to the late, great Dorothy Parker, the new Canadian senators — 14 of them, thus far, the most recent six announced this week — run the gamut from A to B.

In other words, while they may turn out to be grand appointments and may be brimming with noble intentions, on the surface they are just like all the others who went before them, utterly conventional good Canadians chosen from the most conventional quarters of this curious country.

The process to get them was different, in that they weren’t the usual sort of party bagmen and hacks who brown-nosed their way to Red Chamber glory, or, as I have always considered it, slept their way to the middle, which is as far as that sort of thing is likely to carry you.

No, this lot volunteered for the gig, picked from among 2,700 applicants who inexplicably applied for the most disgraced job in the most disgraced chamber in the land.

Remember, they did so in the wake of Sen. Mike Duffy’s acquittal on criminal charges that he had fiddled and fudged expenses, travel and the like to his own benefit.

The former veteran CBC and CTV broadcaster was found not guilty in ringing terms, but in the course of his trial he cheerfully admitted to dinging taxpayers for the services of a fitness trainer-cum-adviser, trips from coast to coast wherein he performed minimal or suspect Senate business and, most gratingly, filing daily “living expenses” meant for out-of-town senators for his non-existent additional costs of living in the same city where he’d lived for decades.

In any case, from the 2,700 applicants, an “independent advisory board” — composed in the main of university leaders and prominent-ish aboriginals and feminists from each area with a Senate vacancy — produced a short list using a “merit-based process,” the first criterion of which was “gender, indigenous and minority balance.”

The other criteria included non-partisanship (though the government website notes, wryly I assume, “Past political activities would not disqualify an applicant”), a “knowledge requirement,” personal qualities (this seems to have been translated as winning one of the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee medals, which were so freely handed out – 60,000 of them – a few years ago that I appear to have acquired one, so don’t be impressed) and knowledge of the legislative process, blah, blah, blah.

As well, of course, the candidates had to meet the usual rigorous, but delightfully vague Senate eligibility requirements, such as holding Canadian citizenship (as it happens, this is one of the citizenships that Democratic Institutions Minister Maryam Monsef holds herself), property in the province of appointment, and residency there at the time of appointment.

(Ah, yes, residency, the sore point for several of the old-type senators, including Duffy, who was and remains a senator from Prince Edward Island, and who, it appears, might have qualified as a new “independent” as well, for exceptions can be made for those individuals who have been absent from their province for the previous two years if they “can provide satisfactory proof” they “intend to return.”)

Consider, for instance, the newest six senators, whose appointments were duly greeted with the usual approving descriptor that they represent “a wide variety of backgrounds.”


The trusting would say that for most of them, the Senate appointment caps a distinguished career of public service; the cynic might read the appointments as but the latest in a lifetime spent, one way or another, at the public teat.

Gary Clement/National Post
Gary Clement/National Post

Former Ontario Provincial Police Commissioner Gwen Boniface, for instance, was praised in the release from Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s office as “bringing justice and equity to a wide range of issues and having a profound impact on women in policing.”

Oddly, nothing was said about her wretched handling of the early days of the native occupation in the small Ontario town of Caledonia – and it was those early days that set the tone for the abandonment of the rule of law which followed – and her sudden resignation and flight to Ireland for a new job.

Indeed, of the new half-dozen, only Sarabjit Marwah and Lucie Moncion actually appear to have had a succession of real jobs, in his case in the banking sector, in hers, in the credit union network. But of course, the government’s own emphasis on making diversity in the Senate priority one (More women! More minority faces!) manages to somehow diminish their genuine achievements.

The others either mostly worked for government (former Ontario government deputy minister and secretary of cabinet Tony Dean) or for organizations supported mostly by government (the ferocious justice advocate Kim Pate, former Federal Court Judge Howard Wetston, and the aforementioned Boniface).

Where are the ordinary Joes? The steelworkers, teachers, the guys on the line at Ford, the out-of-work oilpatch folks, the cashiers at Metro? Where is there anywhere someone who isn’t from the conventionally approved swaths of Canadian society?

As the brilliant Ms. Parker put it, they run the gamut all right, from A to B and back again. The only real answer to the question of what should be done with the Senate also remains the same: Burn it down.


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

And even more far from the common stream.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau appoints six new senators for Quebec


The Canadian Press
Published Wednesday, November 2, 2016 9:02AM EDT
Last Updated Wednesday, November 2, 2016 9:07AM EDT

OTTAWA -- Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has announced six new senators to fill vacancies in Quebec, including a doctor, an environmental scientist and a mayor.

Rosa Galvez is a professor at Laval University and is originally from Peru who has focused much of her research on pollution.

Other appointees include Eric Forest, the mayor of Rimouski and Dr. Marie-Francoise Megie, a longtime family physician and professor at the Universite de Montreal.

Renee Dupuis is an influential human rights and indigenous issues lawyer who won the Governor General's award in 2001 for her non-fiction book, "Justice for Canada's Aboriginal Peoples."

Trudeau has also nominated Marc Gold, a prominent member of the Jewish community and former professor, along with Raymonde Saint-Germain, a public servant with the Government of Quebec.

The appointees named this month were selected through an application process that involved more than 2,700 applicants who were screened by an advisory board that came up with a short list for each seat.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Andrew Coyne: Cracks start to show in Trudeau Liberals

‎Today, ‎November ‎23, ‎2016, ‏‎28 minutes ago

The government of Dorian Gray is showing its age.

Some months ago, I suggested an analogy to the portrait in the story: the prime minister out in public, smiling, unblemished, seemingly ageless, while in an attic somewhere his face was accumulating the marks and lines of his government’s many sins.

But something has gone wrong. Justin Trudeau does not seem so visibly unburdened by office any more. The image of youthful idealism is wearing thin. The cracks are starting to show.

Indeed there is accumulating around this government, and more and more around the prime minister himself, an unmistakable odour of hypocrisy and deceit, made more sickly-sweet by the sanctimony in which both are in the habit of expressing themselves.

It won’t show up in the polls yet, but they are storing up trouble. Liberals have always to guard against arrogance and self-satisfaction — envy and resentment are the Tory equivalents — and this current generation of Liberals are, let us just say, immensely pleased with themselves. That kind of smugness can lead to overreach and unforced errors, and if not checked will eventually give rise to public loathing. People fall out of love as quickly as they fall in it, as any number of once popular leaders can attest.


They are clever, these Liberals, there’s no denying it. They ran a brilliant election campaign, and have handled several files adroitly: the delicate climate change-versus-pipelines dance being perhaps the best example. But on a number of other fronts they have crossed the line separating clever from too-clever-by-half.

There is, first of all, the matter of the pay-to-play fundraisers at which Liberal cabinet ministers keep popping up, and the tone-deaf response from the party and its leader whenever the subject is raised. That ministers of the Crown should not be offering privileged access to themselves as an inducement to party contributors is axiomatic. That the amounts are smaller than in years past, or in some provinces today, is no defence — still less so that other favourite Liberal talking point, that no law explicitly forbids it.

Indeed, the practice would appear to be in direct violation of the prime minister’s own ethical guidelines for ministers, notably the bit about how “there should be no preferential access or appearance of preferential access accorded to individuals or organizations because they have made financial contributions to politicians and political parties.” That the prime minister is himself the latest to be caught in this compromising position, at a private dinner with some Chinese billionaires — with an echo of Clintonian side-dealing, in the form of a six-figure donation to the Trudeau Foundation and a $50,000 statue of Trudeau père — only adds to the sense of an ethics code whose first line is “do as I say, not as I do.”

People fall out of love as quickly as they fall in it, as any number of once popular leaders can attest.

Then there is the matter of the prime minister’s “nonpartisan” Senate appointments. This is, to be polite, a con, as is the claim that they represent a glittering “diversity” of backgrounds. They may come in different skin colours and chromosome counts, but their professional backgrounds are almost comically uniform, virtually every one drawn from Liberal client groups in the state sector and activist community, and while they may not be active Liberal partisans, the likelihood that they would pose any obstacle to the Liberals’ agenda is nil. That’s fine: so long as the Senate is unelected they shouldn’t. It’s when another government, of another party, comes to power that the potential for crisis looms.

A third point where the government’s devious slip is showing: electoral reform, and the public consultations in which a special parliamentary committee has been engaged these past several months. There is no debating this: as a matter of public record, the overwhelming majority of the representations made to the committee, whether from experts or members of the public, favoured some form of proportional representation. Yet the Minister of Democratic Institutions, Maryam Monsef, in what can only be described as an attempt to gaslight the committee, maintains that the consultations revealed “no consensus” on the way forward, while the government readies a separate consultation process, developed in secret, with which to cast doubt on the committee’s findings.

Where should we turn next? To the “interim” purchase of 18 new Super Hornet fighter jets as a replacement for what are universally described as “our aging CF-18s,” with an “open” competition for a more permanent replacement to follow — a competition that cannot possibly be truly open, in the circumstances, and that will now formally include the F-35s, in either case in violation of explicit Liberal campaign promises?

To the military mission in Iraq, and the ever more absurd logical and linguistic contortions needed to maintain the government’s original pretence that our forces are playing a “non-combat” role?

To the ongoing fraud that is the federal budget: not only the officially announced deficits, nearly three times what were promised, but what is widely acknowledged to be a massive effort to manipulate the numbers to fit the government’s political needs?

Are these the worst examples of government cynicism we’ve seen? Hardly. The Harper government set new records in that game. But this is a government that asked people to believe they were different, that made a great show of their sincerity, offering as a token of their good faith no less a surety than the prime minister’s smiling, unlined face. Only he seems to have acquired a few wrinkles around the eyes.

  • Like 1

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

What is the point of caring anymore? While we remain completely distracted by the show of genius being displayed by America's ruling elite, Canadians are ignoring the fact that incompetents like this gal, Christina Freeland, the PM and so many other basket weavers have seats at the trough and licence to feed off us.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this