Oh oh....maybe the Liberals are serious about no expansion

[deicer]

Nobody is forced to be a Canadian citizen. If it hurts you that much, you are free to leave, no questions asked.

As for the political decision making in this fine country, we just came out of a decade of bad decisions that have worsened our collective economic position.

How about we put this debate on hold and resume it in 4 years after the first mandate, then there will be something to discuss instead of blaming the new guy for all the trouble that happened before swearing in.

Just a point of view.

[J.O.]

It's all but impossible to win such an emotional fight when you no longer have the government's ear.

[Guest]

Justin Trudeau's plans revealed in ministers' mandate letters Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan is told to pull out Canada's CF-18s from bombing in Iraq, but no date

By Terry Milewski, CBC News Posted: Nov 14, 2015 5:00 AM ET Last Updated: Nov 14, 2015 5:00 AM ET

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has given his cabinet ministers their marching orders in mandate letters released on Friday. (Fred Chartrand/Canadian Press)

First, the bad news. Justin Trudeau's marching orders for his ministers are out, and anyone who voted Liberal hoping that Jason Kenney was right will be disappointed.

In the heat of the election campaign, the former Conservative defence minister predicted that a Liberal win would mean pot shops and brothels on every corner.

"Unlike Justin Trudeau," Kenney thundered on Sept. 25, "we don't think marijuana should be sold in convenience stores. He also wants to force communities to establish illegal drug injection sites and the Liberals also support the legalization of prostitution — he also wants to force communities to accept brothels."

It's a shock, then, to see that Trudeau's "mandate letters" are full of cautious legalese, urging ministers to "consult" and "develop plans" and "establish committees" before doing much of anything.

Create a federal-provincial-territorial process first

Instead of pot in convenience stores, the new prime minister urges his Justice Minister Jody Wilson-Raybould to "create a federal-provincial-territorial process that will lead to the legalization and regulation of marijuana."

A federal-provincial-territorial process? Let's face it, that could take forever.

But that's how it goes in the long and careful series of letters to ministers. Not that there aren't some interesting clues to the prime minister's thinking on the great issues of the day.

For example, the letter to the environment minister, Catherine McKenna, tells her to get together with the provinces and produce some national emissions targets. No surprise there. But she is also told to get together with the U.S. and Mexico to "develop an ambitious North American clean energy and environment agreement."

That sounds like a bid to co-ordinate emissions targets — another process which doesn't sound like it's likely to be quick.

Amending C-51, the anti-terror bill

Mostly, though, the letters are tied directly to the Liberals' campaign promises — such as, the pledge to amend the Conservatives' big security bill, C-51. The prime minister instructs Ralph Goodale, the public safety minister, to "introduce new legislation that strengthens accountability with respect to national security and better balances collective security with rights and freedoms."

Elsewhere, Government House Leader Dominic Leblanc is told to arrange a parliamentary committee, with access to classified information, which would oversee the security agencies.

Nothing unclear about that. But other letters are intriguingly vague.

Chrystia Freeland, for example, as minister of international trade, is told to "develop strategies to implement the Canada-European Trade Agreement (CETA) and consult on Canada's potential participation in the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP)."

Interesting. There's a big difference between "implement" and "consult." Trudeau is endorsing the European agreement but not the "potential" Trans-Pacific one. No doubt, he's well aware that the latter may never emerge alive from the U.S. Congress.

Bring the planes home, but when?

He's also sticking with his pledge to pull Canada's CF-18s out of the bombing in Iraq — but there's a wrinkle. He tells Harjit Sajjan, the new defence minister, to go ahead and bring those planes home. But he doesn't say when. He never does. He just says it will be done "responsibly" and in co-ordination with Canada's allies.

Does that mean they could stay until the current mission ends in March of next year? The mandate letter doesn't say yes or no.

There's more wiggle room to be found on the subject of the F-35, the fighter jet which Trudeau said during the election campaign that he would not buy.

But the mandate letter for Sajjan merely tells him to "launch an open and transparent competition to replace the CF-18 fighter aircraft, focusing on options that match Canada's defence needs."

That does not specifically exclude the F-35. If it does not "match Canada's defence needs," then why not say so, as he did during the campaign. Is the door open just a crack? And if the competition is to be "open and transparent," how could it not be "open" to the F-35?

Step away from the salt!

So the mandate letters present much to chew on. But get ready to have your chewing monitored carefully by the government.

The new health minister is urged by Trudeau to bring in "new restrictions on the commercial marketing of unhealthy food and beverages to children." Jane Philpott must also insist on "tougher regulations to eliminate trans fats and to reduce salt in processed foods."

So at least we're clear on that. Get ready for the war on salt.

[Dropzone]

Decision on YTZ was just plain stupid and boneheaded.........

[Super 80]

Nobody is forced to be a Canadian citizen. If it hurts you that much, you are free to leave, no questions asked.

As for the political decision making in this fine country, we just came out of a decade of bad decisions that have worsened our collective economic position.

How about we put this debate on hold and resume it in 4 years after the first mandate, then there will be something to discuss instead of blaming the new guy for all the trouble that happened before swearing in.

Just a point of view.

And how exactly does this situation differs from the the bad decision making of the very recent past?

The events of the last couple days make Garneau look like an incoherent indecisive crackpot. Presumably he isn't one, so it looks like somebody laid down the law from on-high without respect for the intergovernmental process underway or his authority as Minister of Transport. Doesn't sound like much has changed in Ottawa despite all the rhetoric. I would imagine sixth graders breaking up with their crush can muster more formality than a pair of text messages.

And quite frankly, I have long accepted that my career is going to dictate I leave Canada permanently.

[Guest]

Quite often decisions like that are pure political payback for those who voted for the party.

[j.k.]

Seems fair to me.

[Dropzone]

All true.....but there are always consequences for stupid political decisions......people and companies and our economy will get hurt.

[deicer]

The difference is, those of us that were opposed to what the Harper regime was doing to our country, railed against the Harper regime not against our Country. We still loved out Country and know that the opportunity comes to change governments regularly. Like diapers.

Harper had his chance, he blew it.

It is extremely disingenuous to assume that everything is going to be worse before change has even started.

If one cannot accept that this is how democracy works, then maybe one needs to find a country that has the laws and religions that are more acceptable to their beliefs.

Canada is what Canada is. The majority of us love it the way it is, even though occasionally it doesn't behave exactly how we want it to.

If it is your choice not to accept these terms and conditions, then you are, as a Canadian citizen, still able to voice your disapproval and ultimately, leave.

God Bless Canada!

[J.O.]

So if Porter doesn't survive because their business model isn't viable in the long term without a major change to a long standing set of rules, that's the government's fault? Sorry but that's absurd. That's like any airline saying they'll go out of business unless we chuck the flight duty rules out the window. They entered the game knowing where the lines were drawn on the field. If you can't play within those rules, you shouldn't field a team.

[Dropzone]

So if Porter doesn't survive because their business model isn't viable in the long term without a major change to a long standing set of rules, that's the government's fault? Sorry but that's absurd. That's like any airline saying they'll go out of business unless we chuck the flight duty rules out the window. They entered the game knowing where the lines were drawn on the field. If you can't play within those rules, you shouldn't field a team.

It is more about Bombardier and Quebec.......All Cdn taxpayers are about to get hit yet again to backstop the Beaudoins.

[DEFCON]

"Like diapers"

Perfect!

[Dropzone]

Nobody is forced to be a Canadian citizen. If it hurts you that much, you are free to leave, no questions asked.

Actually it's not easy to leave...... the lines and the waits are too long getting into better countries.

[inchman]

Actually it's not easy to leave...... the lines and the waits are too long getting into better countries.

... and which countries would those be?

[j.k.]

Porter's conditional order doesn't makes a drop of difference on Bombardier's failure or success - to try to link that as related is absurd.

J.O. has it right - Those rules were in place, that runway was that long before Porter showed up - no harm in asking for change, but you can't complain when you don't get it, let alone start a blame game.

[Guest]

Porter's conditional order doesn't makes a drop of difference on Bombardier's failure or success - to try to link that as related is absurd.

J.O. has it right - Those rules were in place, that runway was that long before Porter showed up - no harm in asking for change, but you can't complain when you don't get it, let alone start a blame game.

Of course we can same the same for Bombardier and their dream plane. Sink or swim on their own.

[J.O.]

I don't want to see Bombardier fail any more than you do, I have friends who work there and some of them have done this waltz more than once. Still, two dozen airplanes sold to Porter will not save them. I doubt that even if that order went ahead AND Air Canada helped out by ordering 30 or 40 more, that those orders would be enough for the C Series to break even. Sadly the project is on the ropes for reasons that go far beyond politics. $40 oil certainly isn't helping but neither is poor corporate fiscal management.

[inchman]

Just back from the Dubai Air Show.

We have a sense here that the C Series is in competition only from Boeing, Airbus and Embraer.

I was amazed at how many countries on display at Dubai are trying to build this same class of aircraft. At least 2 or 3.

Bombardier had a Q400 and a big tent on the tarmac that was "By Invitation Only" and had a hand written "Closed" sign on an 8 1/2 x 11 paper taped on the door when we went by. Couldn't even bring myself to take a picture of the sign it was so pathetic. Despite looking for it, I could not find the aircraft, which was supposedly there. Maybe it was out on a test flight or on its way home (we were there on the last day).

There were no orders signed for the aircraft at Dubai although the talk from BBD was very positive in their press release. (What else are they going to say?)

http://www.cnbc.com/2015/11/12/reuters-america-airshow-bombardier-faces-challenge-to-haul-in-cseries-orders.html

Frankly, and disappointingly, I don't see this aircraft becoming a success. No real orders and lots of current competition from established manufacturers and potential from startups. It might even be a blessing in disguise to have it die early as competition will only get tighter as time goes on ... against manufacturers in countries where they will definitely be subsidizing production.

[Dropzone]

Frankly, and disappointingly, I don't see this aircraft becoming a success. No real orders and lots of current competition from established manufacturers and potential from startups. It might even be a blessing in disguise to have it die early as competition will only get tighter as time goes on ... against manufacturers in countries where they will definitely be subsidizing production.

The reluctance of the Beaudoins to give up their 2 class share system (they retain control with only a small percentage of the shares) means arrogance will eventually destroy BBD.

[Dropzone]

... and which countries would those be?

Just about any country with better weather.........man I hate the winter and the cold....

[Guest]

Just about any country with better weather.........man I hate the winter and the cold....

Friends always tell me the YLW is the land of sun, wine and warmth. Surely they aren't misleading me? Re leaving the country, have you considered Belize?

http://www.belize.com/residency-and-retirement-in-belize

​ ​

[rudder]

The reluctance of the Beaudoins to give up their 2 class share system (they retain control with only a small percentage of the shares) means arrogance will eventually destroy BBD.

While the Provincial government may be comfortable providing taxpayer dollars to support BBD with status quo on the Beaudoin family veto over every decision of the BBD BOD, the Federal government is unlikely to be so accommodating.

Not unlike the willingness to support the auto companies on reasonable and pragmatic terms, I think that the Feds should exchange cash for equity and put an end to the dysfunctional voting structure. What value should be assigned to a $1B cash infusion in to a company with a market cap $3.2B?

If these terms are offensive to the Beaudoin family then they will have to look at asset sales at BBD in order to meet cash flow requirements associated with the C-series folly that are bringing the liquidity of BBD in to question. And once you start to sell the crown jewels, what is the true value of what remains?

A business plan based on the benevolence of others is not a real business plan. Just ask Porter.

[Super 80]

The difference is, those of us that were opposed to what the Harper regime was doing to our country, railed against the Harper regime not against our Country. We still loved out Country and know that the opportunity comes to change governments regularly. Like diapers.

Harper had his chance, he blew it.

It is extremely disingenuous to assume that everything is going to be worse before change has even started.

I was never a Harper supporter, Harper was above all else almost completely ineffectual. But what is so unsettling about this situation is that it demonstrates that Trudeau is just as willing to govern by edict as Harper was despite promises of sound decision making.

As time goes on and the bullshit keeps piling up my affection for this country has been diminishing. I'm sorry if that is offensive to you. I can only offer you my assurances I have every expectation of leaving Canada permanently.

[Dropzone]

Friends always tell me the YLW is the land of sun, wine and warmth. Surely they aren't misleading me?

Beautiful in summer but doesn't last long enough for me.....still have to deal with the cold and the clouds of winter........whenever the temp goes below 15C I always start thinking about someplace else......getting too old I guess.

[deicer]

I was never a Harper supporter, Harper was above all else almost completely ineffectual. But what is so unsettling about this situation is that it demonstrates that Trudeau is just as willing to govern by edict as Harper was despite promises of sound decision making.

As time goes on and the bullshit keeps piling up my affection for this country has been diminishing. I'm sorry if that is offensive to you. I can only offer you my assurances I have every expectation of leaving Canada permanently

And all this after only one week.

As I stated above, let's put this one aside and come back to it before the next election in 4 years. By then there should be enough real information to make a better decision on how Trudeau actually performed as a Prime Minister.