Sign in to follow this  
Malcolm

All About Justin / The good, the bad and the ugly

Recommended Posts

C'mon.  Stop it.  Logical thinking has no place in Government.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does Climate Barbie know about this minor detail??  For a minute, i was starting to feel guilty about filling my propane tanks to heat the house in winter!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Obviously another outbreak of "foot in mouth" disease.

Trudeau's comments in Saskatoon 'disrespectful,' says chief

'He should learn to use his words more carefully,' says Muskowekwan First Nation Chief Reginald Bellerose

By Jason Warick, CBC News Posted: Jan 26, 2017 3:48 PM CT Last Updated: Jan 26, 2017 6:16 PM CT

Tribal Chief of the Saskatoon Tribal Council Felix Thomas poses a question to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau during a town hall meeting in Saskatoon on Wednesday.

Tribal Chief of the Saskatoon Tribal Council Felix Thomas poses a question to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau during a town hall meeting in Saskatoon on Wednesday. (Liam Richards/Canadian Press)

Jason Warick is a reporter with CBC Saskatoon.

Several First Nations leaders are blasting Prime Minister Justin Trudeau for comments he made during a town hall meeting in Saskatoon on Wednesday.

"He basically said chiefs do not know what the needs of First Nations are," said Muskowekwan First Nation Chief Reginald Bellerose.

"I thought that was disrespectful and he should learn to use his words more carefully."

During a 90-minute town hall meeting with Trudeau at the University of Saskatchewan, the discussion was largely civil, with questions about carbon taxes, international aid and relations with Iran.

But in a question from the floor, Saskatoon Tribal Council Chief Felix Thomas was critical of the "disconnect" between Trudeau's words and his government's actions. Thomas said that little of the promised billions of dollars has arrived on First Nations territory and the fiscal year is nearly over.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau speaks at the town hall meeting in Saskatoon. (Liam Richards/Canadian Press)

"There was a lot of fanfare with the last budget," Thomas said. "But none of that money has gone to the communities yet."

Trudeau responded that much more must be done, but funding alone will not help.

'Is it fair to use that and paint all the other communities with the same brush?'- Chief Felix Thomas, Saskatoon Tribal Council

"I've spoken with a number of chiefs who said, 'You know, we need a youth centre.… You know, we need TVs and lounges and sofas so they can hang around.' And when a chief says that to me, I pretty much know they haven't actually talked to their young people," Trudeau told the audience in his response to Thomas.

"Because most of the young people I've talked to want a place to store their canoes and paddles so they can connect back out on the land, and a place with internet access so they can do their homework."  (I would bet there are no canoes to store). 

Sweetgrass First Nation Chief Lori Whitecalf took to Twitter shortly after CBC News published Trudeau's controversial comments.

Thomas said Trudeau should refrain from stereotyping Indigenous people. He said Saskatoon Tribal Council leaders work hard to connect with their people and they ensure there's a sound business case for any new infrastructure.

"Is it fair to use that and paint all the other communities with the same brush? Some of those rec centres are needed," Thomas said.

Bellerose was in the audience and was also taken aback.

Bellerose and Thomas noted Trudeau visited with Saskatoon's mayor and city councillors, but didn't talk to him or any other elected Saskatoon Tribal Council chiefs.

Bellerose said he and other First Nations leaders were offered little more than a photo opportunity with Trudeau. He said he would have preferred to talk about education funding or Muskowekwan's recently signed deal to host a $3-billion potash mine on the reserve.

"The selfies and stuff: I'm not into that," Bellerose said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

Trudeau abandons pledge to reform Canada’s elections

Wednesday’s move was called a “betrayal” by the NDP, who accused Justin Trudeau of lying to progressive voters when he made electoral reform a central promise in the 2015 election.

Wed., Feb. 1, 2017 - Toronto Star
By Alex Boutilier - Ottawa Bureau Reporter

OTTAWA—Prime Minister Justin Trudeau abandoned his promise to reform Canada’s electoral system on Wednesday, claiming no consensus has been found on an alternative system.

Only two months after recommitting to electoral reform, Trudeau told newly appointed Democratic Institutions Minister Karina Gould that replacing the first-past-the-post system was no longer on the table.

Trudeau’s decision shelves months of work by a special House of Commons committee, two separate public engagement and consultation exercises, numerous MP town hall meetings and one cross-country ministerial tour.

The move was called a “betrayal” by the opposition New Democrats, who accused Trudeau of lying to progressive voters when he made electoral reform a central promise in the 2015 election.

“Rather than keep his word to the millions of Canadians who voted for him and the hundreds of thousands of Canadians who engaged in good faith … over this question of how to strengthen and broaden our democracy, Mr. Trudeau chose today instead to spit in their face,” New Democrat MP Nathan Cullen told reporters.

In the House of Commons, Trudeau said not only is there no clear consensus on a new voting system — which citizens weren’t actually asked to weigh in on — but the issue itself is not a priority for Canadians.

“There is no consensus among Canadians on how, or even whether, to reform our electoral system,” Trudeau said during question period.

“We are moving forward in a way that will focus on the things that matter to Canadians. That is what Canadians elected us to do.”

But only two months ago, Trudeau told the Star’s editorial board that he heard “loudly and clearly” that “Canadians want a better system of governance, a better system of choosing our governments.”

Trudeau went on to say he wouldn’t abandon his promise to replace first-past-the-post — which gave the Liberals a majority government with less than 40 per cent of the popular vote — simply because it was difficult to do.

“I make promises because I believe in them,”

.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It does not seem to be a betrayal but (surprise) an exercise in a 2nd sober thought.  Good for him. in cheek.jpgOn the other hand perhaps the NDs and Greens who voted for him will instead vote Conservative in the next election.:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Malcolm said:

an exercise in a 2nd sober thought

No.  They finally realised that they had nothing to gain by changing the electoral system.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He finally was forced to publicly admit Canadians wouldn't let him slam through a system virtually putting him in power in perpetuity...without them first having a say through a referendum. 

His ego must really be bruised. LOL.

Canada wins again!

 

Edited by Jaydee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He doesn't need to worry, by the time he next election comes up 300000 refugees will be able to cast their ballots in favour of the Party. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.bnn.ca/canada-added-more-jobs-last-year-than-previously-reported-part-time-growth-persists-1.664034

The Canadian economy created slightly more jobs than previously thought in 2016, with much of the growth coming from part-time employment, though economists expect some of that deterioration in the quality of jobs to dissipate this year.

Canada added 229,000 jobs as of the end of 2016 compared with December the year before, according to revised data from Statistics Canada.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

Millennials finally fall out of love with Justin Trudeau after he abandons electoral reform

For many young voters, Harper's government was all they had ever known. Trudeau was supposed to be different

Thu Feb 09, 2017 - CBC News
By Robyn Urback

Sorry, kids: you've been had. I don't mean to be patronizing — to the extent that I can be patronizing of my own contemporaries — but it appears the millennial fantasy of Liberal exceptionalism when it comes to "the same old politics" in Ottawa is, at last, starting to fade. Thanks, electoral reform.

I can only speak anecdotally, of course (the preferred method of data collection among millennials, or didn't you know?!) but it appears young voters are particularly aghast that the prime minister of Canada would break his campaign promise to overhaul the way we hold our elections.

While many older voters yawned and mumbled something about "same old Liberals" following the government's about-face last week, the under-35 cohort found themselves seething over the apparent betrayal, vowing in long screeds on Facebook and Reddit to never vote Liberal again. Some went further, launching and signing petitions, emails and letter-writing campaigns to their MPs, while others organized weekend rallies to demonstrate their fury over the broken promise.

A new type of politics

Their passion was striking, but not altogether surprising: for many young voters, Stephen Harper led the only federal government they had really ever known. For most of their adult or near-adult lives, the government had been run by a bunch of wooden-looking dudes who were reportedly anti-science, anti-marijuana, anti-infrastructure and anti-change.

Then along came Justin Trudeau, who talked about climate change, feminism, investing in infrastructure and smoking weed. He was the antithesis of everything they had known about federal politics in Canada, and he vowed to overhaul it completely — right down to the very fundamentals of how we form our governments. They trusted him, gave him their votes and arguably handed him his majority.

But now, it's becoming clear that Trudeau's government isn't that different after all. For one, the little entitlements are piling up: the health minister's car service bills, the $200,000 in moving expenses for two Prime Minister's Office staffers, the private dinners with billionaires, the prime minister's luxury island vacation. OK, you vaguely remember some old crotchety family member warning you about Liberal entitlements, but that was supposed to be about the old Liberals. Not these guys.

'That means you're on the hook for your parents' early retirement, kids.'

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Government must be doing something right...

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quotidien/170210/dq170210a-eng.htm

Employment rose by 48,000 (+0.3%) in January, building on gains observed in the latter part of 2016. The unemployment rate fell by 0.1 percentage points to 6.8%.

On a year-over-year basis, employment rose by 276,000 (+1.5%), with most of the increase occurring from August to January.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Under employing Canadians is not something to be happy about.

"full-time employment was up +86,000 +0.6%  "

"part-time employment was up +190,000 or +5.6%).

" 19.6% of employed persons worked part time, compared with 18.8% the same month a year earlier."

Edited by Jaydee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The National Post has some suggestions for the upcoming meeting with President Trump http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/dont-hug-him-some-suggestions-for-justin-trudeau-on-how-to-meet-donald-trump

‎Today, ‎February ‎10, ‎2017, ‏‎6 minutes ago
 

Don’t hug him: Some suggestions for Justin Trudeau on how to meet Donald Trump

 
‎Today, ‎February ‎10, ‎2017, ‏‎22 minutes ago | Tristin Hopper

On Monday, U.S. President Donald “America First” Trump meets with his Canadian counterpart for the first time. Given Trump’s track record of getting strangely intemperate with former British Empire Dominions, there’s all manner of ways it could go wrong. 

However, here’s a quick guide on how Justin Trudeau might be able to face Trump without it getting all awkward or sparking a trade war. 

Be sure to mention…

The virtues of abandoning campaign pledges

Trudeau meets Trump just after abandoning his campaign promise to overhaul Canada’s voting system. And if history is any guide, near-total abandonment of campaign pledges has never really been a barrier to Liberals getting re-elected. Thus, Trudeau is in a unique position to hint to Trump that he may not necessarily need to deliver on absolutely every little thing he spouted off on the campaign trail. 

Our mighty and growing armed forces

There’s no getting around this: Canada hasn’t met its NATO commitments for years, and we are categorically dependent on the Americans to defend our borders. But on the plus side, Defense Secretary James Mattis seems to love Canadian troops, we just bought a bunch of new equipment and our special forces are second to none. With luck, maybe Trump won’t nag us for having a navy held together with duct tape.

Donald J. Trump’s peerless, unmatched leadership of the United States of America

Sucking up to the Americans has served Canada well, so why stop now? Especially when the White House suddenly has one of the most praise-hungry occupants in its history? History will not know what Trudeau says to Trump behind closed doors: There are likely no transcripts kept of these meetings, and it’s extremely unlikely that any of Trump’s aides will even remember Trudeau’s name when they write their memoirs.

Jim Watson/AFP
Jim Watson/AFPDo not hug Donald Trump.

Oil. Remember to mention the oil.

Despite all the “America First” talk, the U.S. still imports oceans of its oil from Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Venezuela and Nigeria. After thanking Trump for approving Keystone XL, it doesn’t hurt to mention that our oil is top quality, reliably delivered and we won’t pull any Saudi-like predatory pricing schemes.

Mark Ralston/Getty Images
Mark Ralston/Getty ImagesQuality oil at a reasonable price, guaranteed™

Trump’s Canadian holdings

The word from Trump watchers is that the president seems to be unusually favourable to countries where he has real estate holdings. So, maybe remind him that Canada is the only non-U.S. country aside from India where Trump’s name adorns more than one building (Vancouver and Toronto both have a Trump International Tower and Hotel).

Ernest Doroszuk
Ernest DoroszukRemind him about all the good times he had in Toronto.

But don’t mention…

The word “NAFTA”

Trade is obviously going to be a big focus of this first meeting. And Canada has some leverage: We’re still the Americans’ biggest customer, and there’s no shortage of voices in U.S. industry warning that toying with the Canadian trade relationship could cost U.S. jobs. But Trump has still spent months calling NAFTA the “worst deal ever.” Much like with the word “Obamacare” (parts of which Trump has pledged to keep under a different moniker), Trump might be more likely to be swayed if Trudeau can simply avoid saying the word “NAFTA” too much.  

Human rights, inclusiveness, morality, etc.

Remember all those times Canada tried to ask China to stop oppressing its citizens? Or when we kept telling U.S. presidents that their Vietnam War was a bad idea? Not only did it not work, but it ultimately just annoyed both parties. While there are millions of Canadians who probably want to see Trudeau lecture Trump about non-reactionary immigration policies or some such, there is an approximately zero per cent chance that it will result in the U.S. president changing his mind.

Sean Kilpatrick/CP
Sean Kilpatrick/CPChinese Premier Xi Jinping, pictured in the act of not caring about what Canada has to say.

Immigration

The less said about this, the better. To be honest, Trump’s various immigration restrictions might be good for Canada. Silicon Valley is particularly opposed — and best case scenario is that a few tech giants simply start shifting operations to Toronto or Vancouver. Meanwhile, there’s the uncomfortable fact that, when it comes to catching suspected terrorists, the Canadian border is perceived to be much more of a trouble spot than the Mexican border Trump seems to hates so much.

The War of 1812

This is a classic icebreaker between U.S. and Canadian leaders. The pair can argue over who won, or the Canadian can jokingly gesture to the White House and say “gee, it looks much better since we burned it down.” It’s not a guarantee Trump will get the joke, and it might devolve into an awkward explanation of impressmen, Napoleonic-era trade restrictions and Isaac Brock and such. Instead, maybe mention hockey?

United States Library of Congress
United States Library of CongressFunny story: The war started because of a dispute over trade restrictions.

• Email: thopper@nationalpost.com | Twitter: TristinHopper

NP_Top_Stories?d=yIl2AUoC8zA NP_Top_Stories?i=AeMsyrMfOME:1yiZ7gOAZYc:V_sGLiPBpWU NP_Top_Stories?i=AeMsyrMfOME:1yiZ7gOAZYc:F7zBnMyn0Lo NP_Top_Stories?d=qj6IDK7rITs NP_Top_Stories?i=AeMsyrMfOME:1yiZ7gOAZYc:gIN9vFwOqvQ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sunny Days....?

Pre-clearance bill would give U.S. border agents in Canada new powers

Bill to expand border co-operation could also see permanent residents denied re-entry to Canada

By Evan Dyer, CBC News Posted: Feb 12, 2017 5:00 AM ET Last Updated: Feb 12, 2017 5:00 AM ET

. U.S. border guards working at pre-clearance stations would be given expanded powers under a proposed Liberal law. (Todd Korol/Reuters)

U.S. border guards would get new powers to question, search and even detain Canadian citizens on Canadian soil under a bill proposed by the Liberal government.

Legal experts say Bill C-23, introduced by Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale, and likely to pass in the current sitting of Parliament, could also erode the standing of Canadian permanent residents by threatening their automatic right to enter Canada.

The bill would enshrine in law a reciprocal agreement for customs and immigration pre-clearance signed by the governments of Stephen Harper and Barack Obama in 2015. Both houses of Congress passed the U.S. version of the bill in December.

Michael Greene, an immigration lawyer in Calgary, says C-23 takes away an important right found in the existing law.

"A Canadian going to the U.S. through a pre-clearance area [on Canadian soil] can say: 'I don't like the way [an interview is] going and I've chosen not to visit your country.' And they can just turn around and walk out.

"Under the new proposed bill, they wouldn't be able to walk out. They can be held and forced to answer questions, first to identify themselves, which is not so offensive, but secondly, to explain the reasons for leaving, and to explain their reasons for wanting to withdraw," said Greene, who is national chair of the Canadian Bar Association's citizenship and immigration section.

"And that's the part we think could be really offensive and goes too far."

  • What is pre-clearance?

Pre-clearance allows Canadian visitors to the U.S. to clear U.S. Customs and Immigration while still in Canada at a Canadian port of departure.

Eight Canadian airports offer pre-clearance, and it will expand to two more later this year. They also exist at the Port of Vancouver, at Vancouver's train station and on some B.C.-Washington ferry routes. Later this year, pre-clearance is expected to be introduced at Montreal's train station for Amtrak's Montreal-New York City route.

Howard Greenberg, a Toronto immigration lawyer who has chaired the immigration law committees at the Canadian Bar Association and the International Bar Association, says the law raises the prospect of a Canadian being arrested simply for deciding he or she has had enough with a certain line of questioning.

"At some point, it may change from a situation where you're simply responding to a question, to a situation where you're failing to respond to a direction of an officer. So the ambiguity is somewhat dangerous for the traveller."

Unreasonable delay

A spokesman for Public Safety Canada said C-23 limits how far a U.S. agent can go in questioning a traveller.

"The change is that once a traveller indicates their wish to withdraw, pre-clearance officers would be authorized to exercise certain authorities, such as question the traveller as to their identity and reason for withdrawing," Scott Bardsley told CBC News.

"This authority is provided in order protect the integrity of the border but can only be exercised to the extent that doing so would not unreasonably delay the traveller."

But Greene said the bill fails to define what constitutes an "unreasonable delay."

"What's reasonable for them may be a very long interrogation. Whereas for the individual it may be, 'I'll tell you why I don't want to answer any more questions and then I'm leaving.' Well, the problem is, if that person tries to leave, then they can be charged with failing to co-operate, which under this bill is an offence they can be arrested for, and then charged and given a federal record."

Physical searches

Under the existing law, a strip search can only be conducted by a Canadian officer, though a U.S. officer can be present. Greene points out C-23 says if a Canadian officer is unavailable or unwilling, the U.S. officer can conduct the search.

"So you could have a circumstance where the Canadian officer says, 'No I don't think a search is warranted here. I'm not willing to do it.' But the U.S. officer just says, 'Fine, we're going to do it anyway.'"

Bill C-23 says if a Canada Border Services Agency officer is unavailable or unwilling, a U.S. officer can conduct a strip search on a Canadian traveller in a Canadian airport. (Darren Calabrese/Canadian Press)

C-23 would also allow U.S. officers to carry sidearms while on duty in Canada, if they're working in an environment where Canada Border Services Agency officers are normally armed. 

Bardsley of Public Safety Canada says the change would probably not extend to airports "given that CBSA officers do not carry a sidearm when processing passengers inside air terminals."

Permanent residents turned away?

Also under the existing law, if a CBSA officer feels that a permanent resident has violated the terms of their residency (by not really living in the country, for example), the officer can report them to Citizenship and Immigration, but must allow the person to enter Canada. Permanent residents, like Canadian citizens, enjoy an absolute right of entry.

But C-23 would give a CBSA agent posted at a U.S. airport the right to prevent the resident from boarding a flight to Canada. The resident would have the option to drive or find a ride to a land border, where their legal right to enter Canada would still apply.

Immigration lawyer Michael Greene says Donald Trump's arrival in the Oval Office is another reason for the Liberals to reconsider some parts of Bill C-23. (Susan Walsh/Associated Press)

Immigration Lawyer Michael Greene says the proposed change should worry residents.

"We're going to see an expansion, we're pretty sure, of this eventually to Europe and other major centres. And if they get denied at, let's say, De Gaulle airport in Paris, they're not going to be able to get to a land crossing to make the entry." 

Greene says Canadian permanent residents could find themselves in the same straits as some U.S. green card holders in the first days of President Donald Trump's travel ban.

Changed circumstances

Greene and Greenberg diverge on how Trump's arrival in the Oval Office should affect the debate on C-23.

For Greene, it means Canada needs to reconsider the concessions in the bill it drafted when Obama was in power.

"They want to do their interdiction abroad because it's easier to stop people from coming in if they don't even set foot on American soil. We get that. But they are operating on our soil, so they do need to respect our rights in doing so."

While Greenberg agrees the law has troubling aspects, he says it may be the price Canadians have to pay to keep their uniquely privileged status when entering the U.S. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2017-02-10 at 8:53 AM, deicer said:

Government must be doing something right...

It's all good according to Morneau..we just have to get used to McJobs as the new standard! See? The plan is working!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to wonder what Canadians'response would be if a foreign country started criticizing our efforts to improve the security of our own country.

It seems to me that Bill c23 enables Cbsa/Homeland Security to ask questions that should have been or haven't been asked in the past. It is not a right of citizenship/residency to be able to enter another country just because an individual declares themselves to be "Canadian".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, st27 said:

It's all good according to Morneau..we just have to get used to McJobs as the new standard! See? The plan is working!

Unfortunately it is the way it will be.  When corporations took over and lobbied governments to offshore real jobs, it was over at that point.

Mexico, India, China, Vietnam, et al aren't the bad guys here.  The just took what was dropped in their laps.

GE, under Welch, opened the flood gates, and all the other CEO's jumped on board.

Yes, governments are weak, but the real bad guys in all of this are Corporations and the greedy CEO's.

http://theweek.com/articles/486362/where-americas-jobs-went

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, deicer said:

Unfortunately it is the way it will be.  When corporations took over and lobbied governments to offshore real jobs, it was over at that point.

Mexico, India, China, Vietnam, et al aren't the bad guys here.  The just took what was dropped in their laps.

GE, under Welch, opened the flood gates, and all the other CEO's jumped on board.

Yes, governments are weak, but the real bad guys in all of this are Corporations and the greedy CEO's.

http://theweek.com/articles/486362/where-americas-jobs-went

Hmmm can not blame them for the acceptace of 2nd tier wages for new hires though. All unions / associations that accepted those had the option to take job action and didn't. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this