Canada PoliERA |OT| Two Years of Sunny Days? That’s Scheer Madness!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mr.Mike

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,645
http://budget.ontario.ca/2019/chapter-1b.html#section-4

Legalizing Online Gaming in Ontario

It is time to usher Ontario out of the gambling prohibition era and treat the people of Ontario as adults by allowing them to bet on the outcome of a single sporting event. As consumer preferences continue to evolve, many Ontarians gamble using grey-market websites. Today, Ontarians spend an estimated $500 million a year gambling online, with most of that money spent on illegal websites. As a result, the Province intends to establish a competitive market for online legal gambling that will reflect consumer choice while protecting consumers who play on these websites. This will ensure the people of Ontario have access to safe and legal gambling options. The Province plans to consult with key stakeholders to develop a market that reflects consumer preferences, fosters an exciting gaming experience and minimizes the burden on business while ensuring appropriate protections are in place.

A key part of the government’s customer-focused strategy for gambling is the legalization of single event sports wagering. The Province has asked the federal government to make this change and will continue to pressure it to stand up for Ontario consumers.
 

killerrin

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,115
Toronto
repair or health care services
These fuckers really are planning on gutting and provitizing healthcare, aren't they. Why else would they feel the need to litter in this phrase throughout the budget if it wasn't to get things setup for when they flip the switch.

Legally if you are getting healthcare, it's done through OHIP and covered through OHIP and you can't have private providers offering the same healthcare, paid.
 

Mr.Mike

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,645
... but playolg exists

Unless they're talking poker/sports
The big thing would be letting people bet on a single sporting event, and entirely online. Currently you need to bet on at least 3 games and you do have to visit a convenience store to do it.

Honestly, if the government is gonna let people play slots online (and it was the previous government that set that up) they might as well build a casino at Ontario Place. At least the casino might collect some money from tourists and passing business travelers (it'd be a very short shuttle ride from Billy Bishop).
 

bremon

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,380
What’s the deal with the trinity motif? I’ve only been to Ontario once and didn’t notice it at that point.
 

GSG

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,127
I just got an email from Pierre Poilievre about some bullshit propaganda on the carbon tax. How the hell did this piece of shit get my email address?
 

killerrin

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,115
Toronto
It's a trillium flower

While we're at it we should change the Ontario flag. Just put the trillium on a green background.
This is the Conservatives we are talking about here. If they redesign the flag it'll be a Trillium on a Blue background. To match their totally-not-conservative branded License Plates.

The same way they got my cell phone and text messaged me carbon tax propaganda.
I'm sure they got it from a totally legit, non-leaked corporate source. Like the 407 Expressway records (if Ontario).
 

Kernel

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,820
Someone on my feed was scaremongering that if Kenney and Scheer win they'll have the votes to make changes to the Constitution and the Charter of Rights.

Is that just BS?
 

killerrin

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,115
Toronto
Someone on my feed was scaremongering that if Kenney and Scheer win they'll have the votes to make changes to the Constitution and the Charter of Rights.

Is that just BS?
Mostly bullshit. There are some caveats, it isn't impossible. I'll go about this in a roundabout way. So stay with me:

What isn't bullshit is that if Sheer and Kenney win, that would put the list of provinces which have Conservative leadership into a supermajority within the country as a while.

It would mean Federally we have: Andrew Scheer
Provincially we would have:
  1. Ontario (Doug Ford)
  2. Quebec (Francois Legault)
  3. New Brunswick (Blaine Higgs)
  4. Manitoba (Brian Pallister)
  5. Alberta (Jason Kenney)
  6. Saskatchewan (Scott Moe)

It would be very bad for progressivism in this country since Conservatives would have a very tight majority over almost all of the most influential provinces in the country. Everything Harper wanted to do, but couldn't because they had provinces opposing them would suddenly be right out in the opened ripe for the picking. Just Ontario and Quebec is scary enough, containing over 61% of the population between them. Especially since they are usually the major holdouts against Conservative Governance at the federal level. It could also mean that they pull a USA and flip the deck on our Supreme Court. Trying to stack things in their favour as spots open up.

So now for where things get bad. To modify the constitution, there isn't actually a requirement that things go to Referendum. The only requirements are:
  • It passes in the Federal House
  • It passes in the Federal Senate
  • An identical Law is passed in 2/3rds of Provincial Legislatures, where their total population makes up at least 50% of the national population. This rule called the 7+50 rule, which means 7 Provinces and 50% of the Population.
So now you can see why the conservative supermajority can potentially be a problem. Basically, they hit almost every requirement. With our two saving graces being that:
  • They are just shy of the 7 Provinces (but BC could always flip back to BC Liberals and solve that issue)
  • The Senate. Which also, can be fucked around with because they can stack the deck on every retiring Senator, and the pool of free senators which can be pulled from at a slight political hit and a trip to the GG (reserved for emergencies) is currently topped out at 8. So right now, they are sitting at 31/105 (or 39/113 if they used the extras). So they would have to convince the ISG or Non-affiliated to join their cause. Which could be possible depending on how they swing.
So needless to say. It's not impossible. But it's not improbable.
 
Last edited:

Dr.Acula

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,781
They just went back to the old logo.



I honestly prefer the '60s style wingding to the 2000s era "three men in a hot-tub" logo.
 
OP
OP
Caz

Caz

Community Resettler
Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,058
Canada
If Alberta's election is a preview of what's to come of the federal one, then holy hell is it going to be wild: RCMP Search Business Owned by Calgary UCP Candidate
Mounties seized a computer hard drive, other electronic devices and a suitcase Thursday night from the Autopro location.

The shop owned by Peter Singh, the UPC candidate for Calgary-East, was closed Friday.

RCMP have not released the nature of the investigation.

Singh did not return requests for comment and a representative at his campaign office says the candidate’s whereabouts were unknown.
 

mintzilla

Member
Nov 6, 2017
579
Canada

killerrin

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,115
Toronto
It's bad that Conservative scandals don't even phase me anymore. Like I just expect them to be wildly corrupt. Like if a given candidate isn't under investigation, I feel like that should be a gigantic red flag to investigate them for something just by association.

Meanwhile Progressives even think about being corrupt and their entire voter-base kicks them to the curb, it turns into a 24/7 media frenzy, and the voters tell them to take a hike.
 

bremon

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,380
Lol and while progressives are being piled on the Conservatives hurl names and insults at them that all apply to themselves.
 

Vamphuntr

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,863
This is still my favourite tweet on the matter

Harper's scandals were not that simple though. One had you need to check with a constitution expert to understand what a prorogation was and entailed and the other was about the senate housing and residence stipends rule. Neither were easy to understand or that easy. In the case of the latter Duffy even got away with it in total impunity.
 

Kernel

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,820
I understand why Trudeau would pressure to get SNC a good deal.

But why the hell are conservatives cheating with their own elections?
 

ContraWars

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,135
Canada
Never got one politician knock on a door at any of my houses yet.

Best election ever?

*shakes magic 8 ball and sees Preston Manning's face show up*

"AHH!"
 

Tiktaalik

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,642
Harper's senate expense scandal is a complete nothingburger compared to SNC Lavalin. Improper use of an expense account versus Trudeau attempting to impose political will on the independent justice system. SNC Lavalin is so so so wildly worse, they're not even comparable.
 

killerrin

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,115
Toronto
CBC: Ontario PCs want to make it next to impossible to sue the government

Premier Doug Ford's Progressive Conservatives are moving to make it harder to sue the Ontario government.

The PCs plan to repeal and replace the long-standing Ontario Proceedings Against the Crown Act — legislation that, among other things, outlines government liability in cases of misfeasance and negligence.

The new law would increase the legal threshold necessary to proceed with civil litigation, including class action lawsuits, against the government. Further, it would considerably limit the instances in which the government could be on the hook for financial compensation to plaintiffs.

"What the government is trying to do is place itself beyond the reach of the courts and make it difficult, and in many cases impossible, to sue the government — even when it acts in bad faith or breaches the duties of office," said Amir Attaran, a law professor at the University of Ottawa.

Walled off from lawsuits
"Every province sets limits on how and when the government may be sued. But what Ontario is proposing is to wall itself off from lawsuits like no other province."

University of Ottawa law professor Amir Attaran said the PCs plan would make it difficult to sue the Ontario government 'even when it acts in bad faith or breaches the duties of office.' (CBC)

Perhaps the most significant element of the new legislation, according to Toronto human rights and refugee lawyer Kevin Wiener, is that it eliminates any potential financial liability in most cases where someone is harmed by government policy or regulatory decisions made in "good faith."

"What it means is that the people who exercise power over you can exercise that power negligently and cause you damage and no one will have to pay," said Wiener.

Similarly, the province will not be liable for instances in which a person says there were harmed by the government exercising its authority.

While the act would not serve to "totally eradicate Crown liability," Wiener said it amounts to the government arguing that "as long as people say they are acting in good faith, it doesn't matter how incompetent they are."

Law to apply retroactively
While courts have yet to interpret the proposed legislation, the fact it will apply retroactively to existing cases means it could potentially be used to derail ongoing matters — like a class action lawsuit by a Toronto law firm on behalf of juvenile inmates placed in solitary confinement.

"This a way to wipe the decks clean. And even if the government did something wrong, even if people have sued it already, they're going to shut those lawsuits down," Attaran said.

One "silver lining," Wiener pointed out, is that financial damages can still be awarded in Charter cases.

'Trying to escape liability'
Meanwhile, the proposed Crown Liability and Proceedings Act will force plaintiffs to obtain permission from a court to move forward with suing the government in the first place.

Under current law, no such permission is required to file suit.

That means an applicant will have to prove to a judge that the province acted negligently or in bad faith before proceedings begin. The problem, however, is that usually requires access to government documents or other materials that the province will not be required to provide.

Crown lawyers will also have the option to cross-examine whomever is trying to get permission to launch a suit.

"The bottom line here is that government is trying to escape liability for being sued, even when it does things that may be very, very wrong," Attaran said, adding that contract disputes between business owners and the province are a good example of the type of cases that will likely become nearly impossible to litigate in the future.

The move could prove an impetus for other provinces to pursue similar legal changes, he added.

Details of the proposed legislation were outlined in the PCs recent budget bill, which was tabled in the legislature by Finance Minister VicFedeli last Thursday.

In an email statement, a spokesperson for Attorney General Caroline Mulroney said the legislation will update "outdated procedures and codifies the common law to clarify and simplify the process for lawsuits brought by or against the government."

The Canadian Civil Liberties Association says it will challenge the legislation if it receives royal assent.
Fucking Disgusting
 

bremon

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,380
Seems like the sort of policy that could encourage a desperate person turn to violence. Despite expecting them to be reckless and shortsighted Thug Ford’s regime continues to find ways to surprise me.

Harper's senate expense scandal is a complete nothingburger compared to SNC Lavalin. Improper use of an expense account versus Trudeau attempting to impose political will on the independent justice system. SNC Lavalin is so so so wildly worse, they're not even comparable.
Pretty sure average Joe gives next to zero fucks about either of them though. Nothingburger vs nothingburger with a side of fries in the eyes of people I’ve talked with.
 

Dr.Acula

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,781
Harper's senate expense scandal is a complete nothingburger compared to SNC Lavalin. Improper use of an expense account versus Trudeau attempting to impose political will on the independent justice system. SNC Lavalin is so so so wildly worse, they're not even comparable.
Yeah, but "the guy from TV" Mike Duffy lying about living in his cottage to claim money for living expenses is so much easier to parse and understand than Trudeau pressuring the AG to prosecute SNC-Lavalin under this statute instead of under that statute, because they wanted to protect jobs in Quebec.

No one cut anyone a cheque and then tried to hide it in the SNC scandal. It's less sexy.
 

killerrin

Member
Oct 25, 2017
3,115
Toronto
Yeah, but "the guy from TV" Mike Duffy lying about living in his cottage to claim money for living expenses is so much easier to parse and understand than Trudeau pressuring the AG to prosecute SNC-Lavalin under this statute instead of under that statute, because they wanted to protect jobs in Quebec.

No one cut anyone a cheque and then tried to hide it in the SNC scandal. It's less sexy.
Money is easy to understand though. I'd argue that the more complex the scandal is to understand, the worse it is on public perception because the public defaults to an "I don't know what this is, but everybody more intelligent than me is screaming about it. Therefore they must literally be the devil". It's why when the Conservatives blow a shit-ton of cash and have money scandals left-right and center the people don't even bat an eyelid because they expect it to happen and they understand it, but when something comes up that they don't understand, it causes them to view it more negatively
 

Kernel

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,820

Scheer keeps on bullshitting.

He's just like Ford except he doesn't look like a used car salesman.
 

Tiktaalik

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,642
BC has had carbon taxes for forever. The fact that gas taxes are suddenly going up even though there has been no change really shows how much of gas prices is driven by the companies simply trying to exploit the situation to make more money.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.