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

firehawk12

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,696
So if you watch The National on Youtube, they'll air old CBC clips during the commercial breaks and they're always fun... but they pulled a package on the "Liberal rat pack" which is hilarious. Nunziata, Tobin, Copps, Boudria... I had forgot that period of the Liberal party... it feels like a lifetime ago.
 

Kernel

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,400

“Let’s just say there are really strong feelings,” added the frustrated federal Tory insider, noting the premier is proving to be a lightning rod with many Ontarians.

Another national party official expressed exasperation at the fact that some voters appear unaware that Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer is not part of Ford’s administration and has nothing to do with its controversial moves, which polls suggest are unpopular.
Suck it assholes.

“It’s a different level of government and we have different priorities,” said the second Tory.
Bullshit.
 

djkimothy

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,039



Suck it assholes.



Bullshit.
I don't know why they're worried. Ford is doing exactly what they want to do.

Ford can go on paid vacation all he wants, but every time a group protests against his budget item, Scheer is rightfuly dragged into the fray.
 

Kernel

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,400
I don't know why they're worried. Ford is doing exactly what they want to do.
Ford is letting the cat out of the bag. He implied they would just find "efficiencies" and no one would lose their job. Yes it's BS but people believed it.

Instead everything is being gutted and countless people are losing their jobs.

The Conservatives strategy is to make everyone hate the Liberals and Trudeau and not focus too much on what they stand for, they will give nice warm, fuzzy statements that can mean whatever you want them to mean. Hey they're not Trudeau.

Make people vote "against" the Liberals and not FOR Conservatives. Because if people knew what they REALLY stand for, they wouldn't vote for them.

But Ford is raising the suspicion that there's a hidden agenda, the Ontario Conservatives have been lying since Day 1 as they slash and burn.

Scheer will enable Ford, he has said this.

When people start realizing what a small federal government means for life in Ontario, well there's hope for October.
 

Tiktaalik

Member
Oct 25, 2017
966
Yeah this was one of the most brazen examples of obvious 'fake news' I'd seen so far in Canada. I'm glad to see that Elections Canada is doing something about this. They're gonna have to be very vigilant this election.
 

killerrin

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,523
Toronto
Yeah this was one of the most brazen examples of obvious 'fake news' I'd seen so far in Canada. I'm glad to see that Elections Canada is doing something about this. They're gonna have to be very vigilant this election.
Sadly, I don't think it's going to matter because while Google came out saying they will respect our new advertising laws, Facebook straight up told the Federal Government "Fuck you, sue me"
 
Last edited:

Popstar

Member
Oct 25, 2017
395
I Am A 95 y.o., former Canadian Minister of Defense and Transport Minister. I want to discuss my experience with the cabal/deep state, global warming, politics and extraterrestrials. Ask me anything!

Can you elaborate on your experiences with extraterrestrials?

I have only been in direct contact once, personally, when I was encouraged to keep up the good work I have been doing. I was told there are 8 different species working together with individuals like me, who are involved with disclosure and spreading the truth. They also enhanced my ability to communicate telepathically.
 

killerrin

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,523
Toronto
That is um, uh. Quite the AMA. Aliens, Illuminati, The Cabal, Gods and Religion. Its like Peak Reddit with so many Conspiracy Theories flying around. That is quite the fascinating read just from a "watching a train crash in slow motion" perspective
 

Terrell

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,822
Canada
That's pretty much true of any political party. I doubt it’s exclusive to the Liberals. This is politics, nothing personal. The NDP aren’t clean in this and we know the conservative record.

May’s willingness to work with other parties have been demonstrated earlier which will help her leech more support away from the ndp. At least she has something to bring back to her voters.
You’re absolutely right and it’s a part of the Greens’ appeal.
I posted this earlier but the most common read of BC election results is that Fed Liberals dissatisfied with the BC Liberals found a home with the Greens. In BC the Greens have positioned themselves where the Federal Liberals do, as a socially progressive, technocratic, free market party. The Fed Greens don't seem that much different. The core difference is they're aggressive on environmental issues, but that's an axis independent of the traditional left/right political axis. There's no reason why a socially conservative or economically Conservative party couldn't also be environmentalist. The centre right BC Liberals for example implemented the most economically conservative approach to climate action with their revenue neutral carbon tax.

The core difference I see between the NDP and Greens (especially now that the NDP seems to be matching and exceeding the Greens on environmental policy) is around labour issues. In BC the minority NDP government has not moved as far as promised on labour policy reform due to a lack of support from their Green minority partners.

I'd suspect that there's also likely a spot of differentiation where the NDP are more likely to support universal programs while the Greens (like the Liberals) would tend more toward means tested programs. Ultimately I think we'll have to wait until more policy documents appear to really sort out where every party is going to land this election.

Quebec is already quite happy to be selling their power to the Americans so there's really no reason for them to play ball on some sort of "grand bargain" energy corridor idea. It's dead in the water already.

The only grid expansion that makes sense would be for Alberta to buy power from BC and for adjacent provinces to buy more power from Manitoba.
I can’t say I agree that Liberals hold a technocratic position in politics, their history does not align with that at all. Though it’s completely understandable one could make such a conclusion, given that they’re the only party to form government that frequently considers relevant work experience when appointing cabinet positions and the only party that has EVER genuinely considered the opinion of peer-reviewed experts, even when it hasn’t politically expedient. It’s what they do with those considerations that I feel disqualifies them from being labeled technocratic. Their electoral reform actions alone should make it pretty clear that they don’t qualify for that distinction.

And I can absolutely see the labour issue being stronger with the NDP, but that has a lot to do with their storied history of being backed by the heads of the labour unions, either financially or otherwise. The NDP is no different from other parties in that their policy is crafted to the benefit of their primary supporters, and in the NDP’s case, that’s been unions. While that comes off as a good thing, it does lead to the NDP’s more whiplash-inducing moments, like Notley’s support of oil sands worker unions in opposition of the party’s typical environmental stance.
It’s also the reason for labour policy hold-ups in BC: the NDP wants to remove secret ballots to form unions, which risks employee privacy and thus opens workers up to persecution and abuse, both from employers (the card check system is supposed to keep this info out of an employer’s hands, but let’s be real, that’s not a guarantee) and less-scrupulous union organizations. Truthfully, I think that there needs to be better enforcement of the rules surrounding unionization, such as employers not being permitted to dictate the timeline of a ballot through loopholes to gain time to impose a broader influence (such as bribery via private pay raises to discourage unionization and other scummy tactics) or having any reasonable suspicion of influence on employees by their employers during this period automatically certifying a union without a vote. Card check is better for unions, secret ballot without better rules for running them benefits employers. There’s something in between that’s best for workers independent of these 2 forces, especially considering the proposed option the NDP was touting makes electing to form a union less private than voting in provincial and federal elections.

This idea that the NDP is tied to union organizations actually highlights another aspect of the Greens’ appeal to voters: while it’s likely due to not having much in the way of elected power, the Greens aren’t really beholden to big associated groups.

The Liberals are supported by one half of Bay Street’s millionaires and voted in by progressives willing to compromise on their larger desires to draw in centrists, the Tories are supported by energy sector tycoons and the other half of Bay Street (once Reform and PC parties merged specifically) and voted in by anyone decidedly right of centre in the given moment, the NDP is supported by union organizations and the dead (no shit, a bulk of their funding was willed to them by dead progressives, moreso than any other party by a large margin) and voted in by the further left and socialists. What’s unique to the Greens is that, seemingly by design but most likely by circumstance, there’s not any bagmen to speak of, no deep roots to organizations with deep pockets, except for those that donate to them specifically for their pro-science and pro-environment values. No one is putting the David Suzuki Foundation on the same strata of corruptive influence as corporations. If such corruptive influences on the Greens exist, they’re certainly not readily apparent to the general public, which makes scrutiny of them all the more important when they’re gaining ground.
Not being able to have their principles bought out is something that would appeal to voters in ANY country but Canada in particular, partly because they see scandals like SNC-Lavalin from the Liberals time and again, but aren’t stupid enough to think they’ll be somehow be free of undue influence by corporate interest with the Tories who have their own storied history there, while those whiplash-inducing moments I mentioned earlier that are meant to appease labour unions and the party’s inability to reconcile those moments with its political positions weaken leftist opinion of the NDP for the same reason. And the Bloc is.... well, the Bloc, dead in the water because no one really wants to fight for Quebec sovereignty anymore, as evidenced by the PQ and QS’ resounding provincial defeat, being the loudest voices for it.
On this point, the Greens stand alone, and they’re leaning into it to their benefit in extremely unsubtle ways. When Andrew Weaver announced that the BC Greens would take no corporate or union money, their funding very sharply increased. It’s my understanding that this “party of the people” approach was rolled out by Peter Bevan-Baker in PEI. And given what they have in fundraising compared to other parties and Weaver twisting Horgan’s arm on this issue, I’d be inclined to believe them when they say that.

While I’m sure there’s some truth to what people say about their political predilections, I’m also aware that a lot of it is hold-over from Jim Harris’ tenure as leader and all the diet libertarianism he brought to the table.
We don’t have to wait for an election platform to dissect the Green position, since they already have a document that outlines the guiding principles they use to form their platforms. It’s a bit robust and outlines a few of the issues I have with the party (iffy on their anti-nuclear position even though I agree with the reason for their conclusion and definitely opposed to their anti-GMO position, personally), but if there’s something decidedly right-wing about the modern Greens, it’ll be easily identifiable through this document and such information should probably be teased out of it.

“Nobody in the office of the leader of the official opposition was in touch with Premier Ford’s office about his decision to adjourn the legislature.”
Double bullshit.

Scheer just better hope that Kenney, Moe and Palliser can carry their weight, as well, because he’s inextricably tied to them, too. And if he didn’t want that to be the case, he shouldn’t have opted to do this:




popcorn.gif

This should be interesting...
I’m not sure “interesting” is the word I’d use, since no matter who’s responsible, someone is gonna get torpedoed, and I’d bet the only ones who likely aren’t responsible for this are the ones we want to be responsible for this.

That is um, uh. Quite the AMA. Aliens, Illuminati, The Cabal, Gods and Religion. Its like Peak Reddit with so many Conspiracy Theories flying around. That is quite the fascinating read just from a "watching a train crash in slow motion" perspective
Assuming it’s actually Hellyer (which I kinda doubt), it IS Peak Reddit, where they’re more interested in listening to a clearly dementia-suffering nonagenarian to hear the “truth” about the world than... y’know, listening to people who matter.
 
Last edited:

djkimothy

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,039
Glad the government is doing this but there's still much to do. Include grocery bags and other material pollutants.

Straws are just the tip of the iceberg.

 

Tiktaalik

Member
Oct 25, 2017
966
Honestly I'm not that big of a fan of going after single use plastics and especially straws.

For one thing it's been noted many times by advocate groups for disabled persons that straws are a very important tool for people with various mobility challenges, and there's no real good alternative to the sort of single use plastic straws that the government is seeking to ban. Seemingly no one cares about this and this policy is steam rolling forward because it's low hanging fruit that makes us feel good that we're doing "something" about the environment.

More importantly though, who cares? The whole issue feels like early 1990s era environmentalism, overly concerned about 'litterbugs' which is wildly irrelevant to the real issues we face, which is that our entire society is oriented around burning carbon and we need to pull back from this by making big changes at the industrial level if we're to avoid the catastrophic impacts of rising world temperatures.

Banning straws is like a feel good distraction from talking about the actual core problems and actual difficult and expensive changes that are required.
 

Hours Left

Member
Oct 26, 2017
6,743
Honestly I'm not that big of a fan of going after single use plastics and especially straws.

For one thing it's been noted many times by advocate groups for disabled persons that straws are a very important tool for people with various mobility challenges, and there's no real good alternative to the sort of single use plastic straws that the government is seeking to ban. Seemingly no one cares about this and this policy is steam rolling forward because it's low hanging fruit that makes us feel good that we're doing "something" about the environment.

More importantly though, who cares? The whole issue feels like early 1990s era environmentalism, overly concerned about 'litterbugs' which is wildly irrelevant to the real issues we face, which is that our entire society is oriented around burning carbon and we need to pull back from this by making big changes at the industrial level if we're to avoid the catastrophic impacts of rising world temperatures.

Banning straws is like a feel good distraction from talking about the actual core problems and actual difficult and expensive changes that are required.
You should definitely do some research on the effects of plastics on our ecosystem before posting something like this.

Also, there are alternatives to plastic straws, with more coming out all the time. (It’s set to become a huge industry with all the bans that are coming.)
 

Terrell

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,822
Canada
Grocery bags and single-use food containers are included, guys, read the article. It says that single-use plastics AS A WHOLE are under scrutiny, rather than singling out the straw.
As long as they’re replaced by a good alternative, I’m good with that. There’s a lot of plant-based plastic-like substances that properly biodegrade and have the same strength and usability.

All that said, alternatives to plastic straws pose their own usability challenges, along with health and safety concerns, for the disabled. I consider that category as worthy of consideration in plastic bans as plastic syringes and sterile packaging efforts in the medical field, but aside from understandable exceptions, everything else is fair game.
 

Tiktaalik

Member
Oct 25, 2017
966
You should definitely do some research on the effects of plastics on our ecosystem before posting something like this.
No one is saying that littering the ocean with plastic is fine, but in context, this is not the problem we need to be focused on right now.

There are concrete limits to the time our policy creating staff and politicians have. What is the opportunity cost of creating a policy that limits plastic waste nation wide? Significant!

City of Vancouver was recently set to ban straws this summer, except they're delaying this because staff realized that they were ramming this through even though the alternatives are poor and disabled persons are severely affected. Now they're going to be spending more time consulting with an eye to introduce this in 2020.

Now what's a better use of City of Vancouver staff time given our immediate environmental problems? Consulting on how to implement a straw ban, or working on land use policies that create a more walkable, bikeable city that reduces car use and reduces CO2 use?

I'd favour holding off on a straw ban and these sort of adjacent policies for 5 years or so and focus 100% on the near term goal of reducing CO2 emissions.
 

TheTrinity

Member
Oct 25, 2017
255
That's one step, the other is excessive packaging on goods. Got a dress shirt recently and it was wrapped in like 3 layers of film plastic, multiple pins through to hold everything exactly right plus the structural cardboard in the fold and under the collar. It was an insane amount of packaging for just a shirt.

Fold it and wrap it up in some recyclable paper and call it a day, the shirt will be fine.
 

Hours Left

Member
Oct 26, 2017
6,743
No one is saying that littering the ocean with plastic is fine, but in context, this is not the problem we need to be focused on right now.

There are concrete limits to the time our policy creating staff and politicians have. What is the opportunity cost of creating a policy that limits plastic waste nation wide? Significant!

City of Vancouver was recently set to ban straws this summer, except they're delaying this because staff realized that they were ramming this through even though the alternatives are poor and disabled persons are severely affected. Now they're going to be spending more time consulting with an eye to introduce this in 2020.

Now what's a better use of City of Vancouver staff time given our immediate environmental problems? Consulting on how to implement a straw ban, or working on land use policies that create a more walkable, bikeable city that reduces car use and reduces CO2 use?

I'd favour holding off on a straw ban and these sort of adjacent policies for 5 years or so and focus 100% on the near term goal of reducing CO2 emissions.
We can (and have to) do both things at once.

“One issue at a time” governing is useless and futile.
 

Tiktaalik

Member
Oct 25, 2017
966
We can (and have to) do both things at once.

“One issue at a time” governing is useless and futile.
Opportunity Cost is a thing.

There's only one City of Vancouver council, only 24 hours in a day and a fixed amount of city staff. We could add more city staff, but that costs money and that risks political consequences of inducing a tax revolt and an election of a more environmentally regressive council in four years. So yes we have to make choices and prioritize what we do.
 

Terrell

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,822
Canada
Opportunity Cost is a thing.

There's only one City of Vancouver council, only 24 hours in a day and a fixed amount of city staff. We could add more city staff, but that costs money and that risks political consequences of inducing a tax revolt and an election of a more environmentally regressive council in four years. So yes we have to make choices and prioritize what we do.
Let’s not extrapolate the City of Vancouver’s poorly-considered straw ban (which is admittedly a drop in the bucket wrt the ocean plastics issue) with action against single-use plastics as a whole, which if performed correctly, will accommodate the communities and people that rely on them for public health and safety concerns much more readily than the City’s plan did.

Environment Minister McKenna has been preparing to roll out their plan for a minimum of a year, if interviews on the subject are any indication. So unless you’re going to accuse Minister McKenna of wasting government time and energy on a file she’s directly responsible for, perhaps leave it at that.

And I assume this is a platform position that you disagree with the federal NDP about, since they’ve proposed the same actions against single-use plastics. After all, there’s better uses of time, right?

They should be banning fossil fuel cars/buses not single use plastics.
That’s... a lot of monetary reimbursement to dole out.
 

Vamphuntr

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,372
Glad the government is doing this but there's still much to do. Include grocery bags and other material pollutants.

Straws are just the tip of the iceberg.

Good idea. At least it will be less stuff that will end up in a landfill. Already using reusable bags for grocery and reusable contained. It's dancing around the elephant in the room for the Liberals though. They need Alberta's oil for the country's GDP but at the same time they need anything Green because it's really popular right now and May is rising so you get something like this.
 

Tiktaalik

Member
Oct 25, 2017
966
Let’s not extrapolate the City of Vancouver’s poorly-considered straw ban (which is admittedly a drop in the bucket wrt the ocean plastics issue) with action against single-use plastics as a whole, which if performed correctly, will accommodate the communities and people that rely on them for public health and safety concerns much more readily than the City’s plan did.

Environment Minister McKenna has been preparing to roll out their plan for a minimum of a year, if interviews on the subject are any indication. So unless you’re going to accuse Minister McKenna of wasting government time and energy on a file she’s directly responsible for, perhaps leave it at that.

And I assume this is a platform position that you disagree with the federal NDP about, since they’ve proposed the same actions against single-use plastics. After all, there’s better uses of time, right?
Minister McKenna has absolutely wasted government time on this. I only raised City of Vancouver as an example because it's a relatable example where one can easily get a grip about the sort of resources that are being expended. Whatever amount of Federal civil servants and public policy experts that worked with McKenna would have been better utilized tasked with something else.

I don't agree with the NDP on this either. A straw ban is smart feel good politics, and yes absolutely in general terms we should limit single use plastics, but this is a poor use of resources in the grand scheme of things when one considers the near term threat of rising temperatures.

My position is that our environmental policy should be all hands on deck to reduce CO2 emissions. The only exemption I can think of would be work to protect flora and fauna threatened with near term extinction. (if we don't do something about CO2 emissions that set of threatened flora and fauna is gonna grow...)
 

Terrell

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,822
Canada
It works for the Liberals.

Who cares about credit?
You seemed to have attributed the ad to the Liberals, just making sure it’s clear where this is coming from as we discuss it.

And it does puzzle me that the Liberals haven’t been able to mount an effective counter-offensive themselves and it took external forces to throw a punch that really lands; it’s not like he’s not left himself wide open for them. But perhaps that’s the hope from the Liberals, that enough external resistance will let them walk into the leaders debate with a weakened Scheer AND clean hands. I honestly don’t know, a current strategist would have to read us in on the party’s tactics, but it does seem like a reasonable strategy, though I’d say it’s a gamble that I wouldn’t think they had the position to confidently make.

Minister McKenna has absolutely wasted government time on this. I only raised City of Vancouver as an example because it's a relatable example where one can easily get a grip about the sort of resources that are being expended. Whatever amount of Federal civil servants and public policy experts that worked with McKenna would have been better utilized tasked with something else.

I don't agree with the NDP on this either. A straw ban is smart feel good politics, and yes absolutely in general terms we should limit single use plastics, but this is a poor use of resources in the grand scheme of things when one considers the near term threat of rising temperatures.

My position is that our environmental policy should be all hands on deck to reduce CO2 emissions. The only exemption I can think of would be work to protect flora and fauna threatened with near term extinction. (if we don't do something about CO2 emissions that set of threatened flora and fauna is gonna grow...)
Again, this isn’t purely a plastic straw ban, either from the Liberals or the NDP proposal, so please stop reducing it to that, you do yourself a huge disservice by continuing to do so.
And do you honestly believe that keeping plastic out of the ocean isn’t protecting endangered marine populations? Because that would certainly be a... unique take on the situation.
 

Terrell

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,822
Canada
Yeah that's a weird angle.

It's not weakness they're in on it together.



You don't do this out of "weakness".
You’re only as strong as your weakest link. Allying with Ford weakens them all, but Scheer most of all, even if only due to public perception. Like I said earlier, if another one of them stumbles and the public loses whatever faith they had in conservative governance as opposed to the alternative, Tories can kiss their hope of forming the next federal government goodbye.
 

Kernel

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,400
You’re only as strong as your weakest link. Allying with Ford weakens them all, but Scheer most of all, even if only due to public perception. Like I said earlier, if another one of them stumbles and the public loses whatever faith they had in conservative governance as opposed to the alternative, Tories can kiss their hope of forming the next federal government goodbye.
Trudeau should flat out ask Andrew whether he supports Ford's destruction of Ontario's services and whether he'd defend or even strengthen the Canada Health Act.

Because Andrew will duck that question.
 

Terrell

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,822
Canada
Trudeau should flat out ask Andrew whether he supports Ford's destruction of Ontario's services and whether he'd defend or even strengthen the Canada Health Act.

Because Andrew will duck that question.
When he has to field the question at the leader debates from Trudeau, Singh, May and likely even Bernier and Blanchet, it’ll be a lot harder to duck it.
 

djkimothy

Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,039
I’m just gonna leave this tweet here because it’s so pants on head stupid that even my mayor Jim Watson chimed in. It’s literally the Canadian version of the “Thanks Obama” meme.

 

Kernel

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,400
Well, it never really got to work because Obama was re-elected then his term was expired.

But i think democrats eventually co-opted the meme as their own as a sarcastic commentary.
He lost a ton of seats in Congress including a Supreme Court seat due to obstruction. Only had a majority for 2/8 years I think.

Now look at how much Trudeau has dropped due to SNC and the CPC hate train.