Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Do you really think a former professional sports media reporter is the best qualified person to get your political opinions from?

I'm not sure what his former job has to do with anything.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

I'm not sure what his former job has to do with anything.

You don’t think his qualifications should matter when he, as a “news reporter”, switches gears from reporting the news to political commentary on the air?

“The city is broke” really sets the tone for the whole rant and it just devolves into another example of what is wrong with the media.

[Cappy]

I'm glad to see Sid Seixeiro is still as insufferable as always

[CaptainCrunch]

Interview with the soon to be former ethics commissioner, where he states his frustrations.

https://nationalpost.com/news/politi...iberals-lapses

“The public has to believe that ethics are taken seriously, and they have yet to have any big evidence of that since 2018,” Dion said in an interview with the National Post shortly after announcing he was leaving his post for health reasons.

After five years on the job, Dion said that parliamentarians’ knowledge and concern about their ethics and conflict of interest obligations isn’t worse than when he started, but it’s also not getting better. And that’s of great concern to him.

“The act has been there for 17 years for God’s sake, so maybe the time has come to do something different so that we don’t keep repeating the same errors. After 17 years, maybe we should realize that something is not working,” he said.

n an interview, ethics expert and associate professor at York University’s school of public policy and administration Ian Stedman shared Dion’s observation.
“These are not new rules. You can’t make these mistakes, you make everyone look bad, and you make public trust decline by making these mistakes,” Stedman said.

Over his mandate, Dion’s office gave 140 presentations on ethics and conflict of interest obligations to thousands of attendees, one third of which he gave himself. It also offers virtual training to any MP or staffers who want to learn more about their obligations under the law, and has advisers available to answer any ethics queries.


And yet that did not prevent International Trade Minister Mary Ng from telling a House committee last week that it would be helpful if the commissioner’s office offered “additional” ethics training to political staff after no one in her office raised a flag when she dolled out two contracts to a firm owned by a “close friend.”

“That’s like if I drive in my car this afternoon and I drive through a red light and then argued with a (police) officer that it was too bad because I should have received training about red lights. It’s a convenient excuse, in my view,” he said.

“Giving a contract to a friend, I don’t think you require much training to understand this isn’t appropriate,” he added.

But he also said the public is understandably frustrated at what appears to be a lack of accountability from law-breaking MPs.

“No one’s resigning, no one’s forced to resign and no one is shuffled. And there’s no appearance of even any sort of accountability, beyond having to stand in front of that question period and say a quick mea culpa,” he said.

“It’s really dissatisfying that these regimes work that way, and the solution has to lie with culture of accountability within parliamentary democracies.”

I mean as much as we want the government to reform the ethics rules or increase penalties its never going to happen as long as there's a sense of entitlement with government members.

Why increase the fines? When right now its worth it to do a little personal enriching or helping your pals out, I mean the worst that can happen is a $500.00 fine, and a party that won't force you to leave their seat because of the fact that if that was the punishment Trudeau would have been gone a long time ago.

I mean if I was in government and I had the ability to give my friends a sole source contract worth lets say $30,000 to help a brother out. Or if I had the ability to accept a personal gift in exchange for making an endorsement call for a friends or fundraisers business. Why wouldn't I? I get a fine, pretend I'm sorry, get to keep my six figure salary and pension.

I mean I laughed at Mary Ng with her little apology that she made a mistake. Then said she'd signed a promise not to do it again. These people literally sign an oath of office when they take their roles as MP's that basically say you agree to the code of conduct of the office. And on this new document that she probably scrawled on a napkin, what's the punishment if she does violate again? That's right, nothing.

[Northendzone]

it might be interesting to see if MP's tighten up their game if some of those with flexible ethnics - looking at you mary ng - get punished by the voters and do not get re-elected at the enxt opportunity

the act is a joke. I'd imagine in private enterprise, people would be fired for being so dumb

[Northendzone]

it might be interesting to see if MP's tighten up their game if some of those with flexible ethnics - looking at you mary ng - get punished by the voters and do not get re-elected at the enxt opportunity

the act is a joke. I'd imagine in private enterprise, people would be fired for being so dumb

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Do you really think a former professional sports media reporter is the best qualified person to get your political opinions from?

The Prime Minister was a drama teacher.

[Locke]

Lol! "Mistakes."

They're not 'mistakes.' The punishment is laughable so they just dont care.

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by Cappy

I'm glad to see Sid Seixeiro is still as insufferable as always

Disagree. It was kind of nice to see somebody care about public finances in this country, for once. A little angry for me for sure, but nice to see somebody give a ####.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Northendzone

it might be interesting to see if MP's tighten up their game if some of those with flexible ethnics - looking at you mary ng - get punished by the voters and do not get re-elected at the enxt opportunity

the act is a joke. I'd imagine in private enterprise, people would be fired for being so dumb

Never going to happen, its too much risk for an incoming government as these politicians gets seduced by their influence and the money and their god complexes. Why enact something that could lead to the downfall of your government?

Remember in 2015 the Liberal's campaigned that they were going to be the most honest and transparent government evvvvvaaaaa.

Now its impossible to find a thick black felt pen in a store in Ottawa and the government has hired a consulting firm to handle redacting documents before they're released to committees or journalists.

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

The Prime Minister was a drama teacher.

Exactly, I think people who immediately discounted him for that were also wrong. You can disagree with his take but his former job doesn't make what he's saying any more or less true.

Perhaps we could get a list of professions that are allowed to espouse political opinions.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

Exactly, I think people who immediately discounted him for that were also wrong. You can disagree with his take but his former job doesn't make what he's saying any more or less true.

Perhaps we could get a list of professions that are allowed to espouse political opinions.

Well #s 1&2 on that list are definitely

1) Athletes*
2) Celebrities*






*That I don't agree with

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

Disagree. It was kind of nice to see somebody care about public finances in this country, for once. A little angry for me for sure, but nice to see somebody give a ####.

How does making statements like the city is broke, when it clearly isn’t, helpful?

Why is it a good thing for people in positions where the expectation is that what they are stating are facts to be expressing their personal political opinions in that role.

Don’t you see how that is problematic?

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

Exactly, I think people who immediately discounted him for that were also wrong. You can disagree with his take but his former job doesn't make what he's saying any more or less true.

Perhaps we could get a list of professions that are allowed to espouse political opinions.

Maybe we could just make a list of when it is appropriate for them to do so.

If any random person were able to use the same platform he did I wouldn’t have any issue with it, but when you’re a news reporter I think you should stick to reporting facts otherwise I think it quickly becomes a slippery slope that has a negative impact. Regardless of whether I agree or disagree with their take.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by Mr.Coffee

The Prime Minister was a drama teacher.

Yes, and he was elected to be prime minister by voters. Sid is an employee of a private business who apparently doesn’t realize there’s a difference between sports broadcasting(where sharing opinions are part of the job) and regular news broadcasting where ideally you keep opinions out of it.

Do you have anything that suggests his opinions are well informed or are you just happy to see someone appear to care? If it’s the latter I guess my only question would be why should someone’s emotion be a primary consideration for determining whether or not what they are saying and when they are saying it is appropriate?

[corporatejay]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Yes, and he was elected to be prime minister by voters. Sid is an employee of a private business who apparently doesn’t realize there’s a difference between sports broadcasting(where sharing opinions are part of the job) and regular news broadcasting where ideally you keep opinions out of it.

Do you have anything that suggests his opinions are well informed or are you just happy to see someone appear to care? If it’s the latter I guess my only question would be why should someone’s emotion be a primary consideration for determining whether or not what they are saying and when they are saying it is appropriate?

His show is the equivalent of the view. It's infotainment, he's not a journalist.

[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

His show is the equivalent of the view. It's infotainment, he's not a journalist.

Fair enough, I don’t watch breakfast television and thought it was essentially a morning news show.

[Wastedyouth]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

Do you really think a former professional sports media reporter is the best qualified person to get your political opinions from?

Most politicians aren't qualified to give good political opinions.... so....

[Mr.Coffee]

Originally Posted by iggy_oi

How does making statements like the city is broke, when it clearly isn’t, helpful?

Why is it a good thing for people in positions where the expectation is that what they are stating are facts to be expressing their personal political opinions in that role.

Don’t you see how that is problematic?

I do see how it's problematic but I also view hyperbolism as something that:

a) has always, and will always happen. As such to an extent, understanding hyperbolic statements and relevancy of them and the level of how hyperbolic they are is important;
b) is a function of human nature in order to communicate a point, sometimes effectively and sometimes not- sometimes weakening a stance, so there's nuance at play here;
c) always should be correctly called out, like you're doing, and adjusted to clarify for accuracy; and
d) something that media and tropes on both sides of the political spectrum do literally all the time.

I am sure Sid and everybody watching can put together that Toronto is not literally broke. I didn't really interpret what he said to mean it was a "fact"- I thought he was just implying that expenditures have been very high and budgets very tight.

Notwithstanding all of the above, I agree with you that accuracy in statements generally speaking is welcome. Lastly, sometimes emotion is necessary to effectively communicate a message as well.

[Erick Estrada]

Originally Posted by corporatejay

Exactly, I think people who immediately discounted him for that were also wrong. You can disagree with his take but his former job doesn't make what he's saying any more or less true.

Perhaps we could get a list of professions that are allowed to espouse political opinions.

Huh? For those people to be wrong he would actually have proven himself to be competent and trustworthy.