Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[Ped]

Originally Posted by woob

Can't Count on Carney. Oh crap, that's 4 words. Need to simplify.

Can't Consider Carney!


Might be too many syllables though

[WideReceiver]

Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov

Yes. it is probably the stupidest post on CP in the past 20 years.

That’s a low bar.

[WideReceiver]

Reporters can’t travel with PP? It’s like they want to lose the election.

[Looch City]

They don't understand that PP needs his uninterrupted alone time to come up with new verb the nouns.

It's not easy ya know!

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by WideReceiver

Reporters can’t travel with PP? It’s like they want to lose the election.

He does. PM of a minority government, leader of the opposition, or the right wing grift circuit? One of these is far, far more lucrative than the others, and it has about the same amount of power. Easy choice really.

[WideReceiver]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

He does. PM of a minority government, leader of the opposition, or the right wing grift circuit? One of these is far, far more lucrative than the others, and it has about the same amount of power. Easy choice really.

Disagree. He wants to win but it doesn’t show.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

You mean he said that there wouldn’t be any conflict of interest and now it comes out that he’s implementing screens so there won’t be any conflicts of interest?

Diabolical.

His assets create the conflict of interest. The conflict of interest arises because of that. He was asked if his assets would be a conflict and he failed to answer yes. Him and his team knew they are a conflict because they have already proposed measure to address the conflict. But the conflict exists which is what the media was asking about yesterday.

[Looch City]

Carney's conflict [of interest] creates carnage in Canada, casting chaos, crippling communities, and consuming countless citizens.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by belsarius

The CPC can't seem to help but shoot themselves in the foot.

Not allowing reporters to travel with PP is just going to stoke the anti-MSM fire and make is easier to tie them to Trump's attack on the media.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/con...rail-1.7487068

Yeah, this is straight out of the Trump playbook of trying to demonize the "MSM."

If you think Trump is a fascist, I don't see how you can see someone completely copying his playbook and think "Nah, that's different."

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Looch City

Carney's conflict [of interest] creates carnage in Canada, casting chaos, crippling communities, and consuming countless citizens.

Nice try, but that’s “Carbon-tax Carney” to you!

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by Torture

So, what's everyone's bets on when the election is called?

Might be later than expected as the Liberals only have 184 candidates for the 343 ridings across the country and a number of the vacancies are from former Cabinet Ministers and other high profile MPs who are not running again. They are going to have to work hard to fill those openings or they can take the Alberta NDP 2015 approach and just put anyone with a pulse on the ballot with potentially poor vetting.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

His assets create the conflict of interest. The conflict of interest arises because of that. He was asked if his assets would be a conflict and he failed to answer yes. Him and his team knew they are a conflict because they have already proposed measure to address the conflict. But the conflict exists which is what the media was asking about yesterday.

Yeah that’s not how it works. His assets could cause a potential conflict of interest, so the blind trust and screens ensure there is no conflict of interest (or further minimize any potential).

Assets can’t just be a conflict of interest unless there is an interest they’re in conflict with. Even PP has potential conflicts of interest, which he’ll have to put into a blind trust and will likely have screens in place regarding certain policies related to housing.

If the assets are in a blind trust, and screens are in place for any policies with a direct effect… where is the conflict of interest?

I’ll answer for you and save the struggle: there isn’t one.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

If the assets are in a blind trust, and screens are in place for any policies with a direct effect… where is the conflict of interest?

I’ll answer for you and save the struggle: there isn’t one.

I know it is tough for you to understand but I thought the CBC article would lay it out clearly enough for you. A screen only exists when there is a conflict of interest. The screen doesn't eliminate a conflict of interest but it mitigates against an individual with a conflict from influencing a decision.

Under the Conflict of Interest Act, a screen is agreed upon by a public office holder and the Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner to "minimize the possibility of conflicts arising between the public duties of the public office holder and their private interests or those of their relatives and friends."

Screens are made public and include a description of the conflict of interest, the names of the individuals and/or entities involved, the title of the screen administrator and a statement from the public office holder agreeing to abstain from any discussions, decisions, debate or votes concerning the subject of the conflict of interest.

A screen includes:

- a description of the conflict of interest;

- the names of the individuals and/or entities involved;

- the title of the screen administrator and a description of their responsibilities; and

- a statement that you agree to abstain from any discussions, decisions, debate or votes concerning the matter that forms the subject of the conflict of interest.

​Conflict of interest screens are established with your agreement where it is likely that you will be involved in discussions or decision-making processes that provide an opportunity to further your private interests or those of a relative or friend, or to improperly further another person's private interests.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by rubecube

O'Toole is likely PM right now if he didn't have to cow to the far-right while running.

I was seriously debating voting conservative for the first time in my life last election right up until O'Toole started spouting anti-vaccine bull#### to appease the deplorables

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

I know it is tough for you to understand but I thought the CBC article would lay it out clearly enough for you. A screen only exists when there is a conflict of interest. The screen doesn't eliminate a conflict of interest but it mitigates against an individual with a conflict from influencing a decision.

Jesus christ, use your noggin a little bit harder and figure this one out. Read the portion of the second quote you cut out right before it. Hell, just re-read the first quote. Or even just figure out what “preventative” means. It’s a common word.

I hate to use a vaccine analogy when talking to a right winger, but you’re one of those people who thinks you’re only supposed to get a flu shot when you already have the flu, don’t you?

A conflict of interest screen is a preventive compliance measure, agreed upon pursuant to section 29 of the Act by a public office holder and the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner, to assist the public office holder in avoiding conflicts of interest. A screen also seeks to minimize the possibility of conflicts arising between the public duties of the public office holder and their private interests or those of their relatives and friends.

Maybe it’s best to just stick to chasing Fuzz and diss around trying to bully them. This clearly is not your speed.

[sharkov]

Can’t we just get a wartime coalition government of liberal, conservative and ndp instead of eating our energy iinfighting

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Jesus christ, use your noggin a little bit harder and figure this one out. Read the portion of the second quote you cut out right before it. Hell, just re-read the first quote. Or even just figure out what “preventative” means. It’s a common word.

I hate to use a vaccine analogy when talking to a right winger, but you’re one of those people who thinks you’re only supposed to get a flu shot when you already have the flu, don’t you?



Maybe it’s best to just stick to chasing Fuzz and diss around trying to bully them. This clearly is not your speed.

Conflict of Interest: A conflict of interest occurs when an individual's personal interests – family, friendships, financial, or social factors – could compromise his or her judgment, decisions, or actions in the workplace.

If Carney had a significant interest in BAM, wouldn't he presently be in a conflict of interest, as I think BAM is currently applying for money from the Federal Government?

I guess you could argue that, if he did have a significant interest in BAM, and he hasn't had to make any judgement, decision, or action as PM yet with regard to BAM, then he isn't in a conflict of interest at the moment. And if he is ever called upon to do so, the screen would probably make him recuse himself, therefore preventing any conflict of interest.

It would be much nicer around here if you could tone down your mean attitude.

[curves2000]

Carney's assets shouldn't be that big of an issue but he's thinking like a former investment banker on the buy/sell side where there is suppose to not be a conflict.

He is in politics now and it's a different scenario. He is probably without a doubt, stupidly wealthy by politician standards. That isn't an issue and good on him, the level of work and pressure working at Goldman, BOC, BOE and other investment firms is immense.

What I suspect part of the issue is may be more hypocritical investments vs personal policies and policies he may want to govern on. Heavy energy investments, green energy investments, private placement for specific firms in North America etc.

A huge portion of Canadian's didn't know who he was a few weeks ago and I would wager a lot of people may not even know we have a new PM. His rise to power is different. I don't begrudge the guy at all, good on him for all his success. There may or may not be conflicts but I don't think a traditional approach is warranted here. This isn't about a few hundred shares of RBC Bank and holding some Canadian Tire stock in his TFSA (which he helped create by the way)

I suspect he will be reluctantly forced to disclose a lot more. This will be a story that his team will want to try and get out of the way quickly. People may disagree but the truth is, as a former banker myself, people hate bankers. A joke I heard once is if you ask 100 people what their thoughts are, 102 will tell you that they hate them.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

Conflict of Interest: A conflict of interest occurs when an individual's personal interests – family, friendships, financial, or social factors – could compromise his or her judgment, decisions, or actions in the workplace.

If Carney had a significant interest in BAM, wouldn't he presently be in a conflict of interest, as I think BAM is currently applying for money from the Federal Government?

I guess you could argue that, if he did have a significant interest in BAM, and he hasn't had to make any judgement, decision, or action as PM yet with regard to BAM, then he isn't in a conflict of interest at the moment. And if he is ever called upon to do so, the screen would probably make him recuse himself, therefore preventing any conflict of interest.

It would be much nicer around here if you could tone down your mean attitude.

If he’s not involved in the decision over whether they get money, there’s no conflict of interest.

And hard disagree. My attitude keeps things light while people like yourself are casually complaining about indigenous people or the fact that not everyone can own guns. Gotta balance the crazy somehow.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Jason14h

If Carney was the PM for the newly elected cons he would be called the favorite CalgaryPuck buzzword - a deplorable . Not caring about the environment . Making minority policies less of a focus vs general economic growth policies.

I guess it depends on how much of his soul he had to sell in your hypothesis contrary to fact to become the Conservative leader.


"Deplorables" refers to specific types of Conservatives, like the types who don't care about anyone other than themselves and are often too stupid to even do that properly. Anti-vaxxers and religious bigots tend to earn the label - not red Tories or blue Grits.