Canadian Federal Politics Thread v5

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by TherapyforGlencross

He’s gotta speak French. It’s a requirement.

Yes, I’m cutting him some slack. I’d cut slack for PP as well, although, him being a politician and living in Ottawa for 20 years, you’d think he’d improve upon it. Regardless, I’m picturing myself on that stage, and using the incorrect word in my second language to try to get my point across.

Anyways… to quote the NP, here’s a passage:



FYI, he said this in French.

Carney would only use emergency powers to accelerate projects if provinces are in support of that said project. Meaning, he would not use emergency powers to impose against the wishes of the provinces. I’m assuming emergency powers would be used to fast track regulatory and various study (environmental such as excess soil, biological, ect ect) manners. If I remember correctly, he said something similar (in english) with his interview with CBC.

So what part is contradictory? Again, i’m assuming it may just have to do with a french language miscalculation.


edit: funny enough, PP reflected on Carney’s quote:



PP is the one who appears to be disingenuous. Note how PP says “force”. Carney not once said he’d use emergency powers to force provinces against their will. But rather, accelerate. Sounds like pure semantics, but I beg to differ. Theres a difference between the two. If you can find me a quote where Carney uses the word force, I’ll retract my statement. I couldn’t find any.

For what it’s worth, I was planning to vote for PP (reluctantly) this election, but I’ve made the switch to Carney. Take that for what you will, considering I think it was you who was wondering if I was left or right leaning.

In English, in Kelowna, Carney never made a distinction saying that provincial or FN support would be a requirement.

He said:

Something that my government is going to do is to use all of the powers of the federal government, including the emergency powers of the federal government, to accelerate the major projects that we need in order to build this economy and take on the Americans

[Doctorfever]

Originally Posted by TherapyforGlencross

He’s gotta speak French. It’s a requirement.

Yes, I’m cutting him some slack. I’d cut slack for PP as well, although, him being a politician and living in Ottawa for 20 years, you’d think he’d improve upon it. Regardless, I’m picturing myself on that stage, and using the incorrect word in my second language to try to get my point across.

Anyways… to quote the NP, here’s a passage:



FYI, he said this in French.

Carney would only use emergency powers to accelerate projects if provinces are in support of that said project. Meaning, he would not use emergency powers to impose against the wishes of the provinces. I’m assuming emergency powers would be used to fast track regulatory and various study (environmental such as excess soil, biological, ect ect) manners. If I remember correctly, he said something similar (in english) with his interview with CBC.

So what part is contradictory? Again, i’m assuming it may just have to do with a french language miscalculation.


edit: funny enough, PP reflected on Carney’s quote:



PP is the one who appears to be disingenuous. Note how PP says “force”. Carney not once said he’d use emergency powers to force provinces against their will. But rather, accelerate. Sounds like pure semantics, but I beg to differ. Theres a difference between the two. If you can find me a quote where Carney uses the word force, I’ll retract my statement. I couldn’t find any.

For what it’s worth, I was planning to vote for PP (reluctantly) this election, but I’ve made the switch to Carney. Take that for what you will, considering I think it was you who was wondering if I was left or right leaning.

Thank you for the reply.

You think Carney would use emergency powers to sort of bypass environmental regulations and concerns on projects? That is quite interesting.

Ya, PP was a bit disingenuous with his comment in the article.

However, I don’t give Carney a free pass for contradicting himself in different languages.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

In English, in Kelowna, Carney never made a distinction saying that provincial or FN support would be a requirement.

He said:

He also never said he’d force anything through or against the wishes of any Province or FN.

So how is it lying?

[Ped]

Nanos poll says 40 percent of Canadians think Carney is best to deal with Trump, versus 26 percent for PP and 13 percent for Freeland.


https://www.theglobeandmail.com/poli...-tariffs-poll/

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

He also never said he’d force anything through or against the wishes of any Province or FN.

So how is it lying?

Therein lies the problem, he tells western Canada (English Canada) that his government will do everything possible including using emergency powers to get things done but turns around and tells Quebec that he won't do anything that they don't support. He's just telling everyone what they want to hear inorder to get support. His plan is clear as mud.

[Winsor_Pilates]

Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov

well it makes way more sense there than the Calgary to Edmonton one.

Unless it's just a one way out of Edmonton

[TherapyforGlencross]

Originally Posted by Doctorfever

Thank you for the reply.

You think Carney would use emergency powers to sort of bypass environmental regulations and concerns on projects? That is quite interesting.

Ya, PP was a bit disingenuous with his comment in the article.

However, I don’t give Carney a free pass for contradicting himself in different languages.

I don’t think he’d sort of bypass but rather:
1. Accelerate procurement processes through emergency powers
2. Accelerate the approval and review process of various studies - review processes for environmental can take a very a long time. That, or another possibility is having Environment Canada complete the studies rather than sending out bid to tenders/RFP’s to private consulting firms. I admit that the latter is unlikely to happen, given that it doesn’t really boost the economy and government is slow. Pricing of the projects would likely skyrocket as well.


To your last point, fair enough. The PM definitely needs to be proficient in french affairs, otherwise situations like this occurs.

[TherapyforGlencross]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

Therein lies the problem, he tells western Canada (English Canada) that his government will do everything possible including using emergency powers to get things done but turns around and tells Quebec that he won't do anything that they don't support. He's just telling everyone what they want to hear inorder to get support. His plan is clear as mud.

I don’t think it’s that black and white.

It’s more as if:

1. If given the go-ahead by provinces, we will use everything in our power (i.e., emergency powers) to quicken the process for fast completion of these energy pipeline projects.
2. If not given the go-ahead, we will not proceed.

Regardless, the fact that this has to be debated indicates that Carney’s messaging was either unclear and foggy, which his PR team admits. I don’t see how this was being sneaky as PP claims.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

Therein lies the problem, he tells western Canada (English Canada) that his government will do everything possible including using emergency powers to get things done but turns around and tells Quebec that he won't do anything that they don't support. He's just telling everyone what they want to hear inorder to get support. His plan is clear as mud.

So your position is the same as his campaign manager, which is that he needs to do a better job of clarifying his message?

Great. Pretty simple. We’ve come a long way from “web of lies.”

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

So your position is the same as his campaign manager, which is that he needs to do a better job of clarifying his message?

Great. Pretty simple. We’ve come a long way from “web of lies.”

It's a case of telling the truth in a way that only a politician can.

[Goriders]

Originally Posted by Azure

So what does everyone think about the big rail investment? Good idea? $40b is a lot of money, but if it actually gets built without going ridiculously over budget, it could be a huge net benefit.

I have my doubts though. All the companies involved have a long history of just leeching off the government but not actually accomplishing anything.

Think you answered your own question.

We’re in the “make it rain” in Ontario and Quebec phase of the Liberal campaign. That’s on page 2 of the Liberal handbook

[Manhattanboy]

Originally Posted by Goriders

Think you answered your own question.

We’re in the “make it rain” in Ontario and Quebec phase of the Liberal campaign. That’s on page 2 of the Liberal handbook

Usually they wait until the election is actually called before dropping billions into Quebec and Ontario but hey these are unprecedented times.

[GordonBlue]

Originally Posted by Manhattanboy

Usually they wait until the election is actually called before dropping billions into Quebec and Ontario but hey these are unprecedented times.

what do you care? you're rich, so just invest in it.
or are you scared non white people might be involved, or the woke.

[Azure]

So it looks like Carney is being more direct about cutting spending, i.e. program spending, and instead investing money into Canada via what I assume will be projects and investments that actually some ROI.

I mean good, but its funny how everyone just goes along with it. When PP says we need to cut spending its 'OMG how DARE HE SAY THAT.'

When Carney says we need to cut spending, its crickets.

Anyways, back to the regularly scheduled boot licking.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

It's a case of telling the truth in a way that only a politician can.

But the fact that PP and his supporters are the ones who actually lied, seems totally lost on you. Yet another thing I guess. You’ll get ‘em next time champ.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Azure

So it looks like Carney is being more direct about cutting spending, i.e. program spending, and instead investing money into Canada via what I assume will be projects and investments that actually some ROI.

I mean good, but its funny how everyone just goes along with it. When PP says we need to cut spending its 'OMG how DARE HE SAY THAT.'

When Carney says we need to cut spending, its crickets.

Anyways, back to the regularly scheduled boot licking.

Do you have, some, like, uhm, news link you'd like to share and discuss with details? That's how it usually works.

[TherapyforGlencross]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

It's a case of telling the truth in a way that only a politician can.

And now I understand why 3-word slogans are so effective as a political strategy.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

Woke for me is about telling the Progressive Left where they are going too far in their fight for justice. For example:

1. The overuse of the concept, "diversity, equity and inclusion" in the hiring process e.g. universities, critically important positions

2. Forgetting the contribution of those who worked and sacrificed to get us where we are today. e.g. renaming schools, streets, and tearing down statues

3. Politicizing science, leading to disinformation and inequality

4. Defunding the police

5. Being too soft on crime e.g. paroling people who are judged to be high risk to reoffend, putting hardened criminals in sweat lodges

6. Adopting measures which restrict freedom of the press

7. Mandating against a person's right to decide what goes into their bodies

8. Etc.

Not to keep beating you up on this, but Anonymous has a very good retort.

Spoiler!

[Ped]

It's funny that the people who complain about DEI most are the people who have benefited most from racist and sexist hiring policies, bank policies, government policies, and literally every aspect of people's lives that have been geared to benefit white males.

[Hemi-Cuda]

Originally Posted by Ped

It's funny that the people who complain about DEI most are the people who have benefited most from racist and sexist hiring policies, bank policies, government policies, and literally every aspect of people's lives that have been geared to benefit white males.

The most irritating thing about the war against DEI is idiots parroting "We just want the most qualified people for the job", which is exactly what DEI does. Why can't they just admit that they just don't want to hire any women or minorities