Federal Politics 2015 Thread

[CroFlames]

The Conservatives may not be perfect, but I would be legitimately worried if another party wins the next election. The world economy is still very fragile, as is the US economy, and the Conservatives did well at keeping Canada's economy humming along during the crisis.

As far as their 'right wing' ideologies, I'm not so sure about that. Back when they took power in 2006, Harper held a free vote on SSM, and SSM was allowed to stay. Hasn't been a peep about that since.

I'm sure their environmental record could be better, but it's private enterprise that is supposed to be building wind and solar farms.

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I actually think BC is going to be a pretty massive battleground. I still think the election gets decided in Quebec, but there are six new seats in B.C., where the Conservatives won 21 of them last time. I think the Greens grab a couple more on the Island, but I would be shocked if the Conservatives retained a lot of seats. There's a tonne of anger at Harper over the pipeline, and the mainland is furious about the coast guard budget being cut, resulting in a longer response time to the recent oil spill. The only question is whether those lost seats go to the Liberals or the NDP.

Also, this is why I think it was such a dumb political move for Trudeau to come out and say he wouldn't form a coalition. It all but guarantees the safety of many of the NDP incumbents, and in any place where it's close and people want to punish the Conservatives, he could lose out to strategic votes.

I think the Bloc will be a non-factor in Quebec, just like last time. They're polling even worse this time.

I see Grenier has the Greens likely to win two seats this time and carry over 7% of the vote. Putting aside the fact that anything that increases Lizzy May's power is rather frightening, that is likewise a bad thing for the left. So people may be angry in BC, but now they are splitting the vote three ways. That won't end the way they want it to.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

I see Grenier has the Greens likely to win two seats this time and carry over 7% of the vote. Putting aside the fact that anything that increases Lizzy May's power is rather frightening, that is likewise a bad thing for the left. So people may be angry in BC, but now they are splitting the vote three ways. That won't end the way they want it to.

BCs politics MIGHT be even more messed up than in Alberta.

Hasn't been a scandal-plagued government in more than 25 years.

Rampant corruption.

Edit: Whoops, wrong thread.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

The Conservatives may not be perfect, but I would be legitimately worried if another party wins the next election. The world economy is still very fragile, as is the US economy, and the Conservatives did well at keeping Canada's economy humming along during the crisis.

As far as their 'right wing' ideologies, I'm not so sure about that. Back when they took power in 2006, Harper held a free vote on SSM, and SSM was allowed to stay. Hasn't been a peep about that since.

I'm sure their environmental record could be better, but it's private enterprise that is supposed to be building wind and solar farms.

You mean by being forced to do a stimulus by the Liberals and NDP, and then taking all the credit through incredibly wasteful TV/Print ads? Less we forget cutting the GST, almost universally agreed as a terrible economic decision, and not balancing a single budget until this year (by dipping into the contingency fund no less).

I don't know, sounds like they aren't that good on the economy. And then you remember their tougher crime laws that are guaranteed to cost taxpayers more money on jails and...what exactly are they good economically on?

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

I'm sure their environmental record could be better

Understatement of the year.

[rubecube]

Clownshoes.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/step...risk-1.3061298

The Prime Minister's Office has removed two videos from its own website after realizing the images posed a security risk to Canadian troops in Iraq and Kuwait.

The videos were shot in Iraq and Kuwait by 24 Seven, the prime minister's in-house media team, which specializes in producing flattering features about Stephen Harper and his government.

[rubecube]

"COMING TO A CHARTER CHALLENGE NEAR YOU..."

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2...bill-c-51.html

OTTAWA — The federal government’s controversial new anti-terrorism bill has won the approval of the House of Commons.

The Anti-Terrorism Act, also known as Bill C-51, easily passed third reading by a margin of 183 to 96, thanks to the Conservative government’s majority and the promised support of the third-party Liberals.

The legislation gives the Canadian Security Intelligence Service more power to thwart suspected terrorist plots — not just gather information about them.

[rubecube]

And Trudeau shouldn't get a pass on this either.

[#-3]

Anyone else catch this.

http://www.truenorthtimes.ca/2015/05...s-intercourse/

I doubt it really hurts her in the long run, I think most who vote green don't really care what the media buzz is. But it was kinda funny to watch her get dragged off stage.

But I do think her comments early on might fuel increasing concerns about Harper being too Monolithic in his approach to policy.

[evman150]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

I see Grenier has the Greens likely to win two seats this time and carry over 7% of the vote. Putting aside the fact that anything that increases Lizzy May's power is rather frightening, that is likewise a bad thing for the left. So people may be angry in BC, but now they are splitting the vote three ways. That won't end the way they want it to.

The riding he predicts will go Green (in addition to Saanich-Gulf Islands) is Victoria. Victoria is a two-horse race. Liberals are a non-factor; Tories are a non-factor. It's between NDP and Green. There's no vote splitting causing a Tory win, because they have zero hope. Since 1993, their candidates have gotten 10, 6, 6, 21, 24, 27, 23, and 14%

In other ridings where the Greens have hope, it is often where the Tories don't really have a hope anyway. We like our lefties out here!

[rubecube]

Not really sure what to make of this.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...click=sf_globe

The federal Conservative Party says it won’t participate in the traditional leaders’ debates run by a consortium of broadcasters including CBC, CTV and Global.

The party will instead take part in up to five independently staged debates in the run-up to the fall federal election, Steven Chase reports.

The Conservatives, in particular, are keen to lessen the influence of the consortium over these debates. They want to vary the format to allow more time for one-on-one debate between Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau.

The Tories have accepted invitations to participate in two rival debates: one organized by Maclean’s magazine and its owner Rogers, and the other by French-language broadcaster TVA.

The Conservative decision puts pressure on other federal political parties to follow suit in abandoning the consortium-run debates that have almost always controlled these events.

[rubecube]

I likely won't be voting Liberal in the election, but this is still relevant:

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Not really sure what to make of this.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...click=sf_globe

I would guess that Harper believes a more loosely moderated debate will allow him to hammer Trudeau with talking points, which actually may prove effective.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

I would guess that Harper believes a more loosely moderated debate will allow him to hammer Trudeau with talking points, which actually may prove effective.

I'd actually laugh my ass off if the rest of the parties did the consortium debates without the Conservatives.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

I'd suggest that a variety of formats is ideal.

[PsYcNeT]

Originally Posted by CroFlames

The Conservatives may not be perfect, but I would be legitimately worried if another party wins the next election. The world economy is still very fragile, as is the US economy, and the Conservatives did well at keeping Canada's economy humming along during the crisis.

The Bank Of Canada operates as a separate entity from the Feds. The Cons can't pat themselves on the back because we happened to have Mark Carney in charge during the financial crisis.

[killer_carlson]

Originally Posted by PsYcNeT

The Bank Of Canada operates as a separate entity from the Feds. The Cons can't pat themselves on the back because we happened to have Mark Carney in charge during the financial crisis.

No, but the Conservatives can pat themselves on the back for Jim Flaherty.

He and Carney together stick handled Canada through that. Both are huge losses to our nation's financial administration.

[GP_Matt]

One of the debates will be hosted by Macleans. I trust them to hold a fair debate.

Hopefully they can have a few debates centered around specific issues and a moderator who makes them answer the question asked/stay on topic.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by killer_carlson

No, but the Conservatives can pat themselves on the back for Jim Flaherty.

He and Carney together stick handled Canada through that. Both are huge losses to our nation's financial administration.

Can you point to something Flaherty did to help through the crisis? I seriously can't think of any policy or anything in particular. Carney, yes for sure.

As far as the debates I think there should be more of them and throughout the country. There should be one here in Calgary at the Jack Singer or Jubilee Auditorium, where plenty of people could go and see what they have to say. There is no good reason why we have so few. The leaders can all skip a few lame photo ops and do some extra debates.

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by Slava

Can you point to something Flaherty did to help through the crisis? I seriously can't think of any policy or anything in particular.

He abandoned the conservative policy of spending cuts in the face of a recession.

The prepared campaign lines were quickly tossed aside by Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion and NDP Leader Jack Layton as they jumped on the headlines, demanding a government response to the crisis. But they insisted – as did the Conservatives – that deficit spending was not required. Mr. Harper accused the other parties of being overly pessimistic about the state of the economy.

“What the opposition is demanding I do – raise taxes, increase spending, do a lot of direct intervention and bailouts – these things would demonstrably ruin our fiscal credentials and undermine the strengths that we do have in our economy,” he told the CBC on Oct. 7, one week before election day.

Conservative sources say it was clear the economy was worsening but the party did not want to change its message in the middle of an election.

Days after the election in which the Tories won 143 seats, the message changed. Mr. Harper was no longer ruling out the possibility of a deficit. A key development took place in Washington on Nov. 14 and 15, when Mr. Harper met with world leaders of the G20.

The group emerged with a call for fiscal stimulus measures. Dominique Strauss-Kahn, managing director of the International Monetary Fund, suggested that countries should approve new spending worth 2 per cent of gross domestic product. Conservatives believed the international consensus gave the Prime Minister and his party political cover to shelve the no-deficit promise.

The following week, Mr. Harper said he was considering “unprecedented” stimulus and described the economic situation as potentially as dangerous “as anything we have seen since 1929.”

In light of that talk, there was a clear disconnect with Mr. Flaherty’s ensuing fiscal update, released on Nov. 27, 2008. The document contained no stimulus plans, and argued that Ottawa had already given the economy a boost by cutting the goods and services tax to 5 per cent that year. It hinted of more spending in the 2009 budget, but presented a long-term forecast that showed no deficit. On top of that, the update contained a major surprise: The Conservatives would be eliminating the $28-million subsidy to political parties.

The Conservatives backtracked two days later, but it was too late. The Liberals, NDP and Bloc Québécois were deep into negotiations over how to defeat the government.

In retrospect, many economists say the November update would have been a better time to launch a stimulus package. But at the time, those on whom Mr. Flaherty relied on for advice say the data were not clear enough to make strong recommendations.

Bank of Nova Scotia’s chief economist Warren Jestin, who provided data and advice to Mr. Flaherty in the fall of 2008, said his “intuition” at the time was that things were getting much worse, but the economic numbers still weren’t that bad.

“The sad thing about being an economist is you’re dealing with lag data,” he said.

Mr. Flaherty had the same sense of unease. “None of the economists in the private sector gave us advice that we’re into a recession,” Mr. Flaherty said. Inside the government, the thinking was that some modest stimulus spending in the 2009 budget would be enough.

“I can look back now and say we were in recession the last quarter of 2008,” Mr, Flaherty said. “So it was a bit awkward to present what I presented and then to realize that things were getting increasingly worse.”

Jean Charest, Quebec’s premier from 2003 to 2012, said the Harper government did not want to believe that Canada was being dragged into the global financial crisis and recession.

“The speed at which they turned 180 degrees was spectacular,” Mr. Charest said. “I don’t think anyone held it against them because we had just seen the world unravelling in front of us. There weren’t many options. They did what they had to do, quite frankly.”

The bailout

On Monday, Nov. 3, 2008, Dwight Duncan, then Ontario’s Finance Minister, was flying back from an emergency meeting with Chrysler Group LLC chief executive officer Robert Nardelli and other top officials in Auburn Hills, Mich.

The ultimatum he had received from the auto maker was blunt and alarming.

Chrysler was out of cash and wouldn’t be able to pay its workers in December. Without help from the U.S. government, the company was dead. Without money from governments in Canada, Chrysler would pull out of the country.

Two vehicle assembly plants in Windsor and Brampton, Ont., along with a powertrain plant, would close or be moved to the United States. Nearly 10,000 factory and head office jobs would be gone.

Mr. Duncan stared out the airplane window at the lights of Southern Ontario below. The North American auto industry was on the verge of collapse and the global financial system was failing. He wondered what other problems might be lurking out there.

“I remember looking at those homes and thinking, ‘Those people have no idea what’s coming,’ ” Mr. Duncan said, whose hometown of Windsor would bear the brunt of the depression in auto sales. “This would have reverberated up and down the 401 [highway], between Windsor and Ottawa.”

In the end, the demise of both Chrysler and General Motors in Canada was, as Mr. Duncan put it, “too big to contemplate.”

By the end of December, Ottawa and the province would agree to help rescue both companies – a pledge that would eventually cost taxpayers $13.7-billion and make them part owners of GM.

So far, $6.2-billion has been repaid, and the government still owns $4-billion worth of GM stock.

For the Conservatives, the bailout marked a philosophical U-turn. Paul Boothe, who negotiated the bailouts for Industry Canada, said the rescue went against the free market “political instincts” of the Harper government.

“I was convinced, but we had a bunch of explaining to get them to the same place,” said Mr. Boothe, now a business professor at the University of Western Ontario.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/repor...0149/?page=all