I'm not a fan of this government but this is one thing I can get behind. Kudos to them for doing this. Only thing I would like to see is that the interest free is tied to residency. ie Only if you remain in Canada after graduation and 'pay back' the interest in the form of contributing to the economy.
The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to Lubicon For This Useful Post:
Economic statement was interesting. The big thing is the change in Canadian industrial policy. A lot more focus on competitiveness and investment. More than we've really seen with this government. Hope it's not too late.
Justin Trudeau came out strongly in favour of supporting Canadian's rights and freedoms and the charter today during a press conference and talked about how Canadians need to be protected against government intervention which takes away their ability to fight for collective bargaining.
This is the same guy that four years ago voted in support of bill C-89 which legislated Canada Post workers back to work and took away their rights to strike and collectively bargain. At the time, Jagmeet Singh called the bill the, "worst, most draconian" back to work legislation.
The Following User Says Thank You to calgarygeologist For This Useful Post:
Justin Trudeau came out strongly in favour of supporting Canadian's rights and freedoms and the charter today during a press conference and talked about how Canadians need to be protected against government intervention which takes away their ability to fight for collective bargaining.
This is the same guy that four years ago voted in support of bill C-89 which legislated Canada Post workers back to work and took away their rights to strike and collectively bargain. At the time, Jagmeet Singh called the bill the, "worst, most draconian" back to work legislation.
The biggest difference with C-89 (which I don't support) and what Ford has done is the mediation process. The Federal bill empowered a mediator-arborator chosen by both parties to force a resolution. They did take away the right to strike, but the union and government did still bargain.
Ford has unilaterally imposed a new contract on their workers and denied them the right to strike with very severe financial consequences.
They are similar on their face, but the Ford legislation is levels of magnitude worse.
__________________
@PR_NHL
The @NHLFlames are the first team to feature four players each with 50+ points within their first 45 games of a season since the Penguins in 1995-96 (Ron Francis, Mario Lemieux, Jaromir Jagr, Tomas Sandstrom).
Fuzz - "He didn't speak to the media before the election, either."
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to belsarius For This Useful Post:
The biggest difference with C-89 (which I don't support) and what Ford has done is the mediation process. The Federal bill empowered a mediator-arborator chosen by both parties to force a resolution. They did take away the right to strike, but the union and government did still bargain.
Ford has unilaterally imposed a new contract on their workers and denied them the right to strike with very severe financial consequences.
They are similar on their face, but the Ford legislation is levels of magnitude worse.
It was also 5 weeks after the labour action started. Ford passed this before the strike even started.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to PeteMoss For This Useful Post:
Justin Trudeau came out strongly in favour of supporting Canadian's rights and freedoms and the charter today during a press conference and talked about how Canadians need to be protected against government intervention which takes away their ability to fight for collective bargaining.
This is the same guy that four years ago voted in support of bill C-89 which legislated Canada Post workers back to work and took away their rights to strike and collectively bargain. At the time, Jagmeet Singh called the bill the, "worst, most draconian" back to work legislation.
I didn’t agree with them forcing the postal workers back to work(shocking, I know), but with that being said as others have pointed it’s an apples to oranges comparison.
Glad to see your hatred of JT is at least getting you to support the fight for workers’ rights though. Maybe you should share your concerns with the conservative candidates in your riding.
I'm actually surprised there hasn't been a thread on the Ontario CUPE vs Provincial government fiasco. I think it's going to be interesting to watch and see what happens. Ford is playing with fire on this one.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to woob For This Useful Post:
I'm actually surprised there hasn't been a thread on the Ontario CUPE vs Provincial government fiasco. I think it's going to be interesting to watch and see what happens. Ford is playing with fire on this one.
For some reason I’m not surprised
The Following User Says Thank You to iggy_oi For This Useful Post:
Justin Trudeau came out strongly in favour of supporting Canadian's rights and freedoms and the charter today during a press conference and talked about how Canadians need to be protected against government intervention which takes away their ability to fight for collective bargaining.
This is the same guy that four years ago voted in support of bill C-89 which legislated Canada Post workers back to work and took away their rights to strike and collectively bargain. At the time, Jagmeet Singh called the bill the, "worst, most draconian" back to work legislation.
Yes. All of that. But nothing that Trudeau did then broke the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
I *am* seeing people saying "Yeah, but Trudeau DID break the Charter when he imposed Emergency Measures". But reasonable people can see that there is a night and day difference.
I definitely support CUPE, but this is a MUCH, MUCH bigger issue as it makes the Canadian Charter absolutely worthless as any province can choose to make laws that contravene any part of the Charter. Yes, I have been upset when Quebec has used it. I have been irate about Ford using it before. But this is the most outrageous use ... clearly not an emergency or crisis situation... it is making it clear to other provinces that it is now a free-for-all to use the "Notwithstanding Clause". Sure, other provinces will see this and pull out the Notwithstanding Clause each and every labour dispute. That's a given. That's done now. But what about all our other charter rights? Putting limits on who can vote? We have already seen in Quebec where it has been used to attack minorities. It also puts limits on police action. It has just opened a Pandora's box.
Should the Liberals choose to even try using disallowance and void the Ontario Bill (disallowance has not been used since 1943), it will jeopardize an already rocky relationship between the provinces and the federal government. I won't be just Quebec threatening to leave over "federal overreach" but MANY provinces will be beyond irate.
Doug Ford has lit a powder keg. And I don't think anyone can step on that fuse before the explosion happens.
You consider an extra $21 million a year "well compensated" for a company the size of the CBC?
All of this spending seems fairly standard for any government, and the deficit is decreasing, so I am having a hard time seeing a "spending spree" anywhere here.
__________________
@PR_NHL
The @NHLFlames are the first team to feature four players each with 50+ points within their first 45 games of a season since the Penguins in 1995-96 (Ron Francis, Mario Lemieux, Jaromir Jagr, Tomas Sandstrom).
Fuzz - "He didn't speak to the media before the election, either."
The biggest difference with C-89 (which I don't support) and what Ford has done is the mediation process. The Federal bill empowered a mediator-arborator chosen by both parties to force a resolution. They did take away the right to strike, but the union and government did still bargain.
Ford has unilaterally imposed a new contract on their workers and denied them the right to strike with very severe financial consequences.
They are similar on their face, but the Ford legislation is levels of magnitude worse.
The bill forced arbitration but that was pretty useless as that process dragged on for more than a year all while the employees right to strike and push for collective bargaining was taken away by the federal legislation.
The federal legislation that was used against the postal union also imposed significant fines against the union and members of the broke the terms of the legislation.
I'm not a fan of this government but this is one thing I can get behind. Kudos to them for doing this. Only thing I would like to see is that the interest free is tied to residency. ie Only if you remain in Canada after graduation and 'pay back' the interest in the form of contributing to the economy.
But every working person is "paying back" the country by contributing to the economy, whether or not they have some piece of paper from school. I didn't even see the Liberals had done this, too busy focusing on their ridiculous tax on stock buy backs they announced as well but this is also pretty bad. If you don't see the direct linear connect between more and more societal pressure for everyone to go to university no matter their degree, backed by cheap guaranteed government loans, and the exponential rise in University cost then I don't know what to tell you. And now with interest free loans that's only going to accelerate and cause this university mess to metastasize further until we have billions and billions of dollars in student debt backed by tax payers that compound further and further as Universities increase their prices. Why the hell would anyone ever pay back an interest free loan? So what, just rack up a huge bill of university costs that we all have to back regardless utility and maybe pay it back if you feel like it, maybe not, all good? Most of the student debt in north america represents one of the largest bubbles of malinvestment ever assembled in human history and now we're going to add to it.
And before someone chimes in with the "it's none of your business what people study or where they go to school, every degree and education has worth..." etc refrain that people think justifies every dumb action taken on this file I would love not to worry about where people go or what they study. If you want to light tens of thousands of dollars on fire and waste your 20s studying something with no utility I'd be perfectly happy to let you go ahead and do that, couldn't care less. But when you demand interest free loans, or debt forgiveness paid by me, now you're forcing me to care because you're asking for my money. We have entirely too many people going to university getting taxpayer money to study things that have no utility or use, and that's the free market telling you that not me. The free market decides what is of use and economically viable or not and you get into trouble going against it. You won't find a job with an art history degree that pays anything, but you can get high paying jobs operating shovel at an oil sands mine or as a drilling hand on a natural gas rig. Why? Because it turns out we all have a lot more need for diesel to move our products and natural gas to keep us warm than we do for someone to tell us about the evolution of French impressionism.
The Following User Says Thank You to DiracSpike For This Useful Post:
We have entirely too many people going to university getting taxpayer money to study things that have no utility or use, and that's the free market telling you that not me
Why do you, and many others, just fixate on arts degrees in these types of discussions? Those degrees are in the minority when in comes to total university output no? Do you think none of the university educated professionals that run this province never got student loans? I know my post secondary education in geoscience and 20+ year career in Calgary O&G was made possible by student loans.
But every working person is "paying back" the country by contributing to the economy, whether or not they have some piece of paper from school. I didn't even see the Liberals had done this, too busy focusing on their ridiculous tax on stock buy backs they announced as well but this is also pretty bad. If you don't see the direct linear connect between more and more societal pressure for everyone to go to university no matter their degree, backed by cheap guaranteed government loans, and the exponential rise in University cost then I don't know what to tell you. And now with interest free loans that's only going to accelerate and cause this university mess to metastasize further until we have billions and billions of dollars in student debt backed by tax payers that compound further and further as Universities increase their prices. Why the hell would anyone ever pay back an interest free loan? So what, just rack up a huge bill of university costs that we all have to back regardless utility and maybe pay it back if you feel like it, maybe not, all good? Most of the student debt in north america represents one of the largest bubbles of malinvestment ever assembled in human history and now we're going to add to it.
And before someone chimes in with the "it's none of your business what people study or where they go to school, every degree and education has worth..." etc refrain that people think justifies every dumb action taken on this file I would love not to worry about where people go or what they study. If you want to light tens of thousands of dollars on fire and waste your 20s studying something with no utility I'd be perfectly happy to let you go ahead and do that, couldn't care less. But when you demand interest free loans, or debt forgiveness paid by me, now you're forcing me to care because you're asking for my money. We have entirely too many people going to university getting taxpayer money to study things that have no utility or use, and that's the free market telling you that not me. The free market decides what is of use and economically viable or not and you get into trouble going against it. You won't find a job with an art history degree that pays anything, but you can get high paying jobs operating shovel at an oil sands mine or as a drilling hand on a natural gas rig. Why? Because it turns out we all have a lot more need for diesel to move our products and natural gas to keep us warm than we do for someone to tell us about the evolution of French impressionism.
Every single person is not paying back this country. You need to earn a high enough income to get off of the societal subsidy. Most (I would need to fact check this to be sure) that are paying more in tax than they receive in service would have some form of post secondary education. Most oil sands operators will have some form of trades education.
I agree that post secondary education needs reform. That is independent of loan policy. Cutting interest is likely a reasonable subsidy as loan repayment still creates mora hazard.
The bill forced arbitration but that was pretty useless as that process dragged on for more than a year all while the employees right to strike and push for collective bargaining was taken away by the federal legislation.
The federal legislation that was used against the postal union also imposed significant fines against the union and members of the broke the terms of the legislation.
The federal legislation, after 5 weeks of job action, would have been saved by section 1. Saskatchewan Federation of Labour does not stand for a never ending right to strike, it stands for the proposition that you cannot ban strikes outright before they happen. Thus why Ontario needs sec. 33. The two cases you cite, despite your longstanding history on this site of standing up for unions and the labour movement, are apples and oranges.
If there was 5 weeks of job action, the Ontario government would not need s. 33.
