GT: Federal Election - Page 89 - Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Parallex · 12-01-2015, 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zamler

It doesn't matter what it is, JT said he is rich and doesn't need such programs then turns around and uses them.

... no, he didn't. Which specific program is he using that he said he didn't need? Because Trudeau was talking about the tories Universal Child Care Benefit. Is this being funded by the UCCB? No? I didn't think so.

corporatejay has the right of it... this is simply a job perk much like the chefs and personal drivers that accompany most upper parlementary positions (including those enjoyed by Ambrose and whomever succeeds her a leader of the opposition).

opendoor · 12-01-2015, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nufy

I get that...

Its the optics around the whole thing.

You would think he would have advisors whispering in his ear...

"this will look bad if it gets out..."

It doesn't look bad to anyone with a lick of sense. It'd be like if there was outrage over the fact that Trudeau isn't going to be paying the guy who cuts the lawn for the PM's residence out of his own pocket.

EldrickOnIce · 12-01-2015, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blaster86

Stop being ridiculous.

Stop being ridiculous? Who?
The CBC for first reporting it?
Other news agencies for picking it up?
Or me, for posting it here?

You don't think the optics look bad, given his self appointed role as champion of the rich paying a little more? The fake outrage of the "We don’t need it. And Canada can’t afford it" kind of sound bites?

Parallex · 12-01-2015, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by EldrickOnIce

Stop being ridiculous? Who?

Everyone engaging in histrionics over Trudeau metaphorically enjoying an orange when he said he didn't need apples.

CroFlames · 12-01-2015, 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Parallex

Everyone engaging in histrionics over Trudeau metaphorically enjoying an orange when he said he didn't need apples.

I don't think childcare should be part of the PM's total compensation package. So sue me.

He doesn't own 24 Sussex, so obviously it makes sense to have housekeepers, landskeepers, etc, as well as aides to assist him in his job. Child care, IMO, is different. It is especially interesting since he proclaimed he doesn't need assistance of any kind from taxpayers for child care.

Blaster86 · 12-01-2015, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nufy

Its the optics around the whole thing.

BREAKING STORY:
PM position comes with benefits.

NEWS AT 11!

This is a make-work story. Someone digging for a scandal when it doesn't exist.

Meanwhile, the PBO says the deficit prediction is off by close to 6 billion in 2019/2020 and no one seems to care about that one. Just that a job as important as the Prime Minister also comes with work benefits.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CroFlames

I don't think childcare should be part of the PM's total compensation package. So sue me.

That's fine, but that doesn't make this a scandal.

Quote:

Originally Posted by CroFlames

It is especially interesting since he proclaimed he doesn't need assistance of any kind from taxpayers for child care.

HE'S NOT TAKING ASSISTANCE FROM. #### it, nevermind. Have fun with your scandal.

CroFlames · 12-01-2015, 03:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blaster86

BREAKING STORY:
PM position comes with benefits.

NEWS AT 11!

This is a make-work story. Someone digging for a scandal when it doesn't exist.

Meanwhile, the PBO says the deficit prediction is off by close to 6 billion in 2019/2020 and no one seems to care about that one. Just that a job as important as the Prime Minister also comes with work benefits.

That's fine, but that doesn't make this a scandal.

HE'S NOT TAKING ASSISTANCE FROM. #### it, nevermind. Have fun with your scandal.

You could use a chill pill.

I never said it was a scandal, so nice try. Nor am I proclaiming anything.

But if you have hired nannies paid for by the state, well then that is assistance from taxpayers any way you slice it. Guess what? Canadians also assist Justin's life by taking care of his residence, transportation, security, etc, etc etc. And that is fine.

Some people, me included, think that child care shouldn't be part of it since it has nothing to do with government function.

EldrickOnIce · 12-01-2015, 03:14 PM

The only one talking about a scandal is Blaster

Blaster86 · 12-01-2015, 03:18 PM

I have no word other than scandal for what you guys are trying to make this out to be. It sure as #### isn't a case of you three just disagreeing with PM being able to hire a nanny when you're saying Mr. Trudeau is without honour because of it.

Nufy · 12-01-2015, 03:20 PM

Ultimately JT is proving to be just like most politicians...

Say one thing and then spin it so that anything goes...

When the JT supporters finally stop basking in the sunshine falling from his butt hopefully they will realize that.

Welcome to the new govt...just like the old govt...

Parallex · 12-01-2015, 03:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CroFlames

Some people, me included, think that child care shouldn't be part of it since it has nothing to do with government function.

Neither do chefs or chauffeurs... I don't see you making a stink that Ambrose/Leader of the Opposition has those.

Nufy · 12-01-2015, 03:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blaster86

I have no word other than scandal for what you guys are trying to make this out to be. It sure as #### isn't a case of you three just disagreeing with PM being able to hire a nanny when you're saying Mr. Trudeau is without honour because of it.

I didn't mention honor...

I called him a hypocrite...

jayswin · 12-01-2015, 03:22 PM

This is going to be unbelievable. It's like a mirror image of what this board went through when Harper was in power, except now the roles of the posters are reversed.

Blaster86 · 12-01-2015, 03:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nufy

Welcome to the new govt...just like the old govt...

Nope. Under the old government the PBO never would have been allowed to contradict the finance minister to the media.

Zarley · 12-01-2015, 03:24 PM

How can you people possibly defend Trudeau over this?

The Liberals stated during their campaign that wealthy families such as his did not need government help to care for their children and thus were not deserving of a tax benefit. Hiring childcare workers with taxpayer dollars flies in the face of this sentiment. The optics of the situation are terrible and I have to question the PMs judgement for even considering, let alone going through with the hire.

Nufy · 12-01-2015, 03:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Parallex

Neither do chefs or chauffeurs... I don't see you making a stink that Ambrose/Leader of the Opposition has those.

Ok then...

I don't think that any public official should have child care subsidized by the govt.

Happy now...

CroFlames · 12-01-2015, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blaster86

I have no word other than scandal for what you guys are trying to make this out to be. It sure as #### isn't a case of you three just disagreeing with PM being able to hire a nanny when you're saying Mr. Trudeau is without honour because of it.

You could easily just say "I have no problem with what the PM is doing in this regard" and we would understand what you mean.

CroFlames · 12-01-2015, 03:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Parallex

Neither do chefs or chauffeurs... I don't see you making a stink that Ambrose/Leader of the Opposition has those.

Ah, you got me. I am totally OK with the Conservatives taking advantage of the system for personal gain. The minute a Liberal does it though, the gloves are off.

Darn you Justin Trudeau.

Blaster86 · 12-01-2015, 03:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CroFlames

You could easily just say "I have no problem with what the PM is doing in this regard" and we would understand what you mean.

It's not that "I have no problem with it." I think it's ridiculous that any of these civil workers who make as much money as they do should be able to charge anything to the office. My issue is that this IS a perk of the job, not something PM Trudeau has just made up on the spot after. My issue is that this is a total non-issue for that reason. It's someone digging for something when there are far better things to be scrutinizing right now if someone is looking to hold the man accountable.

Parallex · 12-01-2015, 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CroFlames

Ah, you got me. I am totally OK with the Conservatives taking advantage of the system for personal gain. The minute a Liberal does it though, the gloves are off.

You say it mockingly but it's hard to deny that a lot of (I'm sure) self-identified Conservative Party supporters are all of a sudden taking an awful lot of interest in government perks now that the Conservative Party isn't in power anymore. C'mon... it's partisan nitpicking and you know it.

For the record I'm in favor of them (Ambrose included) having those perks. They'll allow them to do their jobs (which are immense and time consuming) better and encourage quality people who might otherwise choose to forego public life to instead partake in it.