Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community
Old 10-18-2020, 02:10 PM   #21
Ben_in_Canada
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Ben_in_Canada's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Where ever I'm told to be
Exp:
Default

If the allowances for the Mi'kmaw are really so insignificant that fishing out of season will not affect the stocks for the commercial fisherman, how did it get so out of control?
Do the Mi'kmaw people also work during the commercial season, I don't see why they couldn't/wouldn't.
So is that the real problem? One group gets to double dip?
Ben_in_Canada is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-18-2020, 02:15 PM   #22
Oling_Roachinen
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Exp:
Default

No the real problem is the Federal government signed contracts they never expected to uphold, not the people whose ancestors signed those contracts trying to get them upheld.
Oling_Roachinen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-18-2020, 02:40 PM   #23
afc wimbledon
Franchise Player
 
afc wimbledon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: east van
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben_in_Canada View Post
If the allowances for the Mi'kmaw are really so insignificant that fishing out of season will not affect the stocks for the commercial fisherman, how did it get so out of control?
Do the Mi'kmaw people also work during the commercial season, I don't see why they couldn't/wouldn't.
So is that the real problem? One group gets to double dip?
the first nation fishery is the primary fishery, that's the whole point of a treaty obligation, unless we want to give them their land back, which I assume we dont.

It's Canada's mortgage payment to the band for all the good parts of Nova Scotia, the decent harbors, the rivers with salmon in etc, while its true first nations didnt live everywhere they lived everywhere we like to live now and we have to pay a minimal rent for it, a few thousand lobsters, salmon etc anyone that objects to this should be ashamed.
afc wimbledon is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to afc wimbledon For This Useful Post:
Old 10-18-2020, 03:11 PM   #24
Maritime Q-Scout
Ben
 
Maritime Q-Scout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: God's Country (aka Cape Breton Island)
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben_in_Canada View Post
If the allowances for the Mi'kmaw are really so insignificant that fishing out of season will not affect the stocks for the commercial fisherman, how did it get so out of control?
Do the Mi'kmaw people also work during the commercial season, I don't see why they couldn't/wouldn't.
So is that the real problem? One group gets to double dip?
Sadly, its racism, or at the very least envy on a right that was obtained due to race.

Quote:
Originally Posted by afc wimbledon View Post
the first nation fishery is the primary fishery, that's the whole point of a treaty obligation, unless we want to give them their land back, which I assume we dont.

It's Canada's mortgage payment to the band for all the good parts of Nova Scotia, the decent harbors, the rivers with salmon in etc, while its true first nations didnt live everywhere they lived everywhere we like to live now and we have to pay a minimal rent for it, a few thousand lobsters, salmon etc anyone that objects to this should be ashamed.
This is an awesome province. Its not all anti-Mi'kmaq treaty rights.

Antidotally, my Facebook feed is full of support for the Mi'kmaq and no one arguing or presenting alternate information (such as conservativation, or fairness is the same rules for everyone, which while on the surface make sense are much more nuanced than that).

Yesterday were the municipal elections in the province. On a whole we took a lot of progressive steps (Richmond County had an all male council that voted against funding a women in politics conference with the warden saying "Why would I help a potential challenger?" losing to a woman with most if not all council members being defeated; my hometown, the second largest city in the province, elected a 37 year old pregnant woman mayor).

We're not all anti-treaty yokels (nor did anyone imply it).

I really wish our government would take accountability and increase the police presence before more people get hurt.
__________________
Maritime Q-Scout is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Maritime Q-Scout For This Useful Post:
Old 10-18-2020, 10:25 PM   #25
gasman
Scoring Winger
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout View Post
What's there to discuss?

[Bold]RCMP need to staff the detachment and restore order. [/Bold]

Treaty of 1752 was upheld by the Supreme Court in R v Marshall.

The Mi'kmaq have a right to fish for a moderate living.

Full stop.

Even if the Mi'kmaq weren't allowed to fish (which again, they are) its still illegal to assault people, burn cars & buildings and destroy property.

The fact that the RCMP went this long understaffing the detachment, in turn not enforcing the peace, is unacceptable.
The RCMP doesn't determine the level of staffing, that is determined by whoever holds the contract, be it the province or the municipality Who are also responsible for determining the policing priority.
Most of the comments on here about this being an RCMP staffing or policing problem don't know what they are talking about.

Usually the municipality and the RCMP settle around one member for say around 1000 people, but that is primarily guided by what the municipality (city council) is willing to pay

Historically Well off municipalities will pay for extra members. Stratcona county is always flush so they have more members per capita.

The RCMP is contracted to the town or county, if council wants them to not intervene in a protest, or not show up in force their actions will be swayed by that direction...to a degree

This isn't caused by poor policing, it is almost certainly government induced
gasman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2020, 12:56 AM   #26
afc wimbledon
Franchise Player
 
afc wimbledon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: east van
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gasman View Post
The RCMP doesn't determine the level of staffing, that is determined by whoever holds the contract, be it the province or the municipality Who are also responsible for determining the policing priority.
Most of the comments on here about this being an RCMP staffing or policing problem don't know what they are talking about.

Usually the municipality and the RCMP settle around one member for say around 1000 people, but that is primarily guided by what the municipality (city council) is willing to pay

Historically Well off municipalities will pay for extra members. Stratcona county is always flush so they have more members per capita.

The RCMP is contracted to the town or county, if council wants them to not intervene in a protest, or not show up in force their actions will be swayed by that direction...to a degree

This isn't caused by poor policing, it is almost certainly government induced
except in a case like this the Provincial detachment would take over and allocate extra resources, the locals dont get to decide policy when potential riots with national coverage are concerned
afc wimbledon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2020, 07:44 AM   #27
gasman
Scoring Winger
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by afc wimbledon View Post
except in a case like this the Provincial detachment would take over and allocate extra resources, the locals dont get to decide policy when potential riots with national coverage are concerned
Provincial contracts are negotiated the same way, and the policing priorities are set by the province in that case.

If the ministers don't want the RCMP in force, because whatever reason they have. Then the RCMP is likely to sit back and let a bunch of little stuff go until it escalates and goes out of hand. Which is exactly what happened.

This is caused by poor decisions at the government level not likely the RCMP.
gasman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2020, 07:57 AM   #28
Fuzz
Franchise Player
 
Fuzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gasman View Post
Provincial contracts are negotiated the same way, and the policing priorities are set by the province in that case.

If the ministers don't want the RCMP in force, because whatever reason they have. Then the RCMP is likely to sit back and let a bunch of little stuff go until it escalates and goes out of hand. Which is exactly what happened.

This is caused by poor decisions at the government level not likely the RCMP.
Is it? Back on the 15th they said this:
Quote:
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau today defended the federal government's response to an escalating standoff over a Mi'kmaw fishery in Nova Scotia, saying Ottawa has been "extremely active" in trying to resolve the situation.

Speaking to reporters, he called for an end to the violence and harassment that has been on the rise over the past week in several fishing communities in the southwestern part of the province.

"We are expecting the RCMP and police services to do their jobs and keep people safe," Trudeau said.

"I think there's been some concern that that hasn't been done well enough and that's certainly something we will be looking at very closely."
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-...eats-1.5765042


To me that sounds like the government is not stopping the RCMP form doing their jobs, and the RCMP are the negligent ones here.
__________________
Air Canada - We're not happy until you're not happy.
Telus - Almost as bad as Winnipeg.
Calgary Roads Dept - Ya, we'll get to that.
Fuzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2020, 08:16 AM   #29
gasman
Scoring Winger
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzz View Post
Is it? Back on the 15th they said this:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-...eats-1.5765042


To me that sounds like the government is not stopping the RCMP form doing their jobs, and the RCMP are the negligent ones here.
That is 100% a great example of Justin Trudeau passing the buck.

I had indicated that it is the province that would set the policing priorities, but the ocean is federal jurisdiction. So not quite sure who gives direction in that case, maybe it would be the federal government.

I think it is very possible that the RCMP were directed to stand back, especially in the current climate of police hate and social media

The RCMP would very likely have sat down at a high level, in this case possibly even with federal ministers, due to the jurisdiction and were probably told not to intervene unless things got out of hand, which they have, and now the police are stepping in.

Trudeau is as greasy as they come, well evidenced by his willingness to bold face lie about every weekly scandal he has, him pinning this on the RCMP is par for the course and very much a calculated move based on current police sentiment


To be clear, my opinion is that there should have been action taken much sooner, and that the inaction is not the sole fault of the RCMP, and that sentiment that the RCMP is a broken or ineffectual organization are mostly based on uninformed opinions.
gasman is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to gasman For This Useful Post:
Old 10-19-2020, 08:27 AM   #30
Maritime Q-Scout
Ben
 
Maritime Q-Scout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: God's Country (aka Cape Breton Island)
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gasman View Post
Provincial contracts are negotiated the same way, and the policing priorities are set by the province in that case.

If the ministers don't want the RCMP in force, because whatever reason they have. Then the RCMP is likely to sit back and let a bunch of little stuff go until it escalates and goes out of hand. Which is exactly what happened.

This is caused by poor decisions at the government level not likely the RCMP.
When I was in junior high the province amalgamated a number of municipalities into one (1 city, 6 towns and the county) forming the Cape Breton Regional Municipality.

When that happened, the city police forces also amalgamated into one. However, the county was still serviced by the RCMP.

There was debate about which police force to continue with. The RCMP or the city police? Ultimately the decision was made to stay with the city police service and terminate the contract with the RCMP.

My fuzzy memory on the issue, the ultimate decision boiled down to: direct control over the police service versus the massive resources of the RCMP which could be leveraged in a time of need.

Again, my fuzzy memory on the issue.

As I understand it, if there is a major incident, part of the benefit of having the RCMP is they have the resources to rapidly deploy in any area in the country if need be.

I don't recall the Premier of Nova Scotia requesting the RCMP to increase their presence in Inverness when people flocked there like crazy during the Chase the Ace phenomenon.

I don't recall the Mayor of Moncton requesting increased service when Justin Bourque went on a shooting rampage.

Now, in both of those cases, it very well may have happened.

I very well could be misremembering.

Intuitively, if a detachment is worried about being understaffed during an incident (which was stated by an RCMP spokesperson explaining why they didn't make arrests - 'if you have a mob 200 people and 12 officers, if you arrest someone you remove that one person but also 2 officers leaving 10 to police the mob' <--paraphrased) then I would think the force would send more resources to the area.

Wouldn't it be similar to if an incident happened in North West Calgary, that the CPS would divert attention and officers to the area from elsewhere in the city?

This isn't a normal issue, where normally the detachment would be fine with 12 officers, they're facing an emergency. I can't imagine the RCMP wouldn't sent additional resources in time of an emergency; I can't imagine the RCMP are withholding resources to demand increased payment; I *would* imagine the contract states their job is to keep the peace.

Now, I'm totally open to hearing otherwise. I would think my posting history demonstrates my desire to learn and engage in good faith. That said, I'm not saying you're wrong, I want to learn.

Edit: Re-reading the thread, I can see that what I said about understaffing the detachment was ambiguous. By understaffed I mean understaffed for an emergency such as protests/riots. All else being equal, during a normal time, I would imagine the detachment is staffed appropriately. Yes, it would be up to the municipality/province whomever contracted the RCMP to determine the amount of staffing for the detachment. What I mean is there is an emergency, I would be expected the detachment to be staffed properly for an emergency.
__________________

Last edited by Maritime Q-Scout; 10-19-2020 at 08:46 AM.
Maritime Q-Scout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2020, 08:27 AM   #31
Fuzz
Franchise Player
 
Fuzz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Exp:
Default

Well your just making assumptions then. I mean, it's not that big a stretch to assume Justin was lying when he said that, but he did say it before the chaos started, so it's reasonable to believe that they did expect the RCMP to do their job. Assuming the opposite would require some modicum of evidence, no? Do you have that?
__________________
Air Canada - We're not happy until you're not happy.
Telus - Almost as bad as Winnipeg.
Calgary Roads Dept - Ya, we'll get to that.
Fuzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2020, 09:01 AM   #32
gasman
Scoring Winger
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuzz View Post
Well your just making assumptions then. I mean, it's not that big a stretch to assume Justin was lying when he said that, but he did say it before the chaos started, so it's reasonable to believe that they did expect the RCMP to do their job. Assuming the opposite would require some modicum of evidence, no? Do you have that?
I have a fairly solid understanding of the politics of policing within the RCMP based on a father with 40 years experience as an NCO, detachment commander and about 10 years in staffing for Western Canada.

I have no evidence specific to this situation.
gasman is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to gasman For This Useful Post:
Old 10-19-2020, 09:10 AM   #33
gasman
Scoring Winger
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout View Post
When I was in junior high the province amalgamated a number of municipalities into one (1 city, 6 towns and the county) forming the Cape Breton Regional Municipality.

When that happened, the city police forces also amalgamated into one. However, the county was still serviced by the RCMP.

There was debate about which police force to continue with. The RCMP or the city police? Ultimately the decision was made to stay with the city police service and terminate the contract with the RCMP.

My fuzzy memory on the issue, the ultimate decision boiled down to: direct control over the police service versus the massive resources of the RCMP which could be leveraged in a time of need.

Again, my fuzzy memory on the issue.

As I understand it, if there is a major incident, part of the benefit of having the RCMP is they have the resources to rapidly deploy in any area in the country if need be.

I don't recall the Premier of Nova Scotia requesting the RCMP to increase their presence in Inverness when people flocked there like crazy during the Chase the Ace phenomenon.

I don't recall the Mayor of Moncton requesting increased service when Justin Bourque went on a shooting rampage.

Now, in both of those cases, it very well may have happened.

I very well could be misremembering.

Intuitively, if a detachment is worried about being understaffed during an incident (which was stated by an RCMP spokesperson explaining why they didn't make arrests - 'if you have a mob 200 people and 12 officers, if you arrest someone you remove that one person but also 2 officers leaving 10 to police the mob' <--paraphrased) then I would think the force would send more resources to the area.

Wouldn't it be similar to if an incident happened in North West Calgary, that the CPS would divert attention and officers to the area from elsewhere in the city?

This isn't a normal issue, where normally the detachment would be fine with 12 officers, they're facing an emergency. I can't imagine the RCMP wouldn't sent additional resources in time of an emergency; I can't imagine the RCMP are withholding resources to demand increased payment; I *would* imagine the contract states their job is to keep the peace.

Now, I'm totally open to hearing otherwise. I would think my posting history demonstrates my desire to learn and engage in good faith. That said, I'm not saying you're wrong, I want to learn.

Edit: Re-reading the thread, I can see that what I said about understaffing the detachment was ambiguous. By understaffed I mean understaffed for an emergency such as protests/riots. All else being equal, during a normal time, I would imagine the detachment is staffed appropriately. Yes, it would be up to the municipality/province whomever contracted the RCMP to determine the amount of staffing for the detachment. What I mean is there is an emergency, I would be expected the detachment to be staffed properly for an emergency.
Staffing up in this situation would likely have been a joint decision by the Province/Federal/RCMP. There are a lot of factors that would have been discussed, but primarily the question of

Will additional officers fuel discontent and cause a riot - This in particular would get blowback if it did "Why did the RCMP have to go in when they were still peaceful, they caused this... idiots" (General assumption on twitter reaction, not aimed at anyone here)

Secondly, the province or town will get hit with the bill for extra members, regardless so hard to say if they would push back or not up front.

There is a much different reaction to an active shooter, one is active, the other has potential. Politicians are going to politician, Im saying there are a lot of moving parts on something like this, and to lay blame at the feet of the RCMP is more than likely uninformed.
gasman is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to gasman For This Useful Post:
Old 10-19-2020, 09:40 AM   #34
DiracSpike
First Line Centre
 
DiracSpike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: BELTLINE
Exp:
Default

Well if there's one PM we can count on to burn the midnight oil working quickly, diligently, and decisively to resolve a complicated and nuanced conflict like this it's definitely Justin.
DiracSpike is online now   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to DiracSpike For This Useful Post:
Old 10-19-2020, 09:42 AM   #35
Ryan Coke
First Line Centre
 
Ryan Coke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Exp:
Default

Who knows who is to blame in this case, but relying on anything Trudeau says as to where fault lies seems incredibly naive.
Ryan Coke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2020, 10:20 AM   #36
Maritime Q-Scout
Ben
 
Maritime Q-Scout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: God's Country (aka Cape Breton Island)
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gasman View Post
Staffing up in this situation would likely have been a joint decision by the Province/Federal/RCMP. There are a lot of factors that would have been discussed, but primarily the question of

Will additional officers fuel discontent and cause a riot - This in particular would get blowback if it did "Why did the RCMP have to go in when they were still peaceful, they caused this... idiots" (General assumption on twitter reaction, not aimed at anyone here)

Secondly, the province or town will get hit with the bill for extra members, regardless so hard to say if they would push back or not up front.

There is a much different reaction to an active shooter, one is active, the other has potential. Politicians are going to politician, Im saying there are a lot of moving parts on something like this, and to lay blame at the feet of the RCMP is more than likely uninformed.
To be clear, when I saw RCMP I don't mean the officers in the field. Nor am I implying that you think that. Just for the sake of clarity, this to me at this point, is an upper management issue.

When the spokesman for the RCMP justifies a lack of arrests and overall control due to inadequate officers, that raises the question "why aren't there adequate officers?" The lack of staffing is the RCMP defense right now.

Which begs the question, why not increase staffing?

Traps are being cut, citizens assaulted, vehicles and buildings burnt.

Perhaps in the beginning increasing presence could have been seen as too much.

At this point it needs to be rectified.

I'm giving benefit of the doubt where I can, but at this point more needs to be done.

If the issue is with the bill, sort it out after peace is restored.


Perhaps the RCMP leadership isn't the one to blame. Perhaps its the federal Attorney General? The Prime Minister? The Premier? The provincial Attorney General? The Mayor of the Town of Digby? The Warden of Digby County?

Ultimately, I don't care who is at fault... fix it.

But I go back to having the RCMP state with 12 officers and a mob of 200 they didn't have the staffing to arrest.

If the RCMP leadership aren't supporting the officers on the front line, then they are failing not only the community, but the brave men and women who honorably wear the uniform.

Sorry. I am trying to not blame the RCMP here, but I'm really struggling to not assign the organization fault (but not assigning 100% of the fault).

No organization is perfect, and in a crisis no one makes perfect decisions. Adding support, professionals who are experts in de-escalation, and mental health experts to support the presumably tense and stressed officers would all be a really good start.

Perhaps blame is a poor word. Fault is also a bad word.

The RCMP are the organization have the potential to step in to help solve the crisis the quickest. Rightly or wrongly the ball fell at their feet. Yes, they can toss it to the next person/group/government, or they can throw the ball home.
__________________
Maritime Q-Scout is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2020, 10:22 AM   #37
Locke
ness Monster
 
Locke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Income Tax Central
Exp:
Default

There is only one way to settle this like Canadians...

__________________
- "Somebody may beat me, but they're going to have to bleed to do it."
- Steve Prefontaine
This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
Locke is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Locke For This Useful Post:
Old 10-19-2020, 11:38 AM   #38
Weitz
Franchise Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Exp:
Default

Will the fisherman eventually just set up a blockade? We know thats the ultimate weakness of the RCMP.
Weitz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-19-2020, 11:54 AM   #39
Locke
ness Monster
 
Locke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Income Tax Central
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Weitz View Post
Will the fisherman eventually just set up a blockade? We know thats the ultimate weakness of the RCMP.
Like...a naval blockage? A bunch of run-down fishing boats and canoes against the oppressive might of the Canadian Navy?

I'd put my money on the canoes.

"Dammit Dave! He threw a fish at me! A fish Dave!! Lets go home and watch Schitt's Creek!!"
__________________
- "Somebody may beat me, but they're going to have to bleed to do it."
- Steve Prefontaine
This Post Has Been Distilled for the Eradication of Seemingly Incurable Sadness.
Locke is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Locke For This Useful Post:
Old 10-19-2020, 12:15 PM   #40
Firebot
Powerplay Quarterback
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gasman View Post
That is 100% a great example of Justin Trudeau passing the buck.

To be clear, my opinion is that there should have been action taken much sooner, and that the inaction is not the sole fault of the RCMP, and that sentiment that the RCMP is a broken or ineffectual organization are mostly based on uninformed opinions.
It's very obvious that Trudeau is using a blame shift on the RCMP right now, because of the Gabriel affiliation with the RCMP and recent anti-police sentiment, rather than point at his own administration and total lack of action by the minister of fishing and ocean. All of these issues have happened on his watch.

Quote:
"We are expecting the RCMP and police services to do their jobs and keep people safe," Trudeau said.

Very much a Trudeau response, he's proven with the blockades that inaction is key to his federal government and Canadians love him for it. I'm still unsure how he managed to get off unscathed from the blockade debacle.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/cana...ades-1.4811999

Quote:
We are not the kind of country where politicians get to tell the police what to do in operational matters," Trudeau said in Munich, Germany, where he was attending a global security conference.
Early on Feb 2020 was: we won't tell the police what to do.
Now October 2020 : the police should do its job.

People vote for this level of governing.

It's also embarrassing that some MP's had to go against their party wishes to ask for some certainty and action from the government way before this escalated.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-...ules-1.5736013

https://www.facebook.com/KodyBloisNS...37211726696736

Quote:
Kody Blois, MP for Kings-Hants, is calling on federal Fisheries Minister Bernadette Jordan to use the authority recognized by the Supreme Court of Canada 21 years ago to regulate a moderate livelihood fishery and end "the ambiguity and uncertainty around how and to what extent indigenous fishers can exercise their rights, particularly in 'off-season.'"

"The Supreme Court had contemplated the introduction of regulatory limits by the Government of Canada," Blois wrote to Bernadette Jordan this week in a letter posted on his Facebook page.

"The inclusion of a regulatory framework of how the moderate livelihood right can be exercised under the Fisheries Act could be justified on the grounds of conservation while avoiding social discord between Mi'kmaq and commercial fishers."
Bernadette Jordan refused, again part of the mandate of inaction from the Trudeau government

Quote:
Blois was not available for an interview Wednesday and Jordan's press secretary, Jane Deeks, rejected the idea when contacted by CBC.

"This does not reflect the position of the government nor the views of the Minister," Deeks told CBC News.
The lobster fight is yet another black eye for Canada. And Canadians continue to vote this embarrassment because he wants sunshine and rainbows to power the country.

While a resolution would be way more difficult, this escalation was totally avoidable.

Last edited by Firebot; 10-19-2020 at 12:20 PM.
Firebot is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Firebot For This Useful Post:
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:03 PM.

Calgary Flames
2019-20




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2016