Trudeaumetre - Bravo!

618 posts / 0 new
Last post
Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Pondering wrote:

I have a difficult time seeing all these issues as simple black and white choices the way that you do.

Yeah, you're right Pondering. What's so hard to understand about bombing, right? People die when they're bombed, get used to it, right Ponsering?

When's Junior bombing your house? Oh yeah, I forgot, NEVER!

Pondering

Caron says he intends to hold the Liberals to account on their fiscal plans, including their pledge to eventually return to a balanced budget after running $10-billion annual deficits for three years.

He said the latest projections from the parliamentary budget officer seem to indicate there could be hurdles ahead.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ndp-critics-list-mulcair-thursday-1.3315431

Looks like a balanced budget remains the top priority for the NDP. 

Given that we have a structural deficit I expect the Liberal deficits to be added to that and if they remain in deficit because of the revised numbers from the PBO I don't have a problem with it. Of the list of commitments this should be at the bottom of the list. 

The right wing press is giving the impression that an extra 5 billion a year is a big deal. It seems the NDP agrees. 

Unionist

Arthur Cramer wrote:

Libs back tracking on Veterans Affairs promises already, http://thechronicleherald.ca/novascotia/1321999-liberals-no-longer-promi...

At least the local Liberal MP is still strongly and publicly on track:

Quote:

Despite the comments from Hehr, Cuzner said he remains confident there will be an office in Sydney.

“You’re getting a comment from a minister that has been on the job for 15 minutes,” Cuzner said.

“I stood beside Justin Trudeau when he made the promise to Ron Clarke in the opposition lobby and I have every confidence we’re going to fulfil our promise of having an office open in in Sydney. I know myself and Mark Eyking will expect nothing less than the fulfilment of that promise.”

Sounds like he's holding Trudeau's feet to the fire. Don't scorch your toes, Mr. PM!

Slumberjack

Mr. Magoo wrote:
Oh, look, it's been nearly ten days since Trudeau won, and I'm still not seeing any pot for sale at my local grocery store!!!

Since we are dealing with a liberal promise, I'd highly recommend that people maintain whatever supply arrangements they currently have in place.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Unionist wrote:

Arthur Cramer wrote:

Libs back tracking on Veterans Affairs promises already, http://thechronicleherald.ca/novascotia/1321999-liberals-no-longer-promi...

At least the local Liberal MP is still strongly and publicly on track:

Quote:

Despite the comments from Hehr, Cuzner said he remains confident there will be an office in Sydney.

“You’re getting a comment from a minister that has been on the job for 15 minutes,” Cuzner said.

“I stood beside Justin Trudeau when he made the promise to Ron Clarke in the opposition lobby and I have every confidence we’re going to fulfil our promise of having an office open in in Sydney. I know myself and Mark Eyking will expect nothing less than the fulfilment of that promise.”

Sounds like he's holding Trudeau's feet to the fire. Don't scorch your toes, Mr. PM!

Reasonable assertion Uninist. But I'm pretty sure that the MND wasn't free-lancing. I doubt he'd have said that without clearing it with the PMO. We'll see.

Slumberjack

Well, Sydney does boast of a Veterans Helping Veterans branch for helping people acquire access to medical Marijuana.  With all the subsidies government provides to private hydrocarbon interests, I don't see any reason why there shouldn't be a full service VAC center for veterans, considering that in high unemployment areas like Cape Breton and Nova Scotia in general, plenty of young people have seen and will continue to see military service as a viable career option.  In other words, there would be lots of customers for a VAC center that could frankly make use of some help.

JKR

Pondering wrote:

Caron says he intends to hold the Liberals to account on their fiscal plans, including their pledge to eventually return to a balanced budget after running $10-billion annual deficits for three years.

He said the latest projections from the parliamentary budget officer seem to indicate there could be hurdles ahead.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ndp-critics-list-mulcair-thursday-1.3315431

Looks like a balanced budget remains the top priority for the NDP. 

Given that we have a structural deficit I expect the Liberal deficits to be added to that and if they remain in deficit because of the revised numbers from the PBO I don't have a problem with it. Of the list of commitments this should be at the bottom of the list. 

The right wing press is giving the impression that an extra 5 billion a year is a big deal. It seems the NDP agrees. 

I think Canada would be well served if we had much more stimulus than the Liberals are proposing. I think the NDP's position on this is dead wrong. The NDP should be proposing even greater spending on physical and social infrastructure to create more jobs and economic growth and prosperity which would in turn would benefit our social programs. And because interest rates are at historic lows, deficit spending should be driving a huge stimulus program. Why can't the federal NDP under Tom Mulcair recognize that current interest rates are at historic lows?

Unionist

Hehr is Minister of Veteran Affairs - not national defence. And I don't know whether they promised to re-open the offices in the exact same locations or not - but I don't think any questions put to him are "ludicrous". Quite the little big shot, isn't he?

 

quizzical

yup lying liars ac. betcha they'll keep all their promises to corporations

and the disparaging mocking tone of Hehr:

Quote:
When asked specifically if his department would commit to reopening the Sydney office, he said it would be “ludicrous” for his department to do that.

Look, we’re going to reopen offices, we’re going to get veterans the help they need but lets do it with reason and common sense and hard numbers,” he said.

so any one who questions the Liberals on their promises gets told their ludicrous.

then they're told they know sfa and talked down to by the "look" and then as a cherry on top they're told they're without any common sense or reason.

nice guy the Minister of Veterans Affairs. fkn typical Liberal.

quizzical

tks changed it.

here's the quote of Trudeau's from a Halifax campaign stop and in the article it indicates it was part of their platform.

Quote:
The Liberal government is already changing its tune on a campaign promise to reopen nine Veterans Affairs Canada offices closed by the Harper government, including one in Sydney.

The party’s “Real Change” platform document explicitly states a Liberal government would “restore access to the support that veterans are due (and) reopen the nine Veterans Affairs service offices closed by Stephen Harper,” a promise Prime Minister Justin Trudeau reiterated during a campaign stop in Halifax in September.

so everyone in Atlantic Canada voted for them and we lost Meghan Leslie and this is how the Veterans Affairs Minister speaks to them and about them.

and they're not pulling out of their illegal war on Syria and are shafting the Veterans who will be coming back as hehr noted it will take them YEARS to figure out what offices need to be reopened.

 

Unionist

Thanks, quizzical.

quizzical

it should be a done deal. when you say you're going to re-open something specific it doesn't take years to do.  when lives are literally on the line you don't spend years studying what they need.

and why wouldn't the Liberals trust themselves on this? it was them who opened the now closed 9 service offices. or are they now saying they opened them just because when they were in power?

NorthReport

So what has Trudeau promised on the Climate Change file? Whatever it is he had better start moving his ass quickly as a lot of Canadians are living very close to sea level, and just not convinced dykes are going to work on this one.

Scientists say Greenland just opened up a major new ‘floodgate’ of ice into the ocean

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/11/12/sci...

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
and just not convinced dykes are going to work on this one.

Every joke that's funny isn't appropriate, and every joke that's appropriate isn't funny.  Also, Google Images didn't have a good picture of a lesbian with a hammer.

Anyhoo, you meant "dikes".

Pondering

Unionist wrote:

Hehr is Minister of Veteran Affairs - not national defence. And I don't know whether they promised to re-open the offices in the exact same locations or not - but I don't think any questions put to him are "ludicrous". Quite the little big shot, isn't he?

He didn't say the question was ludicrous. He said it would be ludicrous for the department to issue confirmations before he has a chance to study the file to make sure all the offices are where the vets need them. 

These accusations that the Liberals aren't keeping their promises this early are ludicrous. As if just taking control of government and hiring staff wasn't enough, the Climate change conference and G20 and I think another 2 major international events are all happening in the next few weeks. 

I like that the ministers are being open but cautious about giving specific confirmations until they have a chance to study their files. This was a campaign promise:

To restore access to the support that veterans are due, we will re-open the nine Veterans Affairs service offices closed by Stephen Harper, and will fully implement all of the Auditor General’s recommendations on enhancing mental health service delivery to veterans.

I expect 9 offices to re-open. If locations are altered then I expect to hear specific reasons why. Do you think that is reasonable?

quizzical

pondering read the article he told the reporter it was a ludicrous question and if he's doing  it on a question about a campaign promise it spells trouble.

and hey how are those Ministers of State still pissed about no parity and having subordinate jobs?

Sean in Ottawa

Pondering wrote:

Caron says he intends to hold the Liberals to account on their fiscal plans, including their pledge to eventually return to a balanced budget after running $10-billion annual deficits for three years.

He said the latest projections from the parliamentary budget officer seem to indicate there could be hurdles ahead.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ndp-critics-list-mulcair-thursday-1.3315431

Looks like a balanced budget remains the top priority for the NDP. 

Given that we have a structural deficit I expect the Liberal deficits to be added to that and if they remain in deficit because of the revised numbers from the PBO I don't have a problem with it. Of the list of commitments this should be at the bottom of the list. 

The right wing press is giving the impression that an extra 5 billion a year is a big deal. It seems the NDP agrees. 

No indication that the NDP agrees with right wing press. Right wing would slash taxes and spending.

The NDP may be criticizing that the numbers do not add up or that further changes in taxes may be needed so they do. But you do not know that. More partisan drivel from you.

The only thing the NDP and the right wing press agree on is that they do not like the Liberals. And why should they since they are different parties? Liberals are expecially obnoxious when they expect loyalty from those in other parties.

Sean in Ottawa

I wonder if the Liberals, when they produced their campaign platform, thought they might govern with a majority?

Perhaps they expected the cover of a minority to not have to worry about "details."  With a minority it is easy to jettison promises.

You can expect them to keep a pile of easier and symbolic promises but we will see later how they address the more difficult ones.

 

Pondering

quizzical wrote:

pondering read the article he told the reporter it was a ludicrous question and if he's doing  it on a question about a campaign promise it spells trouble.

and hey how are those Ministers of State still pissed about no parity and having subordinate jobs?

No minister has said a word about being pissed. In their shoes, I would be fine as long as the necessary steps are taken to make the paperwork match my position. I imagine they are pretty excited about being Cabinet Ministers.

“We’ve had a great many veterans who are no longer settling in traditional areas, and we’re going to look to where they are settling and get our veterans affairs offices open and operating in those centres.”

When asked specifically if his department would commit to reopening the Sydney office, he said it would be “ludicrous” for his department to do that.

“Look, we’re going to reopen offices, we’re going to get veterans the help they need, but let’s do it with reason and common sense and hard numbers,” he said.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/novascotia/1321999-liberals-no-longer-promi...

He did not say the question was ludicrous. 

 

quizzical

oh my it's most certainly inferred there's no other way to take it.

Pondering

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Pondering wrote:

Caron says he intends to hold the Liberals to account on their fiscal plans, including their pledge to eventually return to a balanced budget after running $10-billion annual deficits for three years.

He said the latest projections from the parliamentary budget officer seem to indicate there could be hurdles ahead.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ndp-critics-list-mulcair-thursday-1.3315431

Looks like a balanced budget remains the top priority for the NDP. 

Given that we have a structural deficit I expect the Liberal deficits to be added to that and if they remain in deficit because of the revised numbers from the PBO I don't have a problem with it. Of the list of commitments this should be at the bottom of the list. 

The right wing press is giving the impression that an extra 5 billion a year is a big deal. It seems the NDP agrees. 

No indication that the NDP agrees with right wing press. Right wing would slash taxes and spending.

The NDP may be criticizing that the numbers do not add up or that further changes in taxes may be needed so they do. But you do not know that. More partisan drivel from you.

The only thing the NDP and the right wing press agree on is that they do not like the Liberals. And why should they since they are different parties? Liberals are expecially obnoxious when they expect loyalty from those in other parties.

Quebec MP Guy Caron will take on the job of finance critic  The NDP chose him to speak for them. 

Caron stated: 

Caron says he intends to hold the Liberals to account on their fiscal plans, including their pledge to eventually return to a balanced budget after running $10-billion annual deficits for three years.

That plan is no longer realistic because the numbers have changed but Caron expects the Liberals to meet those numbers.

The only way to meet those numbers is through cuts. 

Therefore, the NDP is still putting the highest priority on getting to a balanced budget in 3 years. 

The NDP is going to be sorry for the path it is taking, trying to hold the Liberals to the impossible. It sounds like they are going to take every opportunity to be negative whether it makes sense or not. 

Slumberjack

The petrodollar economy is on rickety stilts, and is likely to continue hobbling around like that for some time.  Something will have to be done in Canada to at least maintain employment numbers for show, which is where Trudeau's plan comes in.  Borrow lots, pile on the debt, kick things down the road to where the real debt servicing cuts will need to be made when the global economy is laid out on a gurney asking for more injections of 'liquidity.' In the Canadian context this will necessitate borrowing even more to maintain bond markets if they haven't crashed entirely at that point, which will be required to maintain the solvency of the US T bill, essentially the global economy as we know it.  The T bill doesn't appear to backed by anything these days except for fictitious, digitalized hocus pocus if the various QE rounds have been any indication.

Sean in Ottawa

Pondering wrote:

 

The only way to meet those numbers is through cuts. 

 

Bullshit. Therefore the rest of your post is also.

Pondering

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Pondering wrote:

The only way to meet those numbers is through cuts. 

Bullshit. Therefore the rest of your post is also.

Or raising taxes. It is not possible, with the NEW numbers just released by the PBO, to keep the OLD Liberal numbers without either cuts or an increase in taxes. 

The numbers are now what the Liberals promised PLUS the NEW structural deficit.

quizzical

so much for Justin's promise to legalize marijuana and just maybe people's suspicions about Jody Wilson-Raybould when she was a crown prosecutor could be true.

her words saying she'll talk to Goodale don't leave me feeling positive given the RCMP's actions came a week after the swearing ceremony. and i can't believe she has questions. nope not a chance. unless she comes out saying the RCMP went rogue this came from the Liberals.

Quote:
Canada's new justice minister has questions about the recent Nanaimo RCMP crackdown on pot shops, after 10 shops received letters from police, asking them to cease sales within seven days or risk criminal charges.

quizzical

wonder what they're going to have to pay out to Kinder Morgan who holds the spill clean up contracts now? or maybe they'll only be concerned with life saving and not spills?

Quote:
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has ordered Vancouver's Kitsilano Coast Guard station re-opened in a mandate letter to Minister of Fisheries and Oceans Hunter Tootoo.

Cody87

Pondering wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Pondering wrote:

The only way to meet those numbers is through cuts. 

Bullshit. Therefore the rest of your post is also.

Or raising taxes. It is not possible, with the NEW numbers just released by the PBO, to keep the OLD Liberal numbers without either cuts or an increase in taxes. 

The numbers are now what the Liberals promised PLUS the NEW structural deficit.

Most likely Sean would prefer a corporate tax raise to cuts.

Pondering

quizzical wrote:

so much for Justin's promise to legalize marijuana and just maybe people's suspicions about Jody Wilson-Raybould when she was a crown prosecutor could be true.

her words saying she'll talk to Goodale don't leave me feeling positive given the RCMP's actions came a week after the swearing ceremony. and i can't believe she has questions. nope not a chance. unless she comes out saying the RCMP went rogue this came from the Liberals.

Quote:
Canada's new justice minister has questions about the recent Nanaimo RCMP crackdown on pot shops, after 10 shops received letters from police, asking them to cease sales within seven days or risk criminal charges.

Ministerial mandate letter:

Working with the Ministers of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness and Health, create a federal-provincial-territorial process that will lead to the legalization and regulation of marijuana. - See more at: http://pm.gc.ca/eng/minister-justice-and-attorney-general-canada-mandate...

http://pm.gc.ca/eng/minister-justice-and-attorney-general-canada-mandate...

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture
Pondering

mark_alfred wrote:

Pondering wrote:
Given that we have a structural deficit I expect the Liberal deficits to be added to that and if they remain in deficit because of the revised numbers from the PBO I don't have a problem with it. Of the list of commitments this should be at the bottom of the list. 

The right wing press is giving the impression that an extra 5 billion a year is a big deal. It seems the NDP agrees. 

They should raise taxes for greater revenue if there's a structural deficit, rather than raising taxes to fund a tax cut. 

Anyway, the Liberal promise of balancing the budget was central to their whole campaign.  They stated that the Cons just kept doing the same thing over and over and this stagnated the economy and resulted in deficits and a recession.  The Liberals, on the other hand, were going to intentionally run deficits to fund infrastructure spending to stimulate the economy to "grow it from the heart".  Success, then, is having a different result from what the Conservatives had, that being a robust balanced and growing economy.  If they fair to deliver on this, then they've failed the central focus of their campaign.

The focus of the campaign was running a budget deficit to fix our infrastructure deficit and grow the economy which would bring us back to balance in 3 years. The primary focus was deficit spending.

The structural deficit is predicted for the next 5 years. I don't expect the Liberals to fix that in 3 years. I expect them to put their platform first. Economists are saying 10 billion a year is chickenfeed so I don't see why an extra 5 is such a big deal that the Liberals should alter their plan. 

In any case, the NDP didn't suggest raising taxes. The NDP said they will hold the Liberals to their commitment to balance the budget in 3 years. They did not say they would hold the Liberals to their spending commitment. So, the NDP's priority is that the balanced budget commitment is kept, not that spending promises are kept, although I am sure they will get around to that eventually. Just my impression, but they seem on exactly the same track as before the election. Just constantly criticize the Liberals regardless of what they are doing. They have no intention of working with the Liberals to advance progressive causes because they don't want the Liberals to get credit for them. 

This will backfire on the NDP as they continue to put themselves to the right of the Liberals. The NDP is down to 12% support. They better wake up and smell the roses. 

A while back I thought the Liberals getting a minority might be good, keep them honest. Now I am relieved they got a majority so the NDP can't be obstructionist. 

quizzical

Quote:
Support the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Health on efforts that will lead to the legalization and regulation of marijuana. 

not bring it into being but undertaking efforts leading to.

etd to add:

don't know why she had to go to Goodale. ya he's the head of the RCMP but according to her job description she's:

Quote:
 As the Attorney General of Canada, you are the chief law officer of the Crown, responsible for conducting all litigation for the federal government and for upholding the Constitution, the rule of law, and respect for the independence of the courts.

she's the bomb. it all comes to her.

his only gig is to support her efforts leading to at some unknown time marijuana legalization and regulation.

Quote:
Support the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Health on efforts that will lead to the legalization and regulation of marijuana.

was she dodging the media and Canadians or did Goodale back door her?

 

pookie

quizzical wrote:

Quote:
Support the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Health on efforts that will lead to the legalization and regulation of marijuana. 

not bring it into being but undertaking efforts leading to.

etd to add:

don't know why she had to go to Goodale. ya he's the head of the RCMP but according to her job description she's:

Quote:
 As the Attorney General of Canada, you are the chief law officer of the Crown, responsible for conducting all litigation for the federal government and for upholding the Constitution, the rule of law, and respect for the independence of the courts.

she's the bomb. it all comes to her.

his only gig is to support her efforts leading to at some unknown time marijuana legalization and regulation.

Quote:
Support the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Health on efforts that will lead to the legalization and regulation of marijuana.

was she dodging the media and Canadians or did Goodale back door her?

 

How do you normally read the words "lead to", quizzical?

Oh, and just a heads up.  Once you decrim marijuana, regulating it can no longer be solely a Justice issue.  It's actually tricky, division of powers wise.  Which is why you have to bring in other departments, to show it is not a criminal law in disguise.  

 

quizzical

lol, not quite orders was just part of the job description. all it says:

Quote:
 Work with the Minister of Foreign Affairs to end Canada’s combat mission in Iraq and Syria, refocusing Canada’s efforts in the region on the training of local forces and humanitarian support.

unfortunately i don't believe a word of it and the Star's fact finders didn't look and compare very good. unlike ALL the other job descriptions i've read so far there's no corresponding bulleted point in the foreign affairs job description.

 

 

quizzical

dbl

mark_alfred

Pondering wrote:
Given that we have a structural deficit I expect the Liberal deficits to be added to that and if they remain in deficit because of the revised numbers from the PBO I don't have a problem with it. Of the list of commitments this should be at the bottom of the list. 

The right wing press is giving the impression that an extra 5 billion a year is a big deal. It seems the NDP agrees. 

They should raise taxes for greater revenue if there's a structural deficit, rather than raising taxes to fund a tax cut. 

Anyway, the Liberal promise of balancing the budget was central to their whole campaign.  They stated that the Cons just kept doing the same thing over and over and this stagnated the economy and resulted in deficits and a recession.  The Liberals, on the other hand, were going to intentionally run deficits to fund infrastructure spending to stimulate the economy to "grow it from the heart".  Success, then, is having a different result from what the Conservatives had (stagnation & deficits); so success for the Liberals is a robust, balanced, and growing economy.  If they fail to deliver on this, then they've failed the central focus of their campaign.

quizzical

pookie wrote:
quizzical wrote:
Quote:
Support the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Health on efforts that will lead to the legalization and regulation of marijuana. 

not bring it into being but undertaking efforts leading to.

etd to add:

don't know why she had to go to Goodale. ya he's the head of the RCMP but according to her job description she's:

Quote:
 As the Attorney General of Canada, you are the chief law officer of the Crown, responsible for conducting all litigation for the federal government and for upholding the Constitution, the rule of law, and respect for the independence of the courts.

she's the bomb. it all comes to her.

his only gig is to support her efforts leading to at some unknown time marijuana legalization and regulation.

Quote:
Support the Minister of Justice and the Minister of Health on efforts that will lead to the legalization and regulation of marijuana.

was she dodging the media and Canadians or did Goodale back door her?

How do you normally read the words "lead to", quizzical?

Oh, and just a heads up.  Once you decrim marijuana, regulating it can no longer be solely a Justice issue.  It's actually tricky, division of powers wise.  Which is why you have to bring in other departments, to show it is not a criminal law in disguise. 

lead to = to begin a process  imv not to bring a result. i would've prefered shall cause to be or something like it with a specified time frame.

i get it needs a division of powers. most depts of any government cross over when regulating and i never ever made a criticism about any crossover.

Kisstry not speaking down to me or deflecting away from what i am discussing, ok?

 

 

JKR

Pondering wrote:

mark_alfred wrote:

Pondering wrote:
Given that we have a structural deficit I expect the Liberal deficits to be added to that and if they remain in deficit because of the revised numbers from the PBO I don't have a problem with it. Of the list of commitments this should be at the bottom of the list. 

The right wing press is giving the impression that an extra 5 billion a year is a big deal. It seems the NDP agrees. 

They should raise taxes for greater revenue if there's a structural deficit, rather than raising taxes to fund a tax cut. 

Anyway, the Liberal promise of balancing the budget was central to their whole campaign.  They stated that the Cons just kept doing the same thing over and over and this stagnated the economy and resulted in deficits and a recession.  The Liberals, on the other hand, were going to intentionally run deficits to fund infrastructure spending to stimulate the economy to "grow it from the heart".  Success, then, is having a different result from what the Conservatives had, that being a robust balanced and growing economy.  If they fair to deliver on this, then they've failed the central focus of their campaign.

The focus of the campaign was running a budget deficit to fix our infrastructure deficit and grow the economy which would bring us back to balance in 3 years. The primary focus was deficit spending.

The structural deficit is predicted for the next 5 years. I don't expect the Liberals to fix that in 3 years. I expect them to put their platform first. Economists are saying 10 billion a year is chickenfeed so I don't see why an extra 5 is such a big deal that the Liberals should alter their plan. 

In any case, the NDP didn't suggest raising taxes. The NDP said they will hold the Liberals to their commitment to balance the budget in 3 years. They did not say they would hold the Liberals to their spending commitment. So, the NDP's priority is that the balanced budget commitment is kept, not that spending promises are kept, although I am sure they will get around to that eventually. Just my impression, but they seem on exactly the same track as before the election. Just constantly criticize the Liberals regardless of what they are doing. They have no intention of working with the Liberals to advance progressive causes because they don't want the Liberals to get credit for them. 

This will backfire on the NDP as they continue to put themselves to the right of the Liberals. The NDP is down to 12% support. They better wake up and smell the roses. 

A while back I thought the Liberals getting a minority might be good, keep them honest. Now I am relieved they got a majority so the NDP can't be obstructionist. 

I'm hoping the Liberals run deficits of at least $20 billion to get our economy moving.

pookie

quizzical wrote:

lead to = to begin a process  imv not to bring a result. i would've prefered shall cause to be or something like it with a specified time frame.

i get it needs a division of powers. most depts of any government cross over when regulating and i never ever made a criticism about any crossover.

Kisstry not speaking down to me or deflecting away from what i am discussing, ok?

I'm sorry - were you not criticizing the mandate letter as using weasel words, ie., trying to get out of their campaign promise?  Don't see how my response was deflection at all.

quizzical

i'm speaking about your "just a heads up...." commentary as deflecting and speaking down, and i see you're still doing it.  Kiss

 

 

Pondering

Well quizzical, I guess we will just have to wait until it plays out. Considering the government is still just weeks old and the throne speech hasn't been given yet and parliament hasn't been opened I'm willing to get them time to continue proving themselves.They have already kept a few campaign promises and my reading of the mandate letters is that he intends to follow through with the rest. 

I would like Marijuana to be legalized yesterday but as long as it is moving forward, the premiers are consulted for example, I see no reason to believe that he won't go ahead and legalize. 

The same goes for all the other promises although I don't expect every single one to turn out exactly as intended.

I will be looking for things that go beyond the platform, for tone, for intellectual honesty, sincerity etc.  

Canada tweeted a phone # for people in France who need help. You can put that down to politicking, but Harper wouldn't have done it. 

I watched this video

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/matthew-fisher-as-go-to-guy-in...

 

and after I watched the entire video...I was impressed. He strikes me as a good man and an excellent defence minister. I have high hopes for Jody Wilson-Raybould too and others. 

There will be no rainbows and unicorns, the problems of indigenous peoples will not be solved overnight nor even in Trudeau's first mandate. I'm not expecting miracles, I am sure he will make choices that I hate. I still feel lots of forward momentum. 

This is the first time mandate letters have been published. Trudeau is going to set new standards for openness in government. 

I hope that you will give him a fair chance and credit where credit is due. 

quizzical

i have been and i'm not anti-Justin, just cyncical of the unicorns and candy floss. smacks of people who say 'trust me'. i actually made a comment to you where i liked a portion of one of the job descriptions.

there are only a few things i care about enough to watch them closely on.

women's parity and equality actions

veterans

marijuana

infrastructure revitalization

and i don't believe they'll do a thing in respect to Aboriginal rights and issues so i'm not even going to bother watching them on it. too much emotion.

mark_alfred

Send a letter to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau about proportional representation today!

https://secure.fairvote.ca/en/action/open-letter-to-justin-trudeau

quizzical

how do you elect no representation?

Sean in Ottawa

Cody87 wrote:

Pondering wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Pondering wrote:

The only way to meet those numbers is through cuts. 

Bullshit. Therefore the rest of your post is also.

Or raising taxes. It is not possible, with the NEW numbers just released by the PBO, to keep the OLD Liberal numbers without either cuts or an increase in taxes. 

The numbers are now what the Liberals promised PLUS the NEW structural deficit.

Most likely Sean would prefer a corporate tax raise to cuts.

yes

Also to not do the upper middle tax buy off.

Sean in Ottawa

Pondering wrote:

mark_alfred wrote:

Pondering wrote:
Given that we have a structural deficit I expect the Liberal deficits to be added to that and if they remain in deficit because of the revised numbers from the PBO I don't have a problem with it. Of the list of commitments this should be at the bottom of the list. 

The right wing press is giving the impression that an extra 5 billion a year is a big deal. It seems the NDP agrees. 

They should raise taxes for greater revenue if there's a structural deficit, rather than raising taxes to fund a tax cut. 

Anyway, the Liberal promise of balancing the budget was central to their whole campaign.  They stated that the Cons just kept doing the same thing over and over and this stagnated the economy and resulted in deficits and a recession.  The Liberals, on the other hand, were going to intentionally run deficits to fund infrastructure spending to stimulate the economy to "grow it from the heart".  Success, then, is having a different result from what the Conservatives had, that being a robust balanced and growing economy.  If they fair to deliver on this, then they've failed the central focus of their campaign.

The focus of the campaign was running a budget deficit to fix our infrastructure deficit and grow the economy which would bring us back to balance in 3 years. The primary focus was deficit spending.

The structural deficit is predicted for the next 5 years. I don't expect the Liberals to fix that in 3 years. I expect them to put their platform first. Economists are saying 10 billion a year is chickenfeed so I don't see why an extra 5 is such a big deal that the Liberals should alter their plan. 

In any case, the NDP didn't suggest raising taxes. The NDP said they will hold the Liberals to their commitment to balance the budget in 3 years. They did not say they would hold the Liberals to their spending commitment. So, the NDP's priority is that the balanced budget commitment is kept, not that spending promises are kept, although I am sure they will get around to that eventually. Just my impression, but they seem on exactly the same track as before the election. Just constantly criticize the Liberals regardless of what they are doing. They have no intention of working with the Liberals to advance progressive causes because they don't want the Liberals to get credit for them. 

This will backfire on the NDP as they continue to put themselves to the right of the Liberals. The NDP is down to 12% support. They better wake up and smell the roses. 

A while back I thought the Liberals getting a minority might be good, keep them honest. Now I am relieved they got a majority so the NDP can't be obstructionist. 

 

Bla bla bla -- partisan assumption -- bla bla bla

As usual no actual evidence. Just Liberal cheerleading.

The point of course is the NDP has not stated at all what the focus should be. They have not stated that they want cuts to programs rather than tax increases.

They have never supported the Liberal tax cut to the so called "middle class." They have stated that we need a corporate tax increase.

They have stated that you cannot rest programs people need on a structural deficit.

If the NDP comes out and calls for cuts I will criticize them until then I will ask you for evidence or point out how you are a hot air furnace.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..moved

Pondering

quizzical wrote:

i have been and i'm not anti-Justin, just cyncical of the unicorns and candy floss. smacks of people who say 'trust me'. i actually made a comment to you where i liked a portion of one of the job descriptions.

there are only a few things i care about enough to watch them closely on.

women's parity and equality actions

veterans

marijuana

infrastructure revitalization

and i don't believe they'll do a thing in respect to Aboriginal rights and issues so i'm not even going to bother watching them on it. too much emotion.

Well I can't blame you for being cynical. Infrastructure I expect to happen. I know that the problems of indigenous peoples are deeply rooted in the past, entire generations have been damaged. It is not something that can be solved in a single mandate. It will take decades not years to address the damage done and even then it will not make up for the past. Even so, this is one of the areas I am most hopeful some progress will be made on. 

If the Liberals fail to bring clean water to 100% of the communities without it I can forgive them, but I expect them to meet at the very least a 50% target with at least another 30-50% in progress. I expect indigenous students to get MORE funding per capita than other Canadian children but equal funding is an absolute minimum that must be met. 

I haven't read the Truth and Reconcilliation's 94 recommendations but I expect at least 80% to be met the most significant of which is to sign on the the International Treaty on Indigenous Rights and a good faith inquiry into missing and murdered women that acknowledge the systemic damage done to indigenous communities. 

 

Pondering

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Bla bla bla -- partisan assumption -- bla bla bla

As usual no actual evidence. Just Liberal cheerleading.

The point of course is the NDP has not stated at all what the focus should be. They have not stated that they want cuts to programs rather than tax increases.

They have never supported the Liberal tax cut to the so called "middle class." They have stated that we need a corporate tax increase.

They have stated that you cannot rest programs people need on a structural deficit.

If the NDP comes out and calls for cuts I will criticize them until then I will ask you for evidence or point out how you are a hot air furnace.

It doesn't matter. The NDP priority is revealed by what the NDP priorizes and the NDP just priorized holding the Liberals to a balanced budget rather than some other aspect of the Liberal platform, for example infrastructure spending. 

The NDP could have said the new budget numbers showing a higher deficit better not be used as an excuse not to follow through on other promises.

Dance around it all you like, the NDP chose to focus on the balanced budget promise without even mentioning the increased deficit in the new PBO report. 

Since losing the NDP has tried to claim credit for defeating Harper, dubbed themselves the "progressive opposition" and celebrated their "second best win". Mulcair is strutting about grinning and saying the NDP will hold the Liberals to their promises as though the Liberals don't have a majority. The right wing of the NDP is in denial and is determined to hold onto power over the party if not the country. 

P.S. "bla bla bla" is spelled "blah blah blah"

mark_alfred

The above post, #147, inspired me to check out what the trudeaumetre cites as Liberal promises on Indigenous Peoples:

trudeaumetre wrote:

Indigenous Peoples Education:

Not started: Provide new funding to help Indigenous communities promote and preserve Indigenous languages and cultures. 

Not started: Invest $300 million in additional annual funding for the First Nations education system for kindergarten through grade 12 programs. 

Not started: Invest $500 million over 2015 to 2018 for building and refurbishing First Nations schools. 

Not started: Invest $50 million in additional annual funding to the Post-Secondary Student Support Program. 

Indigenous Peoples Métis

Not started Establish a federal claims process that recognizes Métis self-government and resolves outstanding claims. 

Not started Make permanent the funding available to provincial Métis communities for Métis identification and registration.

Not started Review existing federal programs and services available to the Métis Nation to identify gaps and areas for improvement.

Not started Develop a Métis Economic Development Strategy with $25 million funding over 5 years.

Indigenous Peoples Social Issues

Not started Enact the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

Not started Launch a national public inquiry into missing and murdered Indigenous women and girls in Canada.

Not started Implement the objectives of the Kelowna accord.

Not started The Prime Minister will meet with First Nations, Métis Nation, and Inuit leaders at least once every year.

Not started Ensure clean water availability on 93 communities on reserves currently affected by poor water quality.

Important to keep on them to make sure they fulfill these promises.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Pondering wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Bla bla bla -- partisan assumption -- bla bla bla

As usual no actual evidence. Just Liberal cheerleading.

The point of course is the NDP has not stated at all what the focus should be. They have not stated that they want cuts to programs rather than tax increases.

They have never supported the Liberal tax cut to the so called "middle class." They have stated that we need a corporate tax increase.

They have stated that you cannot rest programs people need on a structural deficit.

If the NDP comes out and calls for cuts I will criticize them until then I will ask you for evidence or point out how you are a hot air furnace.

It doesn't matter. The NDP priority is revealed by what the NDP priorizes and the NDP just priorized holding the Liberals to a balanced budget rather than some other aspect of the Liberal platform, for example infrastructure spending. 

The NDP could have said the new budget numbers showing a higher deficit better not be used as an excuse not to follow through on other promises.

Dance around it all you like, the NDP chose to focus on the balanced budget promise without even mentioning the increased deficit in the new PBO report. 

Since losing the NDP has tried to claim credit for defeating Harper, dubbed themselves the "progressive opposition" and celebrated their "second best win". Mulcair is strutting about grinning and saying the NDP will hold the Liberals to their promises as though the Liberals don't have a majority. The right wing of the NDP is in denial and is determined to hold onto power over the party if not the country. 

P.S. "bla bla bla" is spelled "blah blah blah"

Why are you so very, very, very angry Podering? You won. You should be a lot happier than you are. After all, Junior's the boss. Doesn't it make you happy?

Pages

Topic locked