So is it really the beginning of a new era in Canadian politics or simply more of the same?

130 posts / 0 new
Last post
SeekingAPolitic...

thanks mark.

mark_alfred

You're welcome.  More relevant to this thread is the Liberal position on ISDS within CETA.  Here is an exchange between Tracey Ramsey, the NDP's Trade Critic, and Steve Verheul, the appointed negotiator for the deal:

Ms. Tracey Ramsey wrote:
Since the election, have you received any instructions from the current government to take CETA in a new direction, be it on ISDS or any other areas of CETA?

Mr. Steve Verheul wrote:
I wouldn't call them instructions at this point. We've certainly had a dialogue about potential improvements that could be made with respect to the approach to investment in CETA, and that's what we're exploring with the Europeans now. Clearly the EU first came to us with some of these concerns because of the political situation regarding those issues in the EU. We have had an interest on our side in seeing whether we can make some improvements in light of that. That's been supported by the government.

Ms. Tracey Ramsey wrote:
Was there ever any discussion about eliminating ISDS and ICS provisions altogether, given that investors can already seek recourse in domestic courts?

Mr. Steve Verheul wrote:
No. There hasn't been a discussion of eliminating any kind of avenue for investors to pursue potential claims because you can't pursue those kinds of avenues through domestic courts. Domestic courts have no authority to adjudicate obligations in international treaties. If we're going to have any kind of form of redress for breach of an obligation in the investment treaty, we'd have to go to some other mechanism like an investment dispute resolution process.

So, the Liberals clearly have no interest in eliminating ISDS (and/or ISDS-like provisions) from CETA.  And the last statement by Verheul that it's impossible not to have a trade agreement without ISDS is bullshit.  The Australia–United States Free Trade Agreement didn't have ISDS provisions.  See Australia’s rejection of Investor-State Dispute Settlement: Four potential contributing factors.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Mr. Steve Verheul wrote:
No. There hasn't been a discussion of eliminating any kind of avenue for investors to pursue potential claims because you can't pursue those kinds of avenues through domestic courts. Domestic courts have no authority to adjudicate obligations in international treaties. If we're going to have any kind of form of redress for breach of an obligation in the investment treaty, we'd have to go to some other mechanism like an investment dispute resolution process.

To me, this looks like a bare-faced lie. If the courts in some country don't have jurisdiction over such disputes, that country can simply pass enabling legislation to provide such jurisdiction at the time the treaty is ratified. What a bunch of lying snake oil salesmen these "trade" treaty negotiators are.

 

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

As one person said -- are we really in an age where facts have no currency and you are deemed to be on the wrong side if you ask for any?

There is a real truth to this statement. Over at ipolitics I am being attacked from all sides by Liberals and Trudeau Sycophants over Trudeau's treatment of negotians with its employees. They have thrown all the usual attacks about how Trudeau is better than Harper despite all the counters I have added. Another think I have notices is they are also willing to justify Trudeau's failure to deliver on some promises because there isn't the money. Now they are insisting that I simply give the Liberals a few years to deliver and be patient, despite the suffering people are under going because of Liberal failure to act on promises made. I've even been told people must wait their turn; in my case I was told as disabled Vet I would simply have to wait for redress as there is only a limited amount of money and "my needs" aren't the most important. whatever the hell that means.

The fact that people will make these arguments so willingly in Trudeau's defence shows just how much Canada has fallen into a public policy discussion wasteland where anyone challening the notion the Emperor is clothed is viciously attacked and defamed. Things are a mess.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

So, is this, http://canadians.org/blog/ceta-decision-delayed-eu-meeting-trudeau-gover..., part of a "new era", or more of the same?

Pondering

Arthur Cramer wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

As one person said -- are we really in an age where facts have no currency and you are deemed to be on the wrong side if you ask for any?

There is a real truth to this statement. Over at ipolitics I am being attacked from all sides by Liberals and Trudeau Sycophants over Trudeau's treatment of negotians with its employees. They have thrown all the usual attacks about how Trudeau is better than Harper despite all the counters I have added. Another think I have notices is they are also willing to justify Trudeau's failure to deliver on some promises because there isn't the money. Now they are insisting that I simply give the Liberals a few years to deliver and be patient, despite the suffering people are under going because of Liberal failure to act on promises made. I've even been told people must wait their turn; in my case I was told as disabled Vet I would simply have to wait for redress as there is only a limited amount of money and "my needs" aren't the most important. whatever the hell that means.

The fact that people will make these arguments so willingly in Trudeau's defence shows just how much Canada has fallen into a public policy discussion wasteland where anyone challening the notion the Emperor is clothed is viciously attacked and defamed. Things are a mess.

That is because you present your arguments as though Harper and Trudeau are identical twins which they obviously are not. If you said they are the same with regard to neoliberal policies you would have a much better argument. Everyone knows unions will never be truly satisfied because they job is to get more for employees. Many people see getting a government job as hitting the job lottery so government workers in particular get little sympathy.

You present as though you expected Trudeau to deliver on all promises the first year. People don't expect politicians to keep all their campaign promises so your indignation comes across as having unrealistic expectations.

You seem to have zero insight into the majority of Canadians political positions. Generally speaking you seem to think Canadians are a good deal farther left than they actually are. Your primary focus by far is attacking Liberals which makes you seem extremely partisan. Although I know it is not true you come across as someone who would support trade deals if the Liberals were against them. It seems to be all about the Liberals and the NDP to you, not actual issues. I know that is not true. I know that you care about issues. I also know you are extremely partisan. If the Liberals implemented the entire NDP platform you would still be dissing them.              

Aristotleded24

Pondering wrote:

Arthur Cramer wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

As one person said -- are we really in an age where facts have no currency and you are deemed to be on the wrong side if you ask for any?

There is a real truth to this statement. Over at ipolitics I am being attacked from all sides by Liberals and Trudeau Sycophants over Trudeau's treatment of negotians with its employees. They have thrown all the usual attacks about how Trudeau is better than Harper despite all the counters I have added. Another think I have notices is they are also willing to justify Trudeau's failure to deliver on some promises because there isn't the money. Now they are insisting that I simply give the Liberals a few years to deliver and be patient, despite the suffering people are under going because of Liberal failure to act on promises made. I've even been told people must wait their turn; in my case I was told as disabled Vet I would simply have to wait for redress as there is only a limited amount of money and "my needs" aren't the most important. whatever the hell that means.

The fact that people will make these arguments so willingly in Trudeau's defence shows just how much Canada has fallen into a public policy discussion wasteland where anyone challening the notion the Emperor is clothed is viciously attacked and defamed. Things are a mess.

That is because you present your arguments as though Harper and Trudeau are identical twins which they obviously are not. If you said they are the same with regard to neoliberal policies you would have a much better argument. Everyone knows unions will never be truly satisfied because they job is to get more for employees. Many people see getting a government job as hitting the job lottery so government workers in particular get little sympathy.

You present as though you expected Trudeau to deliver on all promises the first year. People don't expect politicians to keep all their campaign promises so your indignation comes across as having unrealistic expectations.

You seem to have zero insight into the majority of Canadians political positions. Generally speaking you seem to think Canadians are a good deal farther left than they actually are. Your primary focus by far is attacking Liberals which makes you seem extremely partisan. Although I know it is not true you come across as someone who would support trade deals if the Liberals were against them. It seems to be all about the Liberals and the NDP to you, not actual issues. I know that is not true. I know that you care about issues. I also know you are extremely partisan. If the Liberals implemented the entire NDP platform you would still be dissing them.          

*Yawn* Anybody know any good lasagna recipies?

Pondering

Aristotleded24 wrote:

*Yawn* Anybody know any good lasagna recipies?

If what you want is a little social club for aging activists I think you've achieved your goal. I believe, and hope, there are still people here who want to make a difference and actually persuade Canadians to support more progressive policies.

Freeland and Trudeau are calling CETA a progressive trade deal with not a murmur of objection from the NDP. CUPE and the Council of Canadians are our best hope aside from the Europeans themselves.

If people don't wake up Trudeau will be PM for the next 8 to 16 years after which the Conservatives will rule again. Either nobody here takes that seriously or you don't believe it can be changed or you are so deluded that you think more of the same is enough to change it.

But wait, I supported the evil Liberals and dissed the NDP so I can't possibly have anything of value to say because according to people here the NDP is so obviously better. The NDP tried to stay barely left of the evil Liberals. The NDP is British Labour. They are losing because they lost balance between being a party of the people, of justice, and political expediency. Now they are all about political expediency and nothing else. The only reason any of their policies are progessive is because that is a significant part of their base and their identity on the political landscape. If they thought that by going 100% centrist they could win they would do it in a heartbeat. Ironically, that is exactly why they are losing.

Some NDP supporters are claiming that the NDP is against the ISDS clause in CETA and that may be true officially but not so much as anyone would notice. The Liberals are calling it a PROGRESSIVE trade deal. I've been watching the board for a few days, maybe a week, to see what people are discussing. CETA is being completely ignored. If Maude Barlow is looking for support babble certainly isn't where she is going to get it.

The fixation on Trudeau in general is ridiculous but one of the most interesting events in the past few days is Trudeau saying that the EU is useless if they can't conclude a progressive trade deal with a country like Canada. That is pretty much on the same level as Harper saying the pipeline was a no brainer. It smacks of desperation. I have been saying for years that it is Canada pushing the ISDS. I suppose the better way of putting it is that corporations are using Canada to push CETA ISDS. That is because it is a model. It is the wedge they need to push through TPP and TIPP.

But wait, that isn't a major concern of the NDP. They are more concerned with demonizing the Liberals through an accusation that an activist was barred by order of government when they have zero evidence that such a crime was committed. That's the central issue that Canadians should be focusing on. Nevermind the CETA elephant in the room.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..speaking of the council of canadians

The Trudeau Liberals on trade, climate, water & health care

The Council of Canadians campaigns for fair trade, climate justice, water protection, and public health care. With the Liberals now almost one year into their mandate, how are they doing on these files?

TRADE - During the election, the Liberals promised "a full and open public debate in Parliament to ensure Canadians are consulted" on the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). In one sense they have kept this promise, the House of Commons standing committee on international trade has held extensive consultations across the country. But Trudeau also says the party "strongly supports free trade" and that the TPP would "increase opportunities for our middle class and those working hard to join it" (even though the evidence says that's not true). It remains to be seen what will happen here, but the Liberals are facing a November 2017 deadline to ratify the agreement.

The Liberals are also now pushing hard to get the Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) ratified in Europe by early next year, and have committed to exploratory talks on a Canada-China Free Trade Agreement.

CLIMATE - During the election, the Liberals also promised to "establish national emissions-reduction targets" that recognize the consequences of "a greater-than-two-degree increase" in global temperatures. They later said that Harper government's weak emission reduction target was a floor "not a ceiling" of what they would do. Unfortunately, environment minister Catherine McKenna is now saying, "What I said is that we will at least meeting the target". In other words they are, at this point, only committing to Harper's goal of a 14 per cent reduction below 1990 levels of greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 - and not a target based on climate science.

The Liberals have also delayed on a promise to phase out billions of dollars in subsidies to the fossil fuel industry, and have extended a $50 million-over-five-years tax cut to spur the liquefied natural gas (LNG) industry in British Columbia. They have also approved the carbon-intensive Pacific NorthWest and Woodfibre LNG projects. And while it's possible they will say no to the 525,000 barrel per day Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline this month, it is widely believed that they will say yes to the 890,000 barrel per day Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline in December.....

 

Aristotleded24

Any word on how the Liberals are doing on changing C-51?

Geoff

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Any word on how the Liberals are doing on changing C-51?

I hear there's a shortage of rubber stamps in Ottawa.

SeekingAPolitic...

I  have sworen off hyperbole a few months ago and i decide to reserve my use of rich and descriptive adjectives when dealing canadian politicans. But the idea the liberals are so popular and effective stewards of Canada that electotral reform policy is no longer needed is (sorry I can not find a word that not is rich and descriptive).  Anyways liberals spindoctors most be secure in the hnowlege that trudeua is telfon coded.  Come on spindoctors  he could let your boss before the public with a fimlesly talking point. 

mark_alfred

Get used to the ‘job churn’ of short-term employment and career changes, Bill Morneau says

Quote:

The remark also comes just three days after the Bank of Canada delivered bad news for the economy, downgrading the country’s growth outlook yet again.

And when asked about precarious employment the finance minister told delegates that high employee turnover and short-term contract work will continue in young people’s lives, and the government has to focus on preparing for it.

“We also need to think about, ‘How do we train and retrain people as they move from job to job to job?’ Because it’s going to happen. We have to accept that,” Morneau said during a question-and-answer session.

This is "real change"?  Hardly.  Here's Niki Ashton's comments on this article [from FB]:

Niki Ashton wrote:
Arrogant and out of touch. Maybe our Millionaire Finance Minister needs to hear what we've heard from Millennials in over six months of consultations - heartbreaking stories of insecurity, crushing debt, hopelessness. But the Liberals are the ones that implemented a neoliberal agenda that put Canada on track for the growing inequality we face today. The fact is we need federal leadership, rather than being told to accept less, sit back and simmer down. This is our future and our generation, like any deserves justice. Maybe he should join us at our Forum on the 26th and Parliament Hill. Time for a wake up call!

Aristotleded24

mark_alfred wrote:

Get used to the ‘job churn’ of short-term employment and career changes, Bill Morneau says

Quote:

The remark also comes just three days after the Bank of Canada delivered bad news for the economy, downgrading the country’s growth outlook yet again.

And when asked about precarious employment the finance minister told delegates that high employee turnover and short-term contract work will continue in young people’s lives, and the government has to focus on preparing for it.

“We also need to think about, ‘How do we train and retrain people as they move from job to job to job?’ Because it’s going to happen. We have to accept that,” Morneau said during a question-and-answer session.

Considering how much money it costs to go to school, and also the loss of employment potential from studying, I just have to ask, couldn't you make a case that you're better off financially to just forget about school and simply work at a minimum-wage job, once all the financial trade-offs are taken into effect? Say what you want about Wal-Mart, but at least if you work for them you are guaranteed something in return for the time you spend there.

mark_alfred

In my cynical moments I sometimes feel that a lot of the whole post-secondary education thing is just a make work project for some (the faculty and staff), and a lottery or loan enabler of sorts for others (the students).  For the latter, they get a low interest loan, perhaps some casual part time work, and perhaps some assistance from family (going to school enables the student to obtain such assistance from either the system or the parents/family/interested parties), and they MAY at the end of it hit the jackpot of an actual job with benefits after incurring all this debt/charity (but probably not).  Dismal.  Not real change.

mark_alfred

epaulo13 wrote:

..speaking of the council of canadians

The Trudeau Liberals on trade, climate, water & health care

 

It's a good list of how little "real change" this government actually is. 

Here's another interesting thing from Nathan Cullen:

Nathan Cullen wrote:
The Liberals campaigned on protecting the voting rights of Canadians living abroad. But yesterday, we found out that the Liberals will be taking up the torch of Stephen Harper's fight at the Supreme Court to ban Canadians abroad from voting in federal elections. If that wasn't cynical enough, the Liberal Party is still hitting up Canadians abroad for donations. A Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian. The government should be empowering more Canadians to exercise their democratic rights, not fewer.

So more bullshit from the Liberals. 

mark_alfred

Walmart food waste caught on camera: 'They just toss it freely,' says former worker

It's criminal that WalMart is being allowed to get away with this.  Apparently they don't even bother to separate the food from the containers as required by recycling stipulations, so the rotting of it in landfill leads to greenhouse gas emissions like methane. 

The NDP's Ruth Ellen Brosseau had a bill on establishing a national strategy to reduce food waste.  The Liberals along with the Conservates voted against it (the Bloc supported it).

http://www.ndp.ca/news/ndp-will-continue-fight-against-inequality-and-fo...

 

mark_alfred

That millennials were engaged and happy with the Liberals was a change from the previous era.  But that seems to be changing.  Recently a climate change protest on Parliament Hill against pipelines resulted in 99 students being arrested.  And when Trudeau attended a Canadian Labour Congress meeting with youth delegates, several turned their back on him while others shouted at him (they're unhappy with the government's declaration that there will be no "real change" to their job prospects -- and if so, then what was the point of voting for "real change"?).  So, seems some clouds are forming on the sunny ways.  

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/justin-trudeau-greeted-by-h...

Quote:

Many young people at Tuesday’s forum, which was organized by the Canadian Labour Congress, voiced frustration about their employment prospects, and booed as Trudeau also suggested that precarious work — including jobs with no pensions — is a fact of life.

ETA:  found a video from someone who was actually there:  https://www.facebook.com/lovestoned/videos/10154652811351532/

Seems that it wasn't quite as contentious as some of the mainstream media suggested.  So, the idea that millenials are growing weary of JT and the Libs might be overblown.  Interesting thing from the video is that JT mentions child care initiatives that the government is going to take.  Interesting to see what that will be.  Also I note his talk on TPP, where he seems to indicate it's full steam ahead.

Geoff

mark_alfred wrote:

That millennials were engaged and happy with the Liberals was a change from the previous era.  But that seems to be changing.  Recently a climate change protest on Parliament Hill against pipelines resulted in 99 students being arrested.  And when Trudeau attended a Canadian Labour Congress meeting with youth delegates, several turned their back on him while others shouted at him (they're unhappy with the government's declaration that there will be no "real change" to their job prospects -- and if so, then what was the point of voting for "real change"?).  So, seems some clouds are forming on the sunny ways.  

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/justin-trudeau-greeted-by-h...

Quote:

Many young people at Tuesday’s forum, which was organized by the Canadian Labour Congress, voiced frustration about their employment prospects, and booed as Trudeau also suggested that precarious work — including jobs with no pensions — is a fact of life.

ETA:  found a video from someone who was actually there:  https://www.facebook.com/lovestoned/videos/10154652811351532/

Seems that it wasn't quite as contentious as some of the mainstream media suggested.  So, the idea that millenials are growing weary of JT and the Libs might be overblown.  Interesting thing from the video is that JT mentions child care initiatives that the government is going to take.  Interesting to see what that will be.  Also I note his talk on TPP, where he seems to indicate it's full steam ahead.

Bill Morneau has said that young people can expect nothing but precarity in their employment future (churning labour market or some such neo-liberal nonsense). I don't know why millenials would continue to buy into Justin's sunny optimism. Nothing but showers coming their way.

mark_alfred

More broken promises from the Liberals.  This time, it's money buying political influence.

Trudeau defends cash-for-access fundraising

Quote:

Mr. Trudeau defended the ruling party’s cash-for-access fundraisers in the House of Commons on Tuesday after reports in The Globe and Mail about events in which Canadians pay up to $1,500 a ticket for privileged time with cabinet members in charge of key spending and policy decisions.

Mr. Trudeau did not respond to questions about his Open and Accountable Government ethics rules, which he unveiled with much fanfare last November. They state that “there should be no preferential access or appearance of preferential access” in exchange for political donations.

“Providing privileged access to people who are ready to write $1,500 cheques to the Liberal Party clearly does not constitute ethical behaviour,” NDP Leader Tom Mulcair said, calling on Mr. Trudeau to end the “pay to play” fundraisers.

The Globe found numerous instances this year in which the Trudeau Liberals ask people for donations of as much as $1,500 to spend time at private residences, hotels or other venues with senior ministers. The prize guests at these events include Mr. Morneau, Mr. Bains, Infrastructure Minister Amarjeet Sohi and Canadian Heritage Minister Mélanie Joly.

mark_alfred

Quote:

Mulcair flays Trudeau Liberals for breaking “one promise after another”

“Whether it’s Justin Trudeau, Paul Martin or Jean Chrétien, it’s the same fight. Whoever takes up the torch (as NDP leader) in a year will be able to make a complete list of everything the Liberals said they would do, which they had no intention of doing,” Mulcair thundered in a speech to a hundred delegates at a convention of the party’s Quebec wing in downtown Montreal.

Mulcair listed what he said were all the Trudeau government’s broken promises, depicting the NDP as the only progressive voice in Ottawa. The outgoing leader criticized Trudeau for not restoring home mail delivery, appearing to have backtracked on electoral reform and going ahead with the sale of tanks to Saudi Arabia.

“This is not a party that believes in peace. It is a party which goes against its own principles, which has no principles, and which we will continue to denounce far and wide,” he said.

Mulcair also flayed top Liberals like Finance Minister Bill Morneau, whom he described as a “multimillionaire whose name came out in the Panama Papers” and Economic Development Minister Navdeep Bains, whom he accused of saying “idiocies” about Bombardier.

http://montrealgazette.com/news/local-news/mulcair-lashes-out-at-trudeau...

mark_alfred

Charlie Angus' pressure has paid off!  Liberals will support NDP motion calling for $155M in immediate investments to move closer to complying with the Human Rights Tribunal ruling on First Nations child welfare. 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ndp-motion-first-nations-child-welfare-1...

mark_alfred

Quote:
Even Conservatives are concluding that Trudeau’s team has come to embrace Harper’s political agenda.

http://thetyee.ca/News/2016/09/29/Did-Liberals-Out-Harper-Conversatives/

mark_alfred
mark_alfred
mark_alfred

Here's something unusual for this "new era":  http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conservative-senators-middle-class-tax-a...

Quote:

Conservative senators amend government's middle-class tax plan

Conservative Senator Larry Smith moved an amendment to Bill C-2, which he said would make the plan revenue neutral — a promise the Liberals made during the last election, but subsequently broke as their plan will cost the treasury an additional $1.7 billion a year — and would deliver a larger tax break to middle-class Canadians earning between $45,282 and $90,563.

[..]

But the amendment also reduces the tax savings Liberals had promised those earning between $90,563 and $200,000.

[..]

Finance Minister Bill Morneau said Tuesday he found the amendment "surprising," and that he preferred how the bill was initially drafted.

It doesn't specify exactly how these changes were accomplished.  Maybe they lowered the 2nd bracket (45k to 90K) even further, and actually raised the third bracket (90k to 200k) to achieve this.  Though that seems very unlikely from the Con senators.  Yet I'm not sure how else it could have been done.  Anyway, interesting that the Con senators have modified the Lib bill to actually do what was promised (help the middle class rather than the upper middle class, and be revenue neutral) and interesting that Morneau finds this annoying.

Martin N.

In response to the topic title, it is the beginning of a new era via more of the same presented in a very cunning and Machiavellian way. Basically Gerald Butt telling you to go to hell in such a manner that you look forward to the trip.

iyraste1313

In response to the topic title, it is the beginning of a new era via more of the same presented in a very cunning and Machiavellian way........

Yes it may be the beginning of a new era......the Indigenous people of Canada have been sorely deceived by the fake promises of the new Government, in spite of some serious advances in their rights as declared in Canada Supreme Court actions...a double whammy...and a people with the potential to open new directions politically economically........an alliance with suffering rural peoples and dissident urbanites may just be the ticket to advance and ovrhaul the system...this must now be the focus...the neo cons have exposed themselves, no political movement present offers anything different.....a time of great potential, the beginning of a new era indeed!

mark_alfred

Interesting quote from this Globe article Chinese company Anbang buys stake in B.C.-based retirement home chain

Quote:

The Canadian government is eager to attract foreign money to make up for insufficient investment capital within Canada and acquisitions by foreigners are rarely rejected. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is particularly eager to attract more investment from China and has begun exploratory free-trade talks with Beijing. The Liberals have already signalled they are open to rolling back a ban on state-owned Chinese investment in the oil sands imposed by former prime minister Stephen Harper.

So, that is the difference in this new era.  The Libs will sell us out even faster than the Cons.

Pages