Because It's 2016: Canadian Politics in Sunnier Days

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/canada-now-the-second-biggest-arms-exporter-to-middle-east-data-show/article30459788/

utterly disgusted by this

― F♯ A♯ (∞), Wednesday, 15 June 2016 12:11 (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

sunny ways

― The Nickelbackean Ethics (jim in glasgow), Wednesday, 15 June 2016 12:37 (1 hour ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Lol @

The Trudeau government, asked whether it took pride in Canada’s expanded role as a weapons seller and would feature this achievement in trade promotion materials, referred the questions to a department of Global Affairs bureaucrat.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ClL65WPWIAAsLTP.jpg

dear britain

we'll take carney back now

how funny it has been to be a model to Leavers for a few weeks.

Wait, who was a model?

Canada, according to Boris Johnson

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/mar/11/boris-johnson-on-brexit-we-can-be-like-canada

Ah. Wasn't following that as closely as I probably should have. Interesting.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bccla-assisted-dying-legislation-1.3654220

So the assisted dying legislation is being challenged, as it obviously was going to be because it only provides for a much narrower application than in the Carter decision.

suck it, harper:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/northern-gateway-pipeline-approval-overturned-1.3659561

yerrrr

still my fave campaign ever

http://dangerousminds.net/comments/william_s._burroughs_endorses_mr_peanut

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/rob-commentary/if-were-renegotiating-nafta-lets-be-ready-to-walk-away/article31609876/

i cannot believe the amount of people in the us that believe nafta is actually beneficial for everyone in its current form

i was taking a supply chain management course recently and i had to bite my tongue quite a few times because they just glossed over major flaws as if they didn't even exist

I'm inclined to agree with a lot of that but I'm not sure this is true:

Whoever wins November’s presidential election, Washington will likely push to renegotiate NAFTA or even scrap it.

En attente of an english article:

http://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/politique/politique-quebecoise/201610/28/01-5035205-le-front-national-du-quebec-prend-forme.php

A FN version coming up in Quebec, t'was a matter of time. Pleasantly surprised it didn't occur before.

Pour l'heure, le parti compte une cinquantaine de membres.

At least there's that.

uh, I mean, at least that's all there is.

Because the PQ wasn't racist enough?

Il ne souhaite pas pour autant expulser tous les musulmans du Québec, seulement ceux qui refuseront de « s'intégrer » à leur société d'accueil.

At least he's not Idi Amin?

In other news, the CETA is about to be ratified, which I still don't know what to think about.

I don't either. I guess I was never too strongly opposed to it in broad terms because, if we're going to be a free-trading sort of country, at least we should trade more with non-US First World countries, and ones that at least try to have labour and environmental standards? I honestly don't know enough about the details of all the trade agreements we sign, though. I was a weird enough kid that I can remember when i) the Liberals were the anti-free trade party and ii) we held elections before signing free trade deals.

http://cdn.static-economist.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/print-cover-full/print-covers/20161029_cuk400.jpg

I read the article. A lot of things that were good about Canada are still good, and the sweeping wave of xenophobia hasn't really caught on in Canada as it has in much of the West, but if the main reason why JT is preferable to HRC is that she is less gung-ho about free trade deals (at least in her 'public positions'), I'm not feeling that bullish. The Trudeau tax plan has been discussed a lot on this thread; it does more for upper-mid earners than anyone else. The American right has been right of the Canadian right for decades, and has mostly gone off the deep end into sheer insanity some time ago, but the current American left seems further left than the Canadian left (which feels new). Mainstream Democrats are at least taking precarious employment seriously, unlike Trudeau and his finance minster, are more willing to (actually) tax the wealthy, are even entertaining the idea of free tuition.

Oh, the tax plan was discussed on the previous thread: Canadian Politics Thread

Or here: http://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/the-truth-about-justin-trudeaus-tax-cuts/

if the main reason why JT is preferable to HRC is that she is less gung-ho about free trade deals

well, keep in mind that there is absolutely nothing the economist hates more than protectionism

Idk if the Liberal Party should really be considered the left but I'm not really convinced that the NDP is better or further left on most of those issues and am not sure I even know what they stand for at this point. I guess that's the other weird thing about Canadian politics: it really feels a bit like a one-party state atm, with an interim leader for the CPC and a lame-duck leader for the NDP.

sorry, this is not related to canadian politics, but there is no thread for canadian expats in the usa (there aren't enough of us stateside to warrant a thread, i think?)

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/us-election/canadian-expats-reflect-on-the-ugly-us-presidential-race/article32572248/

it was weird moving here and it has just gotten weirder. i've grown to like the us, but it's such a confusing 'relationship'

i thought i knew a lot about it from reading the news articles in canada, but living here really highlights all the nuances that make a huge difference

i am actually mailing my citizenship application either today or tomorrow

good luck with that! must be a long process.

Idk if the Liberal Party should really be considered the left but I'm not really convinced that the NDP is better or further left on most of those issues and am not sure I even know what they stand for at this point. I guess that's the other weird thing about Canadian politics: it really feels a bit like a one-party state atm, with an interim leader for the CPC and a lame-duck leader for the NDP.

― Spiritual Hat Minimalism (Sund4r), Saturday, October 29, 2016 7:00 PM (two days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i find it baffling that the tories and ndp haven't expedited leadership contests.

especially the ndp tbh. with the perception that he is a huge mega-loser for going from 1st in the polls to 3rd in the election literally everything he says is rendered ignorable and sort of pitiable, despite his reputation, deserved or not, for being a good debater in parliament.

thanks van horn street

i've read it takes no more than six months but we'll see

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conservatives-yazidis-liberal-mccallum-1.3820299

more of this please.

I'm late but, yeah, that's kind of great to see.

Also jim OTM re Mulcair.

that's kind of great to see.

Aargh.

that's kind of great to see.

Kinda ridiculous that it will take another year for the NDP to elect a new leader.

For some reasons, I thought it was in May.

The Economist article suddenly seems a little less silly.

I'm so frustrated that only now, this morning, is Canadian news actually focusing on how Trump's protectionist policies on trade and climate change might affect us. Anecdotal evidence, but it's seemed to me that people here have been evaluating him as if they live in America, even the racists and dumbasses don't seem to get that to HIM we are THEM.

Seems like we are chosen to be holding the liberal democracy fort for a while now.

https://www.thestar.com/news/world/uselection/2016/11/09/how-trumps-win-will-affect-canada.html

the environmental stuff is especially enraging for me.

Trudeau's congratulation statement was pretty bad

Jesse Brown ‏@JesseBrown 49m49 minutes ago
You didn't do *anything* so stfu that you are #proudtobecanadian

had a nightmare that bc was a russian oblast

climate policy will be pretty negatively affected i would say

keystone xl is not popular in bc (have some friends who are in favour of it though), so this will be another long fight

nafta is the most interesting, because canada actually stands to gain something from it

thing about nafta: trump talks about renegotiating it or scrapping it entirely but international treaties while chiefly undertaken on the president's behest and negotiated by him have to be confirmed by the senate, surely the senate republicans aren't going to go against free trade? (shouldn't assume anything i suppose)

that's my thinking but ya i guess everything's up in the air right now

I still can't understand why all the Mexicans came to the USA if all the jobs went to Mexico

Duh, to rape.

Reagan's famous shining city upon a hill is now...Hamilton?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-trump-visit-canada-1.3845013

I'm happy with this. To hell with my lofty urban principles. I don't want the canadian economy to suffer more than it should have.

at least they agree on keystone xl

Ugh: https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2016/11/09/trumps-win-an-exciting-message-thats-needed-in-canada-kellie-leitch-says.html

the environmental stuff is especially enraging for me.

not sure that trying to out-harper harper on xenophobia is going to do her many favours

also kellie leith is p much the definition of an elite

Khristinn Kellie Leitch PC OOnt MP, orthopaedic surgeon, former think tank chair

more dangerous than Leitch is that the lots of Quebec nationalists are very much into the Trump/LePen rhetoric and think this is the key to having their own country.

after Tuesday, I'm 100% certain it could happen.

Yeah. I'm feeling very much like I need to get more engaged with Canadian politics after this.

ha

let quebec proceed with seceding and we'll cut them off of everything the rest of canada has but what they want even after seceding. if they want it, they get taxed and exporting to them is treated like all other foreign countries. their main trading partner is the us so they can negotiate something with trump. ha! would love to see that. they won't survive a day

young quebecers are not particularly stoked on independence in general to?and the main goals of the sovereignty movement - protect french, put francophones in power - have been accomplished. yes I'm sure there will be, as there already is, white nationalist movements in quebec, but i wouldn't really worry about it, at all, as something that will gain prominence or get anywhere near power or mainstream influence

The PQ and BQ already had that element but idk, is there really much appetite for separatism in Quebec? Both parties have been routed in their respective elections. Quebec has what might its most federalist provincial government in ages and, on the federal level, came back to the Trudeaus' party for the first time in three decades.
xp!

I guess the worry is that they have to vote Liberals out at some point and we don't want the PQ to become more Trump/LePen-like?

ha

let quebec proceed with seceding and we'll cut them off of everything the rest of canada has but what they want even after seceding. if they want it, they get taxed and exporting to them is treated like all other foreign countries. their main trading partner is the us so they can negotiate something with trump. ha! would love to see that. they won't survive a day

― F♯ A♯ (∞), Thursday, November 10, 2016 12:47 PM (twenty-four minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

yeah having two lost generations of fellow citizens is certainly worth the laugh....

I guess the worry is that they have to vote Liberals out at some point and we don't want the PQ to become more Trump/LePen-like?

― Spiritual Hat Minimalism (Sund4r), Thursday, November 10, 2016 12:54 PM (eighteen minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

yes exactly. so far there is no viable alternative between an increasingly xenophobic party and a corrupted to the core one.

speaking sarcastically there

quebec seceding will never happen but it's pretty upsetting when it comes up

in a world in which Donald Trump is president, Quebec can secede.

i'm open to reading literature that demonstrates quebec can *successfully* secede, if you've got them

you just need a successful referendum for the situation to devolved into a massive shit storm for everyone involved. but go ahead, take things for granted, I decided never to do it again.

comparing a secession to electing trump is comparing apples and oranges

*successful* was the keyword up there

i appreciate the cautionary tone, but i googled "can quebec successfully secede from canada"

here are some simply practical problems for quebec seceding:

https://www.quora.com/Why-doesnt-Canada-let-Quebec-secede

the last two referenda, quebecers have preferred to stay, and last i heard (maybe a few years ago admittedly) i haven't heard any strong desire for another referendum. but let's say they did choose to, the rest of canada would have to be willing to negotiate such a secession. your view is of a city crumbling in chaos suddenly, which i guess could happen theoretically, and sure, we should never take a united canada for granted, but i don't see a secession happening any time soon. and there would be symptoms of it coming to fruition, which i like to believe the rest of us would disseminate, if ever it reached that point

i haven't heard any strong desire for another referendum. but let's say they did choose to, the rest of canada would have to be willing to negotiate such a secession.

I mean, it's mostly an academic question at this point, but I think we'd do that, unless you'd be willing to send troops to Quebec.

sure, but i just can't get my head around how they would solve the other practical issues. especially as brexit has shown how deeply complex it is and, as someone said in the quora link, crimea

anything is possible,

good luck splitting montreal in half in a berlin-during-the-cold-war fashion tho. but yeah, there is limited desire for quebec sovereignty right now let's freak out about the real shit coming down the pipe - as uncertain as the nature of that shit is.

The question on the Quora page was pretty dumb, as pointed out by subsequent comments, and a lot of those 'practical' issues don't seem insurmountable to me. The national debt question is the only one I would take especially seriously. The question about the divisibility of Quebec, and FN treaties, seem most serious to me. Otherwise, banks and TV networks are private institutions anyway; presumably Radio-Canada would separate from the Ceeb. Connecting the two remaining halves of Canada would be pretty manageable: mainland Americans manage to make it to Alaska and vice versa. Issues about citizenship rules or where to locate customs posts are the sorts of things any new country has to handle, and they usually manage to figure those things out. Obviously, if Quebec became independent, it would set its own immigration rules. A new Quebec government would have no obligation to employ former Canadian civil servants as Quebec civil servants but they might well be the right people for the job.

"What about the roughly 1 million French speaking people in Canada who don't live in Quebec, and the roughly 1 million English speaking people who do"

The national debt question is the only one I would take especially seriously. The question about the divisibility of Quebec, and FN treaties, seem most serious to me.

Uh, to clarify this, the latter issues, about whether Quebec would also be divisible, especially given unceded FN land, or land that was ceded under treaties to the Crown, are the most serious issues imo, but they are not even touched on in the first response.

"What about the roughly 1 million French speaking people in Canada who don't live in Quebec, and the roughly 1 million English speaking people who do"

This is just dumb. There are already lots of speakers of minority languages in the country, and in many other countries, and they seem to get by.
― Spiritual Hat Minimalism (Sund4r), Thursday, November 10, 2016 12:27 PM (three minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

there are a few things you don't seem to understand or you take them very lightly, but what he is referring to is that would those french-speakers be considered quebec citizens and not canadian citizens? both? canadian citizens and not quebec citizens? what about casting their vote, before and after the referendum, etc.?

furthermore, how can a government represent you when you did not vote for it or have a say in the referendum?

Presumably, people who were official residents of Quebec prior to a referendum would become Quebec citizens and people who were not would not, regardless of their first language. Afaik, QC residents vote in referenda and non-residents do not. Why would a francophone in Edmonton be considered a Quebec citizen just because they speak French? You're right that I don't understand this and take it lightly.

I mean, there might be a transitional period when a QC government would decide to fast-track immigration of Canadian francophones or vice versa.

Under the category of 'shit I'd've been LOLing over if I'd read it prior to Tuesday':

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/sam-oosterhoff-ontario-pc-candidate-niagara-west-glanbrook-1.3818897

Sam Oosterhoff could soon become the MPP for Niagara's wine country, and he's barely old enough to drink (legally).

Oosterhoff, 19, is the Progressive Conservative candidate in the Nov. 17 byelection in Niagara West-Glanbrook. If he wins, he will become the youngest MPP in Ontario's history.

[. . .]

Oosterhoff's Facebook likes include the "We can end abortion" community and the Libertarian Christian Institute — as well as the indie bands Imagine Dragons and Death Cab for Cutie.

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2016/11/11/if-donald-trump-kills-nafta-canada-could-benefit-walkom.html

i have mixed feelings about remembrance day. if it were only about the world wars, they would be less mixed

but anyway, cohen reciting in flanders fields: https://www.thestar.com/entertainment/2016/11/11/listen-to-leonard-cohen-recite-in-flanders-fields.html

It's coming here too; we have to get coherent. While most Canadians tend to act with fundamental decency, it's in large part a culturally enforced characteristic, and you don't have to scratch too deeply below the surface of most white Canucks to expose xenophobia. Most people I talk to - and myself as well - are probably better informed about US politics and culture than Canadian, many admire and emulate American "freedom" and ideological individualism, and we seem to pretty consistently lag US social and political trends by a few years, bringing in Mulroney after Reagan, Chrétien pretty much concurrently with Clinton, Harper after Bush, Trudeau after Obama. The coming years will be a battle for the hearts & minds of swing voters (i.e. most of the population) especially if the "alt"-right gains mainstream traction in the US and Europe as it seems likely to. Under that polite surface there's a lot of incoherent fear and resentment. I think the strength of institutions will prevent us from electing a real demagogue, but our values are in more peril than I hear anyone admitting and I could see us becoming a Vichy-type lapdog state under a new Harper without too much resistance.

otm dilettante. we better engage with the white middle class now before it's too late, and all the while continue to fight for indigenous and environmental rights. it's seems like a tight rope to walk but we can do it.

I mean, Rob Ford happened in Toronto. Pauline Marois happened in Quebec. Canada isn't immune to what happened on Nov. 8.

whats his name, jason kenney, ffs, managed to convince vast numbers of non-white canadian immigrants to vote for the most anti-non-white-canadians party. i still shudder when i think about the words "old stock"

http://www.homedouglas.com/bbc/collection/e/extra-old-stock-1988/extra-old-stock-1988.jpg
Ruined my ironic shitty beer of choice forever.

also kellie leith is p much the definition of an elite

― harold melvin and the bluetones (jim in vancouver), Thursday, 10 November 2016 12:20 (two days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Khristinn Kellie Leitch PC OOnt MP, orthopaedic surgeon, former think tank chair

― harold melvin and the bluetones (jim in vancouver), Thursday, 10 November 2016 12:23 (two days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Does the American anti-intellectual/anti-'elite'/'I could have a beer with him' tendency have the same kind of currency in Canadian politics? Rob Ford is the only major example I can think of; maybe Ralph Klein? Generally, my impression was that Canadians prefer their leaders to be elitist, arrogant assholes.

Re the Walkom, I'm also sort of curious about NAFTA. As I said on the US thread, I have concerns about the way corporations have been able to sue the Canadian government over environmental legislation.

But, yeah, to be clear, I totally agree that Leitch is being ridiculously hypocritical about "out of touch elites".

That strain is very much alive at a grassroots level, but I think the structure of our system really works against maverick schlubs gooning their way to the top. I work among lots of folks who look enviously over the border at Trump, the Nevada militias, direct democracy, redneck pride, anti-PCorrectness, etc. Lots of provincial-level politicians in the West esp during the heyday of the Alliance moment were way more aligned with anti-elitism than with traditional Toryism. I do think we're a bit insulated from a tidal wave of it by our institutions but there's no question it's a force - & going to be a larger one as time goes on.

Cult of personality (related phenom) very much alive in Can. Politics today (probably an inescapable feature of modern politics going forward, actually). Klein a great example, but not too much of a stretch to Notley and Trudeau "seeming like really nice people" or "something about Mulcair just rubs me the wrong way" (whereas Layton's NDP with the same platform would have done much better in the popular vote) or how much Calgarians idolize Nenshi - very little of their approbation or dislike seems to have much to do with policy (in general) & way more to do with charisma. Criticism of policy often seems more a justification for personal feelings about the projected image than real ideological disagreement.

I can't explain a decade of lizard-mask Harper by thiat theory at all, so yeah it breaks down at some point.

Not saying that personality/charisma are unimportant but does Trudeau's charisma come from anyone imagining he could have a beer and watch the game with them in Timmins? I thought he had more of a Prince Charming thing going on, and his father was the epitome of the elite by any definition.

Probly shouldn't have confused the question by conflating the 2 phenoms. I blame my adhd.

Are there any good Canadian political/cultural podcasts? I don't need them to lean left necessarily (actually, the less partisan the better). I dug Canadaland for a while, but the tone grated on me - it began to seem like a long advertisement for how brave and on-the-edge the host is.

The strategists was great but sadly ended a couple months ago

Anyone follow this one? http://www.mediaindigena.com/podcast I want to find good sources for Canadian indigenous politics.

http://www.canadalandshow.com/ is my favorite.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/opioid-crisis-meeting-1.3856740

'Canada has the world's second-highest per capita consumption of prescription opioids, said Philpott, noting that in some parts of the country, drug overdoses are killing more people than motor vehicle accidents.' I know at least one person that has struggled with Oxycontin, but I didn't know it was that widespread. Maybe someone who knows about medical sciences could tell me if they are benefits at not banning fentanyl?

the opiate epidemic is p huge. i don't think banning fentanyl would do much - pretty sure most of the fentanyl that finds its way into street drugs is not acquired legally.

Is the US #1?

https://biggiesplace.files.wordpress.com/2016/02/bridge-would-it-help-2.gif

according to a cbc bit tonight the fentanyl in canada is mainly imported from china

The Trump election has gotten me thinking a lot about Canadian politics and the level of complacency at large in this country, and what might be done to help combat it. I'm thinking seriously in becoming involved in the political process on a local level (here in TO) but I really have no idea where to start. (This is also influenced by the fact that, at 30, I finally have steady, reliable employment, not to mention no local family and few friends to take up my time or attention. Might as well try to be useful.) I'm wondering if anyone itt has experience with getting enmeshed in local politics.

No experience, but good luck. The election has me feeling a sense of personal complacency and a need to reach out more. Maybe by volunteering.

Thanks, jmm. Getting started by reading up on the NDP and Green platforms and their reps in my riding (University-Rosedale).

I volunteered a little with Brian Masse's campaign in Windsor West in 2011. It was fun!

I'm still processing the US election tbh, though.

Love Hebert: https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2016/11/19/cold-hard-reality-about-to-hit-the-liberals-on-three-fronts-hbert.html

sunnier days indeed

https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2016/11/29/liberals-approve-trans-mountain-line-3-pipeline-projects.html

This is going to be such an endless clusterfuck

this is going to be fucking mayhem in metro vancouver

i live in a bubble, of course, but literally everyone i socialize with and my in-law family in bc are dead against the transmountain expansion

https://dogwoodinitiative.org/letter-shows-trudeau-ready-break-promise-kinder-morgan/

This one is intense: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/prime-minister-you-failed-to-do-your-job-by-approving-pipelines/article33199170/

we seem to pretty consistently lag US social and political trends

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/chris-alexander-lock-her-up-chant-anti-carbon-tax-1.3880911

https://www.mydemocracy.ca/

tell the gov what you think about electoral reform

I'm a pragmatist! Was hoping I was Tyron Lannister but apparently he isn't an option.

im an innovator apparently

fyi, they use census weights to make sure results are representative (correct for self-selection bias) so if u don't fill out the demographics ur answer is discarded:

https://twitter.com/robgillezeau/status/805877752695951361

it's pretty awfully designed in general but that is quite hilarious, what a mess (altho tbh unless you live in a very sparsely populated/homogenous postcode im not really sure about the privacy concerns people would have)

i am NOT sympathetic to the privacy concerns because i've been on the other end, having done research in Statistics Canada's Research Data Centers (tiny room with no windows in basement of a University library) and the privacy/confidentiality requirements are absurdly stringent

Ha, I was an innovator too. Half of the description doesn't seem to apply to me, though. I leaned against online voting and strongly disagreed with mandatory voting any time it came up.

But I think it's the only group for people who want more options/preferences on ballots.

I had similar answers. What a bunch of bullshit first past the post propaganda

I don't have a problem w/ mandatory voting at all tbh, so long as there's a "nahhh" / "none of the above" / write-in option

it never directly asks if we should keep first past the post or switch to PR, the one aspect of democratic reform i remember the liberals campaigning on

and the questions about about ballot design are not so subtly priming respondents to keep the current, relatively simple system

As part of a national engagement process, we will ensure that
electoral reform measures – such as ranked ballots, proportional
representation, mandatory voting, and online voting – are fully
and fairly studied and considered.

This one sentence is all I found in the 2015 Liberal platform on electoral reform. I don't remember them ever advocating PR, to be honest, although I could be wrong. It's probably the system that would weaken the Liberals the most. Most of their Parliamentary reform ideas had to do with giving greater autonomy to MPs and Senators, which seems like the opposite of what PR would do. The NDP are the most pro-PR party iirc. (On this, I tend to agree with the fantasy version of the Liberals that was described in their platform. I would probably favour a ranked ballot system.)

The 2015 Liberal election doc had (used to have?) text promising (paraphrase) "2015 will be the last election using the current first-past-the-post system".

strongly disagreed with mandatory voting any time it came up.

same. i'm surprised i am in the minority of my friends on this one tho. i think a lot of people make a false equivalency of forced voting = more engagement. you can force people to vote, but you can't force them to be engaged.

The 2015 Liberal election doc had (used to have?) text promising (paraphrase) "2015 will be the last election using the current first-past-the-post system".

You're right. It was in the sentence preceding the one I quoted. They made no promises about what would replace it, though, and I never thought PR was at the top of their list. In retrospect, it seems a little crazy that they promised to change the system without saying how they would change it. This is the full electoral reform section of the platform.

We are committed to ensuring that 2015 will be the last federal
election conducted under the first-past-the-post voting system.
As part of a national engagement process, we will ensure that
electoral reform measures – such as ranked ballots, proportional
representation, mandatory voting, and online voting – are fully
and fairly studied and considered. This will be carried out by a
special all-party parliamentary committee, which will bring
recommendations to Parliament on the way forward, to allow
for action before the succeeding federal election. Within 18
months of forming government, we will bring forward legislation
to enact electoral reform.

I guess if I had to see a benefit to mandatory voting, it may be comparable to assigning a grade for attendance and class participation (which essentially penalizes people for not showing up or participating). And attendance/participation grades do seem to work at getting people to show up and participate, even if they're just doing it to avoid losing marks.

and then they just put a check next to the same they recognize. forced voting tends to heavily favour the incumbents (at least from what I've heard).

Yeah, it's different in that the 5% of your grade that counts for attendance and participation is supposed to help you learn and do better and not lose points on the other 95% of a course. There's no real analogue for that with voting, which I see as a right, neither a privilege nor a duty.

Actually, if PR just means multi-member ridings, I'm OK with that. I'm less comfortable with some sort of party list-based system. Coyne's idea of breaking the issue into two questions is not bad imo.

funny that one of the things that the poll seems to say all of canada is for -- flexibility for mps to vote for their constituency vs towing the party line -- will never, ever happen and basically cannot be enforced

also fuck a mandatory vote, EVEN IF they make voting day a stat. people working contract/hourly/tips/etc don't get stats. if you want more voters, throw every mp who suppresses a single voter into the fucking bay of fundy

let's keep the bay of fundy out of this.

I'm an innovator

Is there any downside to a ranked ballot (other than for the Libs and Conservatives)? Seems like such a simple to implement improvement that would help smaller parties a lot.

I'm pretty sure a ranked ballot would benefit the Liberals, actually, since they'd be the most likely second choice of both left-wing and right-wing voters. I think they're the only party that advocates it. I support it anyway.

its better for libs than for conservatives because there are two "left" (lol) parties, ppl voting for one will almost always 2nd-rank the other

xp beat me to it

flexibility for mps to vote for their constituency vs towing the party line -- will never, ever happen and basically cannot be enforced

Why? Canada is pretty unusual in terms of how much party discipline we have. There are ways to weaken the power of party leaders over MPs and also to make MPs more representative of their constituents, although these are two different things. (I favour the first more than the second.)

Just as one example, not that the UK Tories are who we really want to emulate, but their party leaders are directly responsible to the caucus, as opposed to the broader party membership, which means that MPs can boot leaders (as they did with Thatcher) and have less pressure to toe the party line on every vote.

Similarly, recall procedures could pressure MPs to be more attuned to their constituents' wishes.

I'm not sure Liberal voters could be counted on to rank the NDP second, though. In affluent suburban ridings, I would doubt that tbh.

(xp)

i reckon cons would be throwing a lot of their "second-place" votes at harder right fringe parties, like all those ones with family in the name or the alberta roses of wild

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/editorials/the-beer-that-could-change-canada/article33209730/

i reckon cons would be throwing a lot of their "second-place" votes at harder right fringe parties, like all those ones with family in the name or the alberta roses of wild

we'll know if it's leitch in charge

Yep

speaking of which: i watched a brief TV segment where she and michael chong debated, and he seems... like... kinda not bad? granted he went to great lengths to praise harper and kenney's grifting of canada's immigrant and working class families but aside from that.

also what the fuck is up w/ the ndp leadership race?

Chong is our MP. I didn't vote for him but the cons sure could do worse.

Canada's Rosa Parks is replacing Canada's George Washington on our $10 bill.

http://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/as-it-happens-thursday-edition-1.3887380/i-m-feeling-so-proud-sister-of-viola-desmond-new-face-of-our-10-bill-1.3887383

^ Fuck that makes me so happy!

Viola was pre-Parks. Does that make Rosa Parks the USA's Viola Desmond?

New American $10 bill will have the face of James Blake (Rosa Parks' bus driver) on it, Trump vows.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/keystone-pipeline-approval-could-tilt-trade-balance-against-canada/article33711159/

canada treading on dangerous waters

not looking forward to the oil version of the softwood lumber dispute

Canada's Rosa Parks is replacing Canada's George Washington on our $10 bill.

http://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/as-it-happens-thursday-edition-1.3887380/i-m-feeling-so-proud-sister-of-viola-desmond-new-face-of-our-10-bill-1.3887383

― clemenza, Friday, December 9, 2016 6:30 PM (one month ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

this was p great especially considering that john a macdonald - a fellow glaswegian - was a real piece of shit white supremacist

http://www.businessinsider.com/keystone-xl-canada-oil-sands-photos-2017-1/

photo essay on how oil is mined at the tar sands

the magnitude of it is out of this world

trudeau really twerping it up left and right these days

xp. flying over northern alberta it just looks like such a crazy hellscape.

Just signed: https://you.leadnow.ca/petitions/tell-trudeau-welcome-those-fleeing-violence-and-deportation-under-trump?bucket=noii&source=facebook-share-button&time=1485522319

Well-intentioned but that is not a good idea

Why not?

There are a lot of mexicans and hispanics that want to go to canada and canada's economy is nowhere near as diverse to withstand such a huge volume of people

Thered be massive unemployment and this would just create a slew of social problems and an unregulated underground economy of whatever they sell to survive

I know at least a dozen people in canada with arts degrees working at places like subway, retail and other restaurant/pub type establishments

Here in the US, those jobs are given to those without degrees and the economy and demand is diverse enough to allow for niche economies

I think it's calling for eliminating the “Safe Third Country” agreement that would prohibit Canada from accepting asylum seekers who landed in the US, not for Canada to accept anyone deported from the US.

Hm, well, there's a lot of rhetoric there but I thought this is what the petition is actually calling for:

We are calling on Prime Minister Trudeau and Minister Hussen to immediately rescind the “Safe Third Country Agreement”, and that immediate steps be taken to allow special consideration of humanitarian and compassionate reasons for entry to Canada as enabled by the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act.

Based on reading the Safe Third Country Agreement, I didn't really think that would mean that Canada would be required to admit the (ostensibly) 11M undocumented immigrants that Trump wants to expel so much as it would mean that we wouldn't turn away non-American refugees because they arrived at the US first (which is what we have to do now according to the treaty).

(I gotta say that I've definitely known American arts grads working in the sorts of places you describe, though!)

xp! Thanks, that was more concise.

I'm glad Trudeau said this at least: https://twitter.com/JustinTrudeau/status/825438460265762816

and he's a real man of his word: http://startouch.thestar.com/screens/9d4cadfb-9ac8-4eda-8b25-7e0aed44b9ab%7C_0.html

What's stopping millions of illegal mexicans applying and entering canada (legally of course) once the safe third country agreement is rescinded and canada allows entry to immigrants under the immigration and refugee protection act?

If there's no stopping them and canada does admit them, what can canada offer them in terms of jobs and careers?

Keep in mind most illegal mexicans only have a high school education, and were educated in a language that is neither English nor French

Sund4r, canada has a higher population with a post-secondary education per capita than the US. While university educated americans work menial jobs, it is not as common, and there are far more opportunities for them in the US than in canada

Point is Canada has by and large failed its own citizens and has hardly recovered from a recession and yet they want to bring in more unskilled immigrants

Sund4r, canada has a higher population with a post-secondary education per capita than the US. While university educated americans work menial jobs, it is not as common, and there are far more opportunities for them in the US than in canada

Hm, I guess it's hard to argue this when both of us are working in the US. I think I see your point but undocumented Mexicans would still have to go through the whole legal refugee/immigration process in that case. Maybe it's true that this would put excessive strain on the system. I guess the current crisis seemed like the more pressing issue but maybe it was hasty to agitate for this while courts in the US are still working it out.

xpost

What nonsense. Pulling out of the Safe Third Country Agreement doesn't mean Canada will begin accepting every immigration applicant. It simply means that refugees who were refused at the US border can still apply for Canadian visas.

Regardless, I disagree with your anti-Mexican diatribe. Yes, you ought to have some kind of parameters governing immigration. No, immigrants don't steal our jobs.

We should probably build a wall just to be safe

Fuck.

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/29/5-dead-in-quebec-city-mosque-shooting-mosque-president.html

:(

Awful

Yes, you ought to have some kind of parameters governing immigration

No shit sherlock, we're talking about the details and how to go about doing it

No, immigrants don't steal our jobs.

Might want to work on that reading comprehension

Would you at least stop fucking calling them "illegal Mexicans"? Sorry your washout friends couldn't get good jobs, but: a ton of agricultural work in Canada is done by migrants (go to Niagara-on-the-Lake). Immigrants (including unskilled ones) tend to grow economies, and not by "selling whatever they do", and Canada just raised its immigration quota to 300,000 to help drive economic growth.

As was noted, Safe Third Country only bars asylees applying for status in the US from doing so in Canada. If removed, people would still need to get approved for entry.

You have no idea what you're talking about, legally or economically.

Comp sci friends who attended ubc and waterloo also left to the states for better opportunities

No need to repeat something so basic about safe third country agreement, but you can answer my question above about what happens to undocumented Mexicans of the US once they are admitted into Canada though

Unskilled immigrants grow economies that are diverse; where opening a small business is streamlined and a country that fosters innovation and entrepreneurship. Canada has none of these things

also if a tonne of agricultural work is already done by migrants how much more can that sector sustain?

as you suggest, undocumented immigrants in the us are overrepresented in farming occupations, and as well as in construction, but canada's economy is tiny

removing the safe third country agreement right now, with what's going on with trump, would cause a rise in refugee applicants. and sure, canada would just take forever to process each one and do it at a pace it can sustain, but gov't would be oversaturated with these applicants and would need to put in more time, effort, and resources into processing all of them, especially if wanting to do it in a timely manner. i think removing the agreement should be considered at another time when things are not so chaotic in the states

living in la, i notice that most undocumented immigrants, who tend to be of mexican origin, would rather work for themselves. you are assuming all immigrants into canada want to work in agriculture, though. what kind of economy does canada need to have to get these people to easily open their own businesses and can they successfully operate businesses that meet a demand in a largely english-speaking country? if not, then why not promote entrepreneurship and innovation more for starters? why shut down applicants by bright engineers, computer scientists, and entrepreneurs (see brain drain) living in toronto and vancouver and force them to flee to the us for better opportunities? because that is what is happening right now

this is highly contentious, so take it or leave it, but with this agreement lifted, i can totally see trump saying "fine. deny entry to all mexicans and let them all go to canada"

and yes, i have read the agreement in its entirety

im confused as to how you seem to think the immigration system in canada works.

wannabe immigrants or refugees just showing up at the border wouldn't be allowed in.

mexicans would generally not be able to claim refugee status. even if they could they would have to initiate the claim from outside the country, fill in a bunch of forms, be vetted etc. before years later being rejected or accepted.

for a low skilled mexican with no family in canada to get permanent residence is basically impossible under the current system. they could apply to work in canada through the temporary foreign worker scheme, but that would be their only option, and there is no pathway from their to permanent residence.

a huge number of low skilled jobs in canada are performed by temporary foreign workers. fast food jobs, low skilled manual labour, agricultural,etc. they're basically unfree labour, and are routinely misused by companies who claim the labour isnt available locally but are bullshitting because it is but they just want to keep costs down.

the canadian govenrment actively restricts numbers of refugee claimants at times whenever they are "swamped", so it's not really a huge issue for the effective working of the cic to receive high volumes

mexicans would generally not be able to claim refugee status. even if they could they would have to initiate the claim from outside the country, fill in a bunch of forms, be vetted etc. before years later being rejected or accepted.

― Islamic State of Mind (jim in vancouver), Sunday, January 29, 2017 10:36 PM (fourteen minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

do you have a source for that? the way the current agreement works is:

Under the Canada-U.S. Safe Third Country Agreement, persons seeking refugee protection must make a claim in the first country they arrive in (United States or Canada), unless they qualify for an exception to the Agreement.

http://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/agency-agence/stca-etps-eng.html

what the petition is calling for, as it states on the page provided by sund4r, is to allow those deported under trump's gov't to use the safe third country agreement to go to canada and apply there if the us does not allow them entry (from sund4r's link: immigrants "fleeing violence and deportation from Trump’s America")

for a low skilled mexican with no family in canada to get permanent residence is basically impossible under the current system.

― Islamic State of Mind (jim in vancouver), Sunday, January 29, 2017 10:36 PM (fourteen minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

probably. but technically, by law, it is not impossible, as family connections is an exception to the safe third country agreement:

Family member exceptions

Refugee claimants may qualify under this category of exceptions if they have a family member in Canada who:

is a Canadian citizen;
is a permanent resident of Canada;
is a protected person under Canadian immigration legislation;
has made a claim for refugee status in Canada that has been accepted by the Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (IRB), an independent organization;
has had his or her removal order stayed on humanitarian and compassionate grounds;
is the holder of a valid Canadian work permit;
is the holder of a valid Canadian study permit; or
is over 18 years old and has a claim for refugee protection that has been referred to the IRB for determination.

http://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/agency-agence/stca-etps-eng.html

if companies are misusing the system already wouldn't it be wiser to fix or somehow mitigate this before taking in more refugees that will be fleeing the us currently?

your last point is fair, i understand that

mexicans would generally not be able to claim refugee status. even if they could they would have to initiate the claim from outside the country, fill in a bunch of forms, be vetted etc. before years later being rejected or accepted.
― Islamic State of Mind (jim in vancouver), Sunday, January 29, 2017 10:36 PM (fourteen minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

nevermind, i found the answer:

Refugee claimant is found eligible

If the refugee claim is found to be eligible to be referred to the IRB:

the border services officer will provide the refugee claimant with a number of documents and an explanation of each document and its purpose;
the refugee claimant will be allowed to stay temporarily in Canada while waiting for a decision to be made by the IRB;
a removal order will be issued and will be conditional pending the decision by the IRB; or
if the refugee claimant is found not to be a Convention refugee or a person in need of protection by the IRB, the removal order will immediately come into force and the claimant will be required to leave Canada.

http://www.cbsa-asfc.gc.ca/agency-agence/stca-etps-eng.html

all this actually happens at the border (hence "border services officer") so it can take hours per person, so no way is this an application process where you just sit and wait in your home country and it could very well put a strain on the people and time available to process apps and interview them

sorry, misread your family point, you're right

Refugees can apply for protection either within or outside of Canada. If within Canada you are allowed to remain within the country pending the determination of your claim; you don't have to wait at the border or in detention unless there are security/identity concerns.

interesting data here about the 7-country immigration ban:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/us-politics/trump-immigration-ban-canada/article33822491/

warm winds, see, i think there's confusion/ambiguity because see in this same article how the globe and mail words the safe third country agreement:

people turned away from the U.S. can’t come to Canada’s border or airports and ask to seek asylum there

this suggests that if the safe third country agreement was to be rescinded, they would be able to go to canada's borders or airports and ask to seek asylym there

i know some people who had to submit apps by going to the border, so this is why i'm curious about this, because it's not far-fetched

You use the word 'they' as if everyone should be able to know who you're talking about...

applicants

i don't really see why an undocumented mexican who is living in the U.S. on the DL would want to go to the canadian border and get fingerprinted and interviewed and the rest of it for a, likely to be failed, attempt at gaining asylum to canada.

i mean there is no visa requirement for mexicans to visit canada now, if we're going to get unauthorized migration or asylum claimants from mexico in significant numbers i imagine it will likely be mexicans arriving here by plane.

and of course the shooter in the quebec city mosque attack was a trump supporting, le pen loving, anti-feminist dickhole

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/visit/visas-result.asp?country=MX&result=11&message=0&standard=2&q3=

“(Bissonnette) was not necessarily overtly racist or Islamophobic, but he had borderline misogynist, Islamophobic viewpoints,” said Vincent Boissonneault, a fellow Laval student."

I'd hate to see overt Islamophobia.

xp. those ETAs are a formality, basically automated, not like an actual visa application process - which until recently mexicans had to go through to visit canada

as a uk citizen i have to do the same thing to enter the US, you pay via credit card online and you print off a little slip, you show it at the border, you go through.

xp. yeah the hedging bets, waiting for more to come out, minimizing of bissonnette's ideology is sickening but to be expected.

also on fbook i was seeing people complaining about people bringing up the xenophobia of quebecois culture in light of the shooting. smh.

A Trump lover on my FB feed was talking about the (supposedly multiple) killers' 'Arabic heritage' and 'Moroccan descent' soon after the shooting.

Those actually were some of the initial reports (even CBC I think - I was watching tv switching channels) which is pretty messed up.

Oh, I know, but this guy was really making a point of it: "Two people of Arabic heritage - so NOW we know why the media hasn't been covering it". Eating crow now, hopefully.

jim

okay good to know

i need one if i wanted to visit canada as well (because i am a us lpr) so i decided not to go

Goddamn Fox: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-02-01/quebec-mosque-shooting:-fox-news-deletes-tweet/8233210

Good on Trudeau for saying this:

"Make no mistake, this was a terrorist attack,"

and fuck him on this

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/trudeau-abandons-electoral-reform/article33855925/

god if the ndp had their shit together they're so much material to attack the grits from the left with

(I'm of the opinion that the ndp are not going to get anywhere near being the party of government for the indefinite future and should use their parliamentary platform as a sort of pressure group)

What I wrote on FB fwiw:

"We'll definitely replace the system but we have no idea with what" was never that inspiring of a promise tbf.

If I had ever actually thought "the Liberal Party of Canada is serious about keeping its promises", this would have been an alarming one: FPTP has its problems but it has at least been the basis for a functional democratic system for 150 years in Canada (and centuries longer in the UK). I'm in favour of reform but promising to replace the entire electoral system in a short time before even deciding on an alternative would have been pretty reckless if it were not an empty promise that every voter could interpret the way they wanted. Lots of alternatives could be worse.

I'd rather start by seeing more autonomy and less party discipline for MPs, since they're the only people we actually vote for, before changing the voting system. If we're going to reform the way we vote, I'd favour some sort of ranked ballot system. The way the Liberals went about this was definitely not the way to do it, though.

Ha, I see I said some of that a month ago.

my only real problem with FPP is that all the centre-left parties cannibalize each other's votes, so the voting system rarely spits out the outcome I want. If Canada had one monolithic lefty party and three conservative parties fighting over the same group of votes, I would love FPP.

A ranked ballot system (STV or AV) would address the vote-splitting issue.

Did you like FPTP in the 90s? The issues that I have with the system now are the same ones I had then.

i just really dislike fptp because i don't really believe that a party that gets a <40% share of the electorate that bothered to vote has the legitimacy to have complete control of the legislative and executive functions of the government.

I liked how it ended Stockwell Day's run... It is a stable and effective system, even though it privileges regional parties like Reform and BQ and means the NDP will never sniff power again

libs will go back to disliking it when the tories get back in i guess

Next time they need to win lefty votes they can just promise to overturn it again

i just really dislike fptp because i don't really believe that a party that gets a <40% share of the electorate that bothered to vote has the legitimacy to have complete control of the legislative and executive functions of the government.

I agree but I think this could also be dealt with if there was less pressure for MPs to vote along party lines.

i don't see how that sort of situation can be arrived at tho? is that a thing that has been introduced in other places/by what methods?

here's an illustration of why i like more proportional systems

http://www.scotsman.com/news/dominic-hinde-budget-deal-a-milestone-for-green-politics-1-4356617

Elections to the Scottish Parliament use a Mixed-member proportional system.

The SNP received 46.5% of constituency votes and 41.7% of regional list votes in 2016. in FPTP they would likely have a majority, yet they have under 50% of seats in the Scottish Parliament and have formed a minority government.

They're in a fairly commanding position as befits their proportion of the vote vis-a-vis their opponents, but can't act with impunity, and must make concessions to the opposition to pass a budget.

and fuck him on this

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/trudeau-abandons-electoral-reform/article33855925/

― sean gramophone, Wednesday, February 1, 2017 4:19 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

have they abandoned electoral reform permanently or just in time for the next election? seems obvious that it is not ready for next elxn yet, both in terms of logistics and like, there hasn't been a mature national conversation about it yet. and it's a pretty complex topic, not something u wanna rush. i get feeling burned bc it was a campaign promise, but i never expected it to come to pass

i don't see how that sort of situation can be arrived at tho? is that a thing that has been introduced in other places/by what methods?

I would re-frame this: why is party discipline so strict in Canada? The UK has almost the exact same system on a national basis but MPs seem freer: David Cameron was clearly at odds with much of his own caucus on the EU, to the point where he held a referendum on something he didn't believe in and had to resign. 47 Labour MPs voted against Corbyn on Article 50. Congressmen in the US are not nearly as bound by party lines as Canadian MPs are: House Democrats were divided on things like the Iraq War, the ACA, even Trump's cabinet appointments. This article cites several experts who think Canada has the strictest party discipline of any advanced democracy.

Potential ways to address this: Parliament passing rules that MPs cannot be whipped except under certain circumstances, parties passing rules that party leaders have to be accountable to their caucuses (as is the case with some British and Australian parties), stricter separation between riding-level fundraising and national-level party fundraising.

and fuck him on this

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/trudeau-abandons-electoral-reform/article33855925/

― sean gramophone, Wednesday, February 1, 2017 4:19 PM (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

have they abandoned electoral reform permanently or just in time for the next election? seems obvious that it is not ready for next elxn yet, both in terms of logistics and like, there hasn't been a mature national conversation about it yet. and it's a pretty complex topic, not something u wanna rush. i get feeling burned bc it was a campaign promise, but i never expected it to come to pass

― flopson, Thursday, February 2, 2017 12:42 PM (twenty-one minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

looks like theyve just abandoned it. trudeau wanted a ranked ballot as that would benefit libs most, as things weren't pointing in that direction it's been scrapped. libs win the next election or two and then when the tories are back in they'll put it back on the agenda. love me some democracy!

I would re-frame this: why is party discipline so strict in Canada? The UK has almost the exact same system on a national basis but MPs seem freer: David Cameron was clearly at odds with much of his own caucus on the EU, to the point where he held a referendum on something he didn't believe in and had to resign. 47 Labour MPs voted against Corbyn on Article 50. Congressmen in the US are not nearly as bound by party lines as Canadian MPs are: House Democrats were divided on things like the Iraq War, the ACA, even Trump's cabinet appointments. This article cites several experts who think Canada has the strictest party discipline of any advanced democracy.

going to be a pedant here: David Cameron did not need to have the EU ref. He knew that that there was euroscepticism in the UK and that to deflect the right-wing alternative offered by UKIP, and to ward off the anti-eu competitors for his leadership within the tory party, he specifically made a referendum a campaign promise and then went through with it assuming that it would be won and that his position would be secured, and UKIP would be chastened and damaged by a referendum defeat. His MPs, many of whom wanted the referendum, could never have made him do anything, it was entirely self-inflicted and done out of political (mis)calculation.

it's common for MPs to vote against the whip in the uk, but generally where the vote is symbolic, and quite rarely when the rebelling vote will make a difference (though more than in canada I'm sure). The parliamentary labour party are also particularly and almost uniquely in contemporary UK politics in revolt against the Corbyn leadership

That wasn't pedantic at all. Thanks for expanding.

With all the troubles right now, I'm just glad we aren't going through a referendum. Don't get me wrong, I am all for reform but I understand Trudeau, we saw what happened to the last two prominent PM (Renzi/Cameron) who proposed this dubious democratic practice.

Anyone watch the Tory debate? I'm about 19m in here. What do they have, like, 12 candidates?? (Edit: just checked; there are 14!) I'm actually a little intrigued that almost all of them (except Chong?) are so opposed to a carbon tax. I would have thought shifting taxes from income to consumption might appeal to conservatives.

And, yes, wtf is going on with the NDP?

Ugh, Idk who Rick Peterson is but he's calling for a flat income tax.

Lol @ Andrew Saxton: "[Economists] are in their ivory towers, sipping their tea and coffee, dealing with theory and not practice". The latte-loving elites have been reduced to tea and coffee now?

Hm, I actually agree with Raitt and Alexander on reducing the number of sexual assault claims that get dismissed as 'unfounded'.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/rob-magazine/thirteen-canadians-we-want-back-from-trumps-america/article33773631/

ha elon musk

dude literally lives in a city protected by tall metal gates

every time i pass by i feel like im in the twilight zone

Lol @ Andrew Saxton: "[Economists] are in their ivory towers, sipping their tea and coffee, dealing with theory and not practice". The latte-loving elites have been reduced to tea and coffee now?

― My Body's Made of Crushed Little Evening Stars (Sund4r), Sunday, February 5, 2017 9:17 AM (three days ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

guessing game. who is this:

"He took up post-secondary studies again at the University of Calgary, where he completed a bachelor's degree in economics in 1985. He later returned there to earn a master's degree in economics, completed in 1991."

That sounds like Harper but I'm hoping that also describes Saxton.

it's harper. saxton studied and worked in finance.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/sunny-ways-is-trudeaus-best-play/article33984428/

Truth be told, the oil and vinegar comparisons of Mr. Trudeau and U.S. President Donald Trump are overdone. Neither are ideological leaders. They both grew up knowing privilege. They are both image obsessed, celebrity politicians who manipulate social media like pros. It’s not hard to picture Mr. Trump taking to his young, Vogue-certified interlocutor, especially if the fashion-forward Ivanka sits in on their chat.

ha

but seriously:

What he responds well to is validation of his hugeness. Mr. Trudeau must humour him if he has to. By all means, he must not publicly criticize him or contradict him in the joint news conference the two leaders will likely hold after their meeting – even if reporters try to provoke him and his anti-Trump base back home wants him to stand up to the brutish Yankee leader. As one veteran of Canada-U.S. diplomacy explained: “The Liberals need to forget about their base because it’s going to disappear if they lose five million Canadian jobs.”

This is not the assignment Mr. Trudeau signed up for when he was elected. But it’s the one that history has handed him. If he manages it well, it will yield huge economic and political dividends. Canadians will be eternally grateful if this country ends up on the right side of the protectionist wall Mr. Trump seems intent on erecting.

For all of Mr. Trudeau’s affinities with Mr. Obama, the latter was just not that into Canada and never did his friends any favours. Mr. Trump, properly treated, could do us many.

i think the churchill/martin luther king bust replacement is inaccurate though

+also

I totally get the importance of diplomacy but the PET/Nixon comparison is interesting: it's not exactly like PET's base disappeared despite the antagonism between him and Nixon.

that's true

and support for pet has increased over the past 30 years

This is curious: https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/pre-clearance-bill-would-give-us-border-agents-in-canada-new-powers/ar-AAmQSmI

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/national/andrew+coyne+conservative+hysteria+over+harmless+motion/12923560/story.html

Conservatism used to have some claim to being a coherent political philosophy. Of late it has become a series of dares. The most extreme voice will lay down the most extreme position, then challenge others to endorse it.

This is gross: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/bus-driver-minister-laughter-1.3984808

Unrelated, I'm half-seriously thinking of buying a Tory membership to vote for Chong.

been talking to a lot of people who are thinknig of doing exactly that, myself included -- gotta look up if i can join the ndp after to try to elect an actual progressive there too

Ugh, I did that in 2011 and voted for Mulcair. Last election campaign felt like such a crushing letdown.

I can't remember who I voted for in that one, but if def wasn't him. not that my choice was necessarily better... mighta been cullen? can't remember.

Amusing (if weird) fluff: https://noisey.vice.com/en_us/article/justin-trudeau-despises-paul-simon-a-rebuttal?utm_source=noiseyfbusads

more nafta talk and random thoughts

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/nafta-trump-canada-and-trade-the-latest/article33715250/

this is really interesting

i heard from a couple mexicans that if a trade war does occur, the mexican gov't will not cooperate with the us gov't's demands on curtailing immigration from certain countries (read middle eastern countries) nor will it prosecute particular criminals. now i'm reading in the above article that mexico's president has actually said this as well

i think there's a 'let islamic terrorists enter the us through mexico' sentiment among mexicans as pay back right now

trump may want to propose an all or nothing approach because of this? but his advisors will probably tell him he has to bargain. all very tricky

mexico is pretty much pleading to canada to agree to bilateral agreements only, but i really doubt this

the graph depicting the survey results for what countries we should increase trade ties with reflects my own: (1) us; (2) eu; (3) china

in fact, i think we should really work on the eu, so we'll see how ceta goes

http://www.dailyxtra.com/canada/news-and-ideas/news/us-customs-block-canadian-man-reading-scruff-profile-215531

this is scary because the type of jokes people make with friends privately (through text eg) could probably be misconstrued

Anyone else follow that Tony Clement radio tantrum? And he's still at it on his facebook and twitter. RIDICULOUS.

been talking to a lot of people who are thinknig of doing exactly that, myself included -- gotta look up if i can join the ndp after to try to elect an actual progressive there too

So afaict, the NDP doesn't let you hold another party's membership as well as theirs. At this point, I'm leaning towards thinking that the Tory leadership might matter more than the NDP leadership. I am wondering if voting for Mulcair as NDP leader in 2011 and Chong as Tory leader in 2017 means I'm really a closet Liberal.

19-yeare-old closet case is youngest ever MPP

there really should be a minimum age requirement

i mean they should increase it

I disagree, actually. I thought it was great when the NDP got a bunch of undergrads into the House in 2011 and would like to see more participation by young adults.

There's something to be said for life experiences

Young adults can be more ideologically imo

They can, although I was probably less ideological as a young adult than I was either as a teenager or as an older adult. (Actually, I voted PC when I was 18 in 1997! Weird transitional period after my anarcho-communist adolescent days.) Clearly, Canadian young adults in general are not even ideologically driven enough to show up on Election Day, for the most part, so I'm not really concerned about the thread of radicalization. 18-25 year olds are adults in the eyes of the law, vote, pay taxes, are often responsible for their own bills (I was when I was 20), generally either work or are part of the post-secondary system, so I think it is fair for them to be involved in government, and I think they have a perspective to offer.

it's not an issue i lose sleep over

i never voted conservative in any of its forms eg (unless you're including the liberals)

my lowest point was voting for the communist party when i was 19 or 20 (chalk it up to dumb things you believe when you're a naive university student)

Reform was the hard-right option in '97. Charest's PC were practically a centrist option to the Liberals (who were probably at their furthest right, economically) and I thought their foreign policy was more principled (although I can't remember what it was).

I'd sooner reduce the voting age than raise it.

same

Blah, sorry, brainfart. I don't know why I thought we were talking about voting ages rather than age eligible to run.

https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/vbbvqj/conservatives-finally-ditching-the-rebel-have-a-lot-to-answer-for

rats leaving the sinking ship over at the rebel.

legit concerned by the preponderance of MAGA chud types on canadian social media and below the line contributions at newspapers. these "mainstream" conservative voices only now deciding to distance themselves from such a vile and extreme publication shows the current state of canadian conservatism, the real depths it will sink to, and the almost imperceptibly infinitesimal distance between tories and the alt-right

i'd rather they distance themselves a little too late than outright embrace it like south of the border.

that being said, i remain extremely pessimistic as to how Quebec nationalist parties will distance themselves from the increasingly racist and xenophobic sections of the population.

it might surprise you to learn some of the most important figures in quebec nationalism are pretty fuckin outspoken on this issue:
http://plus.lapresse.ca/screens/e9020f7c-0021-4659-a972-e2908ac6db6b%7C_0.html

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/jean-francois-lisee-racism-immigration-burqas-1.3785382

though "systemic racism" aside, of course lisée's still on his party's fuckin anti-burqa tip

i still think there is a large degree of separation between PQ/Lisée/Drainville and organisations like Atalante Québec and lol La Fédération des Québécois de Souche (Federation of pure-bred Québécois, kid you not). i don't think the PQ are as openly xenophobic as those proper french alt-right organisations, nor do they live in the same sphere of politics. the same way John McCain and the american alt-right are not exactly the same battle. the question now is how influent one will try to be on the other in the coming elections, because yeah, PQ will use the white nationalism card for sure.

I c&p-ed the discussion to the 2017 thread: Canadian Politics 2017: I've Got a Pipeline Straight to the Heart of You

thanks sund4r!

My union joins in:

http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/ontario-elementary-teachers-union-calls-for-renaming-john-a-macdonald-schools

I used to supply at one of the (what I take to be many) Sir John A.s occasionally.

Moved it to the 2017 thread:

Canadian Politics 2017: I've Got a Pipeline Straight to the Heart of You