Federal Government & Politics II

[P'tit Renard]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Public opinion in Canada has only just recently turned against immigration and the majority are probably ok with continued economic class ready to buy immigrants propping up our real estate markets. Vancouver is probably 10 years ahead of us and I don't see any evidence other than platitudes that they wanted to stop it. A few token measures aside.

People are against the tsunami of TFWs and fake international students going to strip-mall colleges and questionable public educational institutions (Algoma, Conestoga, CBU, etc.) which the government is sheepishly trying to find ways to give this deluge of extremely low quality labour permanent residency, thereby severely degrading the quality of newcomers to Canada. It's this flood of unqualified migrants that's suddenly tripled population growth and turning public opinion sour.

OZ and UK tried similar schemes to jump start the COVID economy, but quickly back tracked when the pols there realized it was politically untenable.

I don't see how Vancouver could have had a ten year headstart if Trudeau didn't start turbocharging his pet ponzi scheme until COVID?

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

Public opinion in Canada has only just recently turned against immigration and the majority are probably ok with continued economic class ready to buy immigrants propping up our real estate markets. Vancouver is probably 10 years ahead of us and I don't see any evidence other than platitudes that they wanted to stop it. A few token measures aside.

There have been more than a few token measures in BC. Indeed if you look at when they were first implemented in 2016/17 real estate prices increases ground to a screeching halt. They only reignited with Trudeau and Co's pointlessly inflationary Covid policies. The remaining problem is with the Feds and the absolute lack of scrutiny they give to funds coming into the country.

[theman23]

Originally Posted by P'tit Renard

Perhaps it relates to allocation of responsibilities, and MOH mismanagement of front-line resources? From friends and family, I hear it's pretty common for nurse practitioners to issue basic prescriptions, whereas that's still pretty much unheard of in Ontario.

NPs shouldn't be limited to basic prescriptions. They're fairly common here in BC (my own PCP is an NP). But you need nurses to become nurse practitioners, and we aren't swimming in those either. And TBH, I doubt NPs are a costs savings. There was a kerfuffle a few years ago here when it came out that NPs were being paid 50% more per patient than GPs. The government had to respond in the next round of negotiations by giving GPs in B.C. their biggest pay hike in history.

[whatnext]

Don't you love it when the oh-so politically correct "inclusive" liberals get caught out in their own hypocrisy?

Deputy PM Freeland apologizes for saying Poilievre wears more makeup than she does
Story by National Post Staff • 15h

Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland apologized on Tuesday after she accused Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre of wearing makeup in response to a question about drug decriminalization.

“Mr. Speaker, the Conservative leader is wearing more makeup than I am,” she said during question period in the House of Commons.

Speaker Greg Fergus asked Freeland to withdraw the comment. “We do not comment on the appearance of members,” he said. After she withdrew the comment, Freeland instead called Poilievre a phoney...

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canad...er/ar-BB1mSMyQ

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Don't you love it when the oh-so politically correct "inclusive" liberals get caught out in their own hypocrisy?

Deputy PM Freeland apologizes for saying Poilievre wears more makeup than she does
Story by National Post Staff • 15h

Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland apologized on Tuesday after she accused Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre of wearing makeup in response to a question about drug decriminalization.

“Mr. Speaker, the Conservative leader is wearing more makeup than I am,” she said during question period in the House of Commons.

Speaker Greg Fergus asked Freeland to withdraw the comment. “We do not comment on the appearance of members,” he said. After she withdrew the comment, Freeland instead called Poilievre a phoney...

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canad...er/ar-BB1mSMyQ

She was making a point he is fake. She shouldn't have backed down. It's obviously not about his appearance though when you throw rocks constantly with these kind of claims yes you need to be scared when you live in a glass house.

[Marshsparrow]

If Pierre and the Conservative Party can't run free and fair nomination processes, what else are they capable of? Another indivdual comes forward...

https://www.newmarkettoday.ca/local-...atives-8798790

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Marshsparrow

If Pierre and the Conservative Party can't run free and fair nomination processes, what else are they capable of? Another indivdual comes forward...

https://www.newmarkettoday.ca/local-...atives-8798790

If only they did ethical thing like bussing international students to nomination meetings to ensure pro-CPP candidates get Liberal nominations.

[Marshsparrow]

Originally Posted by acottawa

If only they did ethical thing like bussing international students to nomination meetings to ensure pro-CPP candidates get Liberal nominations.

Why is the conservative response always to point to others - CPC be better.

[acottawa]

Originally Posted by Marshsparrow

Why is the conservative response always to point to others - CPC be better.

Why is the Liberal response always to throw stones from a glass house?

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Marshsparrow

Why is the conservative response always to point to others - CPC be better.

Our whole meeting to decide nominations after paying $5 is a system in need of a reckoning. Parties have the right to decide who can be a candidate. While in this case it is nearly certainly selecting the MP legally it's general elections where we have the right to choose our representatives.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

She was making a point he is fake. She shouldn't have backed down. It's obviously not about his appearance though when you throw rocks constantly with these kind of claims yes you need to be scared when you live in a glass house.

She had to apologize as those are the rules of the HoC. Or you don't and get kicked out like PP and then whine about it, knowing full well what would happen.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by acottawa

Why is the Liberal response always to throw stones from a glass house?

Whataboutism!

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

She had to apologize as those are the rules of the HoC. Or you don't and get kicked out like PP and then whine about it, knowing full well what would happen.

Good point what would be interesting is if she stuck to her guns and said no it's a fact he is fake and wears more makeup than me. (assuming that is true which it could be)
Changing the channel seems like nothing but a win win for the Liberals at this point.

[whatnext]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

She was making a point he is fake. She shouldn't have backed down. It's obviously not about his appearance though when you throw rocks constantly with these kind of claims yes you need to be scared when you live in a glass house.

So she's fake too because she wears make-up. Got it.

[Acajack]

Could it be that she was speaking metaphorically?

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by whatnext

So she's fake too because she wears make-up. Got it.

We all know if a Conservative woman said that about JT it would be funny. And yes the Liberals would claim it was a scandalous statement somehow so their hypocrisy makes an apology necessary.

[casper]

Originally Posted by whatnext

So she's fake too because she wears make-up. Got it.

Perhaps the difference is the average Liberal voter does not care what either one wears. After all liberal values are to be tolerant of such things. Even going out of the way to accommodate and protect such behavior.

A small (perhaps vocal, perhaps not) element in the Conservative party supporters would be concerned with men wearing make-up.

[lio45]

Originally Posted by Marshsparrow

Why is the conservative response always to point to others - CPC be better.

Why would they need to be even better than they are? As long as they’re better than the LPC, that’s enough to win. It’s unrealistic of you to hold that one party (CPC) to a higher standard than the others. The standards are what they are, period.

[shreddog]

Truer words have never been said ...

Originally Posted by casper

Perhaps the difference is the average Liberal voter does not care what either one wears.

Originally Posted by casper

... Conservative party supporters would be concerned with men wearing make-up.

Particularily if it was of a certain "darker" shade of make-up.

[Hecate]

Just imagine a man said that to a female member of the house. lol. The double standard on full display. At least she apologized, but there is no place for toxic femininity in parliament.