[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Valmy]

Well, I voted.

For an April 28th election? That is a generous early voting period.

Did you vote in person?

[Grey Fox]

Well, I voted.

For an April 28th election? That is a generous early voting period.

Did you vote in person?

You can vote in person at any Election Canada office the moment they are open to usually 5 days before actual election day.

[Neil]

Well, I voted.

For an April 28th election? That is a generous early voting period.

Did you vote in person?

I did.  Early voting started last week, and I'm going to be in Japan for the actual election, and most of the leadup. 

My wife is sad.  She wanted to work an election polls as a lark, but they called the election at just the wrong time. 

[viper37]

I have no idea where to vote.

Elections Canada site says they don't know where I should vote either.

Well, the anticipated vote begins on April 18th.

[Neil]

I have no idea where to vote.

Elections Canada site says they don't know where I should vote either.

Well, the anticipated vote begins on April 18th.

You can just go to an Elections Canada office.  That's what I did.  You will need to know the full name of the candidate you want to vote for. 

[viper37]

I have no idea where to vote.

Elections Canada site says they don't know where I should vote either.

Well, the anticipated vote begins on April 18th.

You can just go to an Elections Canada office.  That's what I did.  You will need to know the full name of the candidate you want to vote for. 

The closest one is 45 minutes away.  I do not live in a city, remember?   


I have to wait until they have sorted the local voting locations.

Latest polls indicate a solid Conservative victory in my riding.  The current MP (Since Harper first election) has avoided debates and speaking in public for the last few months, it plays in his favour.  One mention of him in the local newspaper since the campaign began.

This used to be a very pro-Bloc riding before him.  But the Bloc abandoned us long ago. <sigh>   

I got to say though, for a back bencher, he knows when not speak.  His years as a city mayor has taught him that.


I wish there was a real pro-Quebec party instead of that garbage we got.

[viper37]

Conservative Candidate Used a Secret Signal Group Chat With Freedom Convoy Leaders, Right-Wing Media and Far-Right Influencers



Another prime specimen of this party.  PP go out his way to recruit them.

[crazy canuck]

What really separates the two party leaders on this is that Mr. Carney sees a lasting reversal of the decades-long trend of Canada-U.S. economic integration, and wants a new agreement to manage the decoupling, while Mr. Poilievre's strategy holds out hope that Canada can strike a deal to get closer to the U.S. once again[/quote]

Poilievre is not facing reality

[Barrister]

What really separates the two party leaders on this is that Mr. Carney sees a lasting reversal of the decades-long trend of Canada-U.S. economic integration, and wants a new agreement to manage the decoupling, while Mr. Poilievre's strategy holds out hope that Canada can strike a deal to get closer to the U.S. once again

Poilievre is not facing reality
[/quote]

Missing quote tag in here so not sure who I'm responding to.

Fighting against Canadian-US economic integration was a huge issue in Canadian politics right from Confederation up until the 1980s.  For that entire period Canadian governments were against integration, recommending at first "imperial preference" (trade with the British Empire) and then later preferring to work through international organizations like GATT/WTO.

Despite that, geography can not be denied, and Canada and the US have become more and more economically integrated all throughout history.

I'm all for expanding our trade with the rest of the world, but short of building massive pipelines and LNG terminals (all of which will take a decade or more) there's very little Canada can do in the term of the next government.

So even if I accept the described difference between Carney and Poilievre, I'm not sure that the Poilievre approach is the wrong one.

[Oexmelin]

It's less an approach than wishful thinking, I am afraid. I too can hope the US and Canada get closer once again. But not under the current administration (for which I think no deal is worth much more than the paper it's written on), and I am not terribly optimistic for the future, as long as the current Republican party remains a viable contender for power (if not the sole remaining contender...).

[Barrister]

It's less an approach than wishful thinking, I am afraid. I too can hope the US and Canada get closer once again. But not under the current administration (for which I think no deal is worth much more than the paper it's written on), and I am not terribly optimistic for the future, as long as the current Republican party remains a viable contender for power (if not the sole remaining contender...).

I think it's a "yes, and" scenario.

We need to both maintain, or even deepen, our economic access to the US as much as possible while also building more trade connections to the rest of the world.

[crazy canuck]

It's less an approach than wishful thinking, I am afraid. I too can hope the US and Canada get closer once again. But not under the current administration (for which I think no deal is worth much more than the paper it's written on), and I am not terribly optimistic for the future, as long as the current Republican party remains a viable contender for power (if not the sole remaining contender...).

I think it's a "yes, and" scenario.

We need to both maintain, or even deepen, our economic access to the US as much as possible while also building more trade connections to the rest of the world.

Why would we make ourselves more vulnerable to the US.  That makes no sense.

[HVC]

It's less an approach than wishful thinking, I am afraid. I too can hope the US and Canada get closer once again. But not under the current administration (for which I think no deal is worth much more than the paper it's written on), and I am not terribly optimistic for the future, as long as the current Republican party remains a viable contender for power (if not the sole remaining contender...).

I think it's a "yes, and" scenario.

We need to both maintain, or even deepen, our economic access to the US as much as possible while also building more trade connections to the rest of the world.

I can see maintaining what we can while transitioning to more reliable sources, but why would we deepen ties to an unreliable partner?

[Jacob]

Viper,

Building additional housing on one property has been allowed in BC for a number of years now.  First there was "laneway housing" - housing built in the backyard with access to a back lane.


And now most recently we have the ability to build multi family units on the same property without the need to apply for a zoning exemption (from single family to multi family).

But of course that is because of Provincial legislation. None of that is within Federal jurisdiction.

I have read it has been problematic in some cities in Quebec and Ontario, with owners being fined, forced to dismantle even after receiving their construction permit for tiny houses.

Zoning bylaws vary from cities to cities (or MRC in Quebec, for rural areas).  For example, even if my own lot was originally 3 distinct lots, made to accomodate 3 seperate houses (my dad didn't want any neighbours, he bought the first two, than the 3rd one with all the construction materials when he realized there was going to be house next to us ), I am now forbidden to build another complete house behind mine.  I am also forbidden to have a permanent (more than 2 weeks) camping car or any kind of caravan on any land that I own in the city without a permit, and this permit only allows me to park the caravan, not to plug it to any kind of septic installation.  The city does not want any camping in its area, with or without provincial license.

If I wanted a new house on my lot, I would have to divide and sell it.  But I can't own it and have another house, no matter how small it is.  No house, no caravan.

The irony is, laneway housing has been authorized in the past in my town...  There are such housing in the same street as mine.

We built a laneway house on our property last year. The process was pretty smooth from my perspective. There was some permitting involved and some bureaucracy, but it wasn't a major issue.

That said, someone a few blocks away built a laneway house without permits and were forced to tear it down and now the the property's for sale.

[Valmy]

New exciting opportunities for the Canadian tourism industry