[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[crazy canuck]

I am more worried about how the Conservatives are restricting access to PP by the media.  Only four questions, no follow up questions. And oh ya, the Conservatives select the four people who ask the four questions.

And recently he called a CBC reporter a protester when she shouted out a question to him after not being selected to ask a question for 10 days.

[viper37]

I am more worried about how the Conservatives are restricting access to PP by the media.  Only four questions, no follow up questions. And oh ya, the Conservatives select the four people who ask the four questions.

And recently he called a CBC reporter a protester when she shouted out a question to him after not being selected to ask a question for 10 days.

And these four questions are pre-selected.  The questions are submitted in advance so he knows what he'll have to answer.

[viper37]

Poilievre says he'll use notwithstanding clause to ensure multiple-murderers die in prison

Not to sure about the Cons using this clause.  I don't feel too comfy with given them that kind of power.

[crazy canuck]

I am more worried about how the Conservatives are restricting access to PP by the media.  Only four questions, no follow up questions. And oh ya, the Conservatives select the four people who ask the four questions.

And recently he called a CBC reporter a protester when she shouted out a question to him after not being selected to ask a question for 10 days.

And these four questions are pre-selected.  The questions are submitted in advance so he knows what he'll have to answer.

Oof I did not know that.

[crazy canuck]

Poilievre says he'll use notwithstanding clause to ensure multiple-murderers die in prison

Not to sure about the Cons using this clause.  I don't feel too comfy with given them that kind of power.

He has to do it because the law has already been struck down by the Supreme Court of Canada which was enacted during the Harper years.

It's worth remembering what the Supreme Court said at that time about the law it struck down:

to serve an ineligibility period that exceeds the life expectancy of any human being, a sentence so absurd that it would bring the administration of justice into disrepute

[Oexmelin]

One of the issues that Conservatives are building upon, however, is the sense of the system of justice being broken in some way - that it delivers some judgement that are seemingly absurd, or unjust.

Some of it is good old "law and order" shtick that Conservatives embrace - which is a familiar staple that can perhaps be more safely used than the rest of the Trumpian inspiration that has become poison for the electorate (but still does well with some of the Conservative base).

However, I think it would still be worth it to take seriously a growing sense of dissatisfaction with the administration of justice - whether it is the rising costs, the delays, the disproportion of means, and the fact that lengthy trials seem to result in very little.

 

[crazy canuck]

One of the issues that Conservatives are building upon, however, is the sense of the system of justice being broken in some way - that it delivers some judgement that are seemingly absurd, or unjust.

Some of it is good old "law and order" shtick that Conservatives embrace - which is a familiar staple that can perhaps be more safely used than the rest of the Trumpian inspiration that has become poison for the electorate (but still does well with some of the Conservative base).

However, I think it would still be worth it to take seriously a growing sense of dissatisfaction with the administration of justice - whether it is the rising costs, the delays, the disproportion of means, and the fact that lengthy trials seem to result in very little.

 

Yes, the concerns about the administration of justice are valid, and the liberals have a lot to answer for in keeping the courts short of the number of judges needed.

One bright spot is that the number of judicial appointments increased substantially after Trudeau resigned.  They are now sitting at historic Lows in terms of judicial vacancies not being filled.

[Barrister]

Dubious story.  There's no fact checking on this.

*see other post.

Viper, I saw where you called this a "false flag" with absolutely no evidence.

[Barrister]

Story was blown up out of proportion.  some stuff was from Liberal insiders, but most was not:
https://x.com/BryanPassifiume/status/1911569486697668629

Then once the Liberals admit to it, you go with the classic "no big deal" excuse.

[viper37]

Yes, the concerns about the administration of justice are valid, and the liberals have a lot to answer for in keeping the courts short of the number of judges needed.

They've also selected judges based on political affiliation.

25% of judges nominated were LPC members, 91% of judges nominated where political contributors to their party.

They used the infamous Liberalist to determine political leanings of potential judges submitted by the Minister of Justice on its short list to the members of the committee charged with selecting them.

Apparently, they stopped using the list, but knowing the Libs, they still have other means of knowing who are political contributors or not, meaning those who share their values.

We need a truly transparent system.

[Jacob]

Two related themes I see coming up regularly - though I don't know how real it is vs a perception repeated ad nauseum on the internet are:

1. Repeat offender does something violent, gets arrested by the police, and is back on the street again the same day.

2. Someone does something violent, gets super low sentence (often contrasted with sterner sentences people allegedly get for defending themselves).

The narrative being pushed is very much that dangerous offenders and "scum" don't suffer significant consequences due to lenient legislation or judges, and limited capacity.

I don't know how true it is in practice, but it for people who like the visceral (and very human) satisfaction of seeing obvious miscreants "getting what they had coming", it seems fairly slim pickings.

I guess Beeb is one of our experts here - is the criminal justice system under resourced and/ or too lenient? Is the sense that the FO part of FAFO is too feeble actually correct?

[viper37]

Story was blown up out of proportion.  some stuff was from Liberal insiders, but most was not:
https://x.com/BryanPassifiume/status/1911569486697668629

Then once the Liberals admit to it, you go with the classic "no big deal" excuse.

The buttons are an issue.

The underlying problem is that there were far right personalities from the US invited to the convention and it didn't raise any alarm in the Conservatives rank.

[Barrister]

I am more worried about how the Conservatives are restricting access to PP by the media.  Only four questions, no follow up questions. And oh ya, the Conservatives select the four people who ask the four questions.

Whereas CC goes with the time-honoured "whataboutism" defence of trying to change the subject.

If you want to talk about media access, Carney has now "suspended" his campaign three times where he then proceeds to answer zero questions from any media.

[Jacob]

On the buttons, the story is IMO that the Conservatives are politically vulnerable to charges of being in bed with odious radical right trends in the US and the Liberals did something underhanded to hit that weakness.

How you react to that depends, I suppose, on whether you think the Liberals' underhandedness is a bigger or smaller deal than the Conservatives' involvement with the US radical right.

[Barrister]

Story was blown up out of proportion.  some stuff was from Liberal insiders, but most was not:
https://x.com/BryanPassifiume/status/1911569486697668629

Then once the Liberals admit to it, you go with the classic "no big deal" excuse.

The buttons are an issue.

The underlying problem is that there were far right personalities from the US invited to the convention and it didn't raise any alarm in the Conservatives rank.

First of all it wasn't a "Conservative" conference.  I called it Conservative-aligned.  It's the Canada Strong and Free Network, formerly the Manning Conference.  No candidates attended, being that they're all campaigning.

Second, here's the attendees:

https://canadastrongandfree.network/date/csfn-ottawa-2025/

Please tell me who on the list is objectionable.  Surely you wouldn't say that any right-wing American is automatically objectionable?