[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[crazy canuck]

It is so weird the economic conservatives have disappeared.

If the Canadian economy keeps strengthening, you will probably see them again.

[Grey Fox]

Where did they go?

[crazy canuck]

Where did they go?

Two things contribute to not hearing much from that group.  First, we have just finished a phase of fiscal conservatism and so what government waste and inefficiency that could be easily removed has been accomplished - although this new government may create new targets of opportunity.  Second, In a time of economic instability you will not likely hear much about the need to reduce government spending. 

[Grey Fox]

Did they vote Liberal that last time around (Federal)?

[crazy canuck]

Did they vote Liberal that last time around (Federal)?

most likely 

[Grey Fox]

Damn.

[crazy canuck]

After the Minister's update the fiscal conservatives are now more vocal wondering why the government is stimulating a healthy economy. And especially when you he Bank of Canada is raising rates.

[Valmy]

Hey Canadians I have a question on...um...how you might list your city names.

Here in the US for genealogy we typically will do City, State or City, County, State, Country to be more formal. So I might say 'Austin, Texas' or 'Austin, Travis, Texas, USA' if I wanted to be more specific.

So I am doing my brother-in-law's family tree and his mother's family is from a long line of French Canadians from Quebec and New Brunswick. One of them was born in Saint-André in the Kamouraska RCM and Bas-Saint-Laurent region.

So would that be Saint-André, Bas-Saint-Laurent, Québec, Canada or should Kamouraska fit in there somehow?

I mean I doubt my brother-in-law, who is Texan to the twentieth power, would care but I just want to do it right you know?

[Barrister]

It would just be Saint Andre, Quebec.  If it was a rural location not contained within any kind of municipality you would use the Regional Municipality name, so in this case Karamouska RCM, Quebec.

Or at least that's how it works out here in Alberta.  My wife is from Round Hill, within the County of Camrose, but you would just identify it as Round Hill, AB.

Counties (or RMs) exist here, but there's no special significance to them that you would want to be sure to capture.

[crazy canuck]

Not sure about Quebec.  In BC you would just use the city and province.

We don't have counties here.  We do have regional districts but they only deal with region wide public infrastructure and transportation issues.  Nobody identifies as being from the Metro Vancouver Regional District.

[Drakken]

It would just be Saint Andre, Quebec.  If it was a rural location not contained within any kind of municipality you would use the Regional Municipality name, so in this case Karamouska RCM, Quebec.

That would be correct: Saint-André, Québec (or PQ), Canada. What indicates which municipality is the postal code.

[Drakken]

Speaking of Québec, does anyone in the ROC know about the political and judicial shitstorm that is currently happening here in Quebec, involving Liberal MNA Guy Ouellette? I am surprised there is no comment about it, because it is a spectacular breach of the privileges of Members of the Assembly.

Cliff version: Our provincial specialized investigation unit on corruption (UPAC) went to arrest a seating Government MNA at his home, on a hunch caused, allegedly, by their assertion that his name had come out in an investigation on info leaked to the media that might have hurt a pending investigation on former Premier Jean Charest. So, they went to visit Superior Court judges to justify and obtain the permission to arrest said MNA. He was arrested at his home and actually detained, then released without any accusation levied against him. However, his parliamentary cellphone and computer were seized. As you know, both are protected by parliamentary privileges which can only be waived by the MNA himself (and he won't) or the Speaker.

Thing is, the MNA in question is a former high-profile police officer himself. He is also known to be have been at loggerheads with the current head of UPAC and very critical of their performance so far and some of their investigation schemes. This has all the appearances of a strongarming attempt to intimidate or ruin the reputation of someone who is regarded, even by all the parties of the Opposition, as completely of integrity.

Neither the Speaker nor the Premier was even informed that they were going to arrest a seating member of the Government caucus, so this took every single member of the Assembly (and even the media) totally by surprise. So far, UPAC has refused to give any explanation or justification, even to our politicians, on why Ouellette was arrested or even if there will be an indictment. Their "argument" is that they set a "trap" to test the integrity of MNA Ouellette, which they argue is a legit and widely-used investigation tactic that was approved by the judges (never heard of that one BTW. In fact, it would be a textbook definition of entrapment), and that he fell for it. Their attitude, basically, is "Go to hell. It's none of your business, MNAs has no more rights than any citizen, and if we have grounds to arrest one we will do so if we wish to".

Needless to say, National Assembly is going absolutely ballistic over this. Everyone, government and opposition caucuses alike, are in shock. To the point that the Speaker made a historical speech from the Chair yesterday, which announced that the Assembly will fight tooth and nail to ensure that none of its members' privileges will be infringed by any police force, and compelled UPAC to either indict Ouellette now or declare him innocent and present their formal and public apologies.

[crazy canuck]

Speaking of Québec, does anyone in the ROC know about the political and judicial shitstorm that is currently happening here in Quebec, involving Liberal MNA Guy Ouellette? I am surprised there is no comment about it, because it is a spectacular breach of the privileges of Members of the Assembly.

Cliff version: Our provincial specialized investigation unit on corruption (UPAC) went to arrest a seating Government MNA at his home, on a hunch caused, allegedly, by their assertion that his name had come out in an investigation on info leaked to the media that might have hurt a pending investigation on former Premier Jean Charest. So, they went to visit Superior Court judges to justify and obtain the permission to arrest said MNA. He was arrested at his home and actually detained, then released without any accusation levied against him. However, his parliamentary cellphone and computer were seized. As you know, both are protected by parliamentary privileges which can only be waived by the MNA himself (and he won't) or the Speaker.

Thing is, the MNA in question is a former high-profile police officer himself. He is also known to be have been at loggerheads with the current head of UPAC and very critical of their performance so far and some of their investigation schemes. This has all the appearances of a strongarming attempt to intimidate or ruin the reputation of someone who is regarded, even by all the parties of the Opposition, as completely of integrity.

Neither the Speaker nor the Premier was even informed that they were going to arrest a seating member of the Assembly, so this took every single member of the Assembly (and even the media) totally by surprise. UPAC had refused to give any explanation or justification, even to politicians, on the whys the MNA was arrested or even if there will be an indictment. They argue that they set a "trap" to test the integrity of MNA Ouellette, which is an investigation tactic that was approved by the judges, and that he fell for it. Their attitude, basically, is "go to hell, it's none of your business, MNA has no more rights than any citizens".

Needless to say, National Assembly is going absolutely ballistic over this. To the point that the Speaker made a historical speech yesterday, which announced that the Assembly will fight tooth and nail to ensure that none of its members' privileges will be infringed by any police force and compelled UPAC to either indict Ouellette now, or declare him innocent and present their apologies.

I am watching it with great interest.  From the news reports I have read it sure smells like an abuse of power by UPAC to settle political scores.  If that turns out to be accurate, in addition to the concern about abuse of process -  what an incompetent bunch the UPAC are to be so hamfisted about it.

[Malthus]

Speaking of Québec, does anyone in the ROC know about the political and judicial shitstorm that is currently happening here in Quebec, involving Liberal MNA Guy Ouellette? I am surprised there is no comment about it, because it is a spectacular breach of the privileges of Members of the Assembly.

Cliff version: Our provincial specialized investigation unit on corruption (UPAC) went to arrest a seating Government MNA at his home, on a hunch caused, allegedly, by their assertion that his name had come out in an investigation on info leaked to the media that might have hurt a pending investigation on former Premier Jean Charest. So, they went to visit Superior Court judges to justify and obtain the permission to arrest said MNA. He was arrested at his home and actually detained, then released without any accusation levied against him. However, his parliamentary cellphone and computer were seized. As you know, both are protected by parliamentary privileges which can only be waived by the MNA himself (and he won't) or the Speaker.

Thing is, the MNA in question is a former high-profile police officer himself. He is also known to be have been at loggerheads with the current head of UPAC and very critical of their performance so far and some of their investigation schemes. This has all the appearances of a strongarming attempt to intimidate or ruin the reputation of someone who is regarded, even by all the parties of the Opposition, as completely of integrity.

Neither the Speaker nor the Premier was even informed that they were going to arrest a seating member of the Government caucus, so this took every single member of the Assembly (and even the media) totally by surprise. So far, UPAC has refused to give any explanation or justification, even to our politicians, on why Ouellette was arrested or even if there will be an indictment. Their "argument" is that they set a "trap" to test the integrity of MNA Ouellette, which they argue is a legit and widely-used investigation tactic that was approved by the judges (never heard of that one BTW. In fact, it would be a textbook definition of entrapment), and that he fell for it. Their attitude, basically, is "Go to hell. It's none of your business, MNAs has no more rights than any citizen, and if we have grounds to arrest one we will do so if we wish to".

Needless to say, National Assembly is going absolutely ballistic over this. Everyone, government and opposition caucuses alike, are in shock. To the point that the Speaker made a historical speech from the Chair yesterday, which announced that the Assembly will fight tooth and nail to ensure that none of its members' privileges will be infringed by any police force, and compelled UPAC to either indict Ouellette now or declare him innocent and present their formal and public apologies.

Yup, read that with great interest in the paper today.

The impression given by the media was that the cops were trying to intimidate the legislature into keeping out of their (no doubt thoroughly nasty) business. No idea, of course, whether this impression is correct or not.

If it is, the Quebec government ought to come down on them like a ton of bricks. Looks like that is happening - if so, the government is thoroughly in the right. Amazing (if those are indeed the facts) that the cops thought they could get away with this.

[Drakken]

I am watching it with great interest.  From the news reports I have read it sure smells like an abuse of power by UPAC to settle political scores.  If that turns out to be accurate, in addition to the concern about abuse of process -  what an incompetent bunch the UPAC are to be so hamfisted about it.

Thing is, no one knows anything except UPAC. For all we know, UPAC may be right and Ouelette might have committed a crime. But they remain utterly silent, which is highly suspicious in and of itself.

Even if the parliamentary privileges were waived it would take months to decrypt and analyze the content of his laptop and cellphone - and elections are in Oct. 2018.

What is more puzzling to everyone, however, is their utter obstination to refuse to give an explanation even to the Assembly or the Speaker. Yes, we get it, UPAC should be able to arrest MNAs that commit crimes and politicians should not be able to interfere in the work of police investigators. However, should said MNA be arrested, the people and the Assembly(or at least the Speaker) should be informed of the reasons why.