[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Neil]

I would rather not take the risk that our institutions could withstand the Conservatives mimicking what Trump is doing.

Yeah, that's my point.  I think that there are certain people who will be frightened about that because of their ideas about the United States, despite the fact that it's not something that the CPC is really talking about, with the exception of the CBC I suppose. 

Poilievre might be a bit of a wonk, but he's not in the same league as Trump or AfD, or even Danielle Smith.

[Neil]

as the Supreme Court of Canada has no problem 'reading in', and would definitely block any rash attempt to perform the kind of vandalism in Canada that the Trump Administration has performed. 

The PMO has large discretionary powers on what it can do to spend credits approved by the House of Commons.

Once they get a majority, they get even more power then Trump has, immunity aside.

There is nothing preventing PP from hiring a special consultant to direct a wave of compression and shutting down entire departments in the name of efficiency.  He already promised the shut down the CBC and mass layoffs in the public workforce.

And none of that discretionary power matters at all.  If Poilievre gets elected and tries to end funding for the CBC, the SCC will find that there's a Charter right to a public broadcaster, because they see it as their job to advance a very particular set of political goals and outcomes. 

[crazy canuck]

as the Supreme Court of Canada has no problem 'reading in', and would definitely block any rash attempt to perform the kind of vandalism in Canada that the Trump Administration has performed. 

The PMO has large discretionary powers on what it can do to spend credits approved by the House of Commons.

Once they get a majority, they get even more power then Trump has, immunity aside.

There is nothing preventing PP from hiring a special consultant to direct a wave of compression and shutting down entire departments in the name of efficiency.  He already promised the shut down the CBC and mass layoffs in the public workforce.

And none of that discretionary power matters at all.  If Poilievre gets elected and tries to end funding for the CBC, the SCC will find that there's a Charter right to a public broadcaster, because they see it as their job to advance a very particular set of political goals and outcomes. 

Even if you are right about that, it would take years to get to the Supreme Court of Canada. By that time, all the damage is done.

[viper37]

And none of that discretionary power matters at all.  If Poilievre gets elected and tries to end funding for the CBC, the SCC will find that there's a Charter right to a public broadcaster, because they see it as their job to advance a very particular set of political goals and outcomes. 

I am no lawyer, but I don't see how the Charter of Rights insure the funding to the CBC.

He likely can't kill the French portion of the network, but he can certainly kill the English CBC itself.

There is nothing about public broadcasting in the Charter.

[crazy canuck]

I would rather not take the risk that our institutions could withstand the Conservatives mimicking what Trump is doing.

Yeah, that's my point.  I think that there are certain people who will be frightened about that because of their ideas about the United States, despite the fact that it's not something that the CPC is really talking about, with the exception of the CBC I suppose. 

Poilievre might be a bit of a wonk, but he's not in the same league as Trump or AfD, or even Danielle Smith.

How can you say that with any confidence when PP actually hasn't told anybody what his policies are? In that way he's actually a lot like Trump. He has no policy only rhetoric.

[Neil]

I would rather not take the risk that our institutions could withstand the Conservatives mimicking what Trump is doing.

Yeah, that's my point.  I think that there are certain people who will be frightened about that because of their ideas about the United States, despite the fact that it's not something that the CPC is really talking about, with the exception of the CBC I suppose. 

Poilievre might be a bit of a wonk, but he's not in the same league as Trump or AfD, or even Danielle Smith.

How can you say that with any confidence when PP actually hasn't told anybody what his policies are? In that way he's actually a lot like Trump. He has no policy only rhetoric.

Because his policies aren't really relevant.  His ability to randomly do insane things is constrained by his ability to pull the Conservative Party along with him.  And so while I know him as a bit of an odd duck from Harper's generally appropriate and straight-laced Cabinet, I have faith in the institution of the Conservative Party.  It's not like we're talking about Maxime Bernier here.

[Neil]

I am no lawyer, but I don't see how the Charter of Rights insure the funding to the CBC.

He likely can't kill the French portion of the network, but he can certainly kill the English CBC itself.

There is nothing about public broadcasting in the Charter.

The SCC doesn't care about what's in the Charter.  Only what they want to be there. 

[viper37]

Poilievre's pivot: Conservatives conducting internal surveys to adapt message

A possible tariff war with the United States, Justin Trudeau's departure and the Liberal leadership race are all upsetting Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre's campaign plans.

And behind the scenes, not all Conservatives agree on how to adjust.

"The carbon tax is no longer the ballot box question," a Conservative source in Western Canada told Radio-Canada. "But we've invested so much money fine-tuning that message, it's hard to abandon it completely."

[...]

It would seem the Cons have nothing tangible to offer this time around.  They were ready to go on election last December, but a month later, their leader need to consult the membership to know what to say.

What is this party? Québec Solidaire 2.0?  Is he the leader or the spokesperson?  Is there a platform ready or not?

[Barrister]

With Climate change and the thining ice, I think it would be possible to keep the Port open year round. We would need more ice breakers. A whole fleet. Also a lot of pipelines & train tracks need to be built. Also something we can do.

25 years of lazyness about our infrastructure has got us royally fucked by the US. We need to change.

So I don't wish to minimize climate change.  It's real.  We should stop it, or at least minimize how much it is happening.

Climate change though is not going to take a 5 month shipping season to a 12 month shipping season.  2 degrees c will have a noticeable and bad effect on the world, but is not going to turn the sub-arctic into a temperate zone.

[crazy canuck]

I would rather not take the risk that our institutions could withstand the Conservatives mimicking what Trump is doing.

Yeah, that's my point.  I think that there are certain people who will be frightened about that because of their ideas about the United States, despite the fact that it's not something that the CPC is really talking about, with the exception of the CBC I suppose. 

Poilievre might be a bit of a wonk, but he's not in the same league as Trump or AfD, or even Danielle Smith.

How can you say that with any confidence when PP actually hasn't told anybody what his policies are? In that way he's actually a lot like Trump. He has no policy only rhetoric.

Because his policies aren't really relevant.  His ability to randomly do insane things is constrained by his ability to pull the Conservative Party along with him.  And so while I know him as a bit of an odd duck from Harper's generally appropriate and straight-laced Cabinet, I have faith in the institution of the Conservative Party.  It's not like we're talking about Maxime Bernier here.

I have to ask again what about the current incarnation of the conservative party of Canada gives you faith that it will keep PP as Prime Minister in check? All the people I would've had some faith and have retired from politics.

Also, this seems eerily reminiscent of Republicans around 2015 thinking they could keep Trump in check.

[Barrister]

I would rather not take the risk that our institutions could withstand the Conservatives mimicking what Trump is doing. 

I've noted this tension in political discourse for many years now.

"Trump is a danger to democracy and good government because he's a uniquely dangerous individual".

vs.

"Trump is a danger to democracy and good government because he's a conservative".

I mean - i sort of understand that argument from the left - they are of the left, and think right-wingers have the wrong ideas.  It's not always a compelling argument in an election to say "I disagree with my opponent, but really they'll only be slightly bad for the country if they win".  When John McCain told a supporter in 2008 that Obama was a "decent man" it was a wonderful demonstration of democratic virtue - but probably not great politics.

But this is what I sense with a lot of the 'Poilievre is mimicking Trump' kind of talk.  He's mimicking Trump - because he says right-wing things.

We'll see though.  There's a "non-zero" chance that Canadians turn on Poilievre because Trump causes voters to turn left.  The Liberal Party has been trying for decades to convince people that "Canadian values" equal "left-wing values".  Maybe they've been successful.

[Barrister]

I have to ask again what about the current incarnation of the conservative party of Canada gives you faith that it will keep PP as Prime Minister in check? All the people I would've had some faith and have retired from politics.

Also, this seems eerily reminiscent of Republicans around 2015 thinking they could keep Trump in check.

See above.

What makes you think Poilievre needs to be 'held in check'?

[viper37]

With Climate change and the thining ice, I think it would be possible to keep the Port open year round. We would need more ice breakers. A whole fleet. Also a lot of pipelines & train tracks need to be built. Also something we can do.

25 years of lazyness about our infrastructure has got us royally fucked by the US. We need to change.

So I don't wish to minimize climate change.  It's real.  We should stop it, or at least minimize how much it is happening.

Climate change though is not going to take a 5 month shipping season to a 12 month shipping season.  2 degrees c will have a noticeable and bad effect on the world, but is not going to turn the sub-arctic into a temperate zone.

It is 4 to 6C in the Canadian Arctic. 2.2C is the average for all of Earth.

We are not on a parth to reducing our emissions.

[Barrister]

It is 4 to 6C in the Canadian Arctic. 2.2C is the average for all of Earth.

We are not on a parth to reducing our emissions.

I believe you're wrong.

The rate of increase of CO2 emissions is declining.  Estimates are we will stop increasing.

Lots of arguments to be had it's not doing so fast enough.  Again don't wish to minimize and say "Nothing to see here!".

But don't say we're doing nothing.

[viper37]

What makes you think Poilievre needs to be 'held in check'?

See Donald Trump 1st and 2nd mandate.

1st mandate, people holding him check.
2nd mandate, no one to hold him in check.

Anyone who lauds Donald Trump can not be trusted.