[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Valmy]

I am going to assume he has an understanding of how businesses has operated in Canada over the last 15 years.

It's nice you can make those kinds of assumptions about your elected leaders. I am kind of jealous.

[crazy canuck]

I am going to assume he has an understanding of how businesses has operated in Canada over the last 15 years.

It's nice you can make those kinds of assumptions about your elected leaders. I am kind of jealous.

 

[mongers]

I am going to assume he has an understanding of how businesses has operated in Canada over the last 15 years.

It's nice you can make those kinds of assumptions about your elected leaders. I am kind of jealous.

 

[Bauer]

I was litigating what consultation meant 25 years ago; the question of what it meant and how businesses could adopt and incorporate indigenous interests into their projects has been well understood for at least the last 15 years.

And in that time, a number of projects have been developed in BC with that model.

And what's your opinion on the time it takes though - which is going to be a key issue for Carneys plan to have a shorter and more transparent approval process.  I do imagine there will be some First Nations that say they weren't properly consulted regardless of what they do.

[crazy canuck]

I was litigating what consultation meant 25 years ago; the question of what it meant and how businesses could adopt and incorporate indigenous interests into their projects has been well understood for at least the last 15 years.

And in that time, a number of projects have been developed in BC with that model.

And what's your opinion on the time it takes though - which is going to be a key issue for Carneys plan to have a shorter and more transparent approval process.  I do imagine there will be some First Nations that say they weren't properly consulted regardless of what they do.

I will answer that by way of an example of the LNG plant in Kitimat.  It took no more than six months for the initial main proponent of the project to negotiate the manner in which the indigenous community would participate.  And on that project the Indigenous community took on a majority ownership stake.

By far the greatest delay was getting Federal approvals.  If the Federal approval process is streamlined as promised that will make a significant difference.

I'm not sure why you were imagining a world in which indigenous communities are going to claim they were not properly consulted if the proponent of projects actually do what they're supposed to do and properly consult. Most of the problems occur is when there are proponents, who are ignorant of what they're supposed to be doing, mainly US based companies, and then of course, we see headlines about how indigenous communities are complaining about, not being consulted.  I assume it is those sorts of headlines that you were basing your assumptions on.

[Bauer]

Yeah you're probably right they would be the types of headlines I have seen.  Good to know there seems to be more of a path towards achieving both consultation and project investment than I thought.  But still seems to me that although the work towards this state may have been going on a long time, Canada is at a moment now where there needs to be less talk and more action both with respect to First Nations and provincial consultation etc

[viper37]

since we were discussing First Nations, an example of how they don't like being rushed:

First Nations say they're ready to fight the big projects Carney wants to hurry through

[...]
Carney said in Saskatoon the approvals process for each project would involve consultations with Indigenous Peoples, so the brief time he offered to comment on Liberals' major-projects bill isn't the end of anything. He also said that he and Woodhouse Nepinak [ the national chief of the Assembly of First Nations ] agreed to discuss these issues next month when the AFN gathers in Winnipeg for its annual meeting.


In the meantime, Woodhouse Nepinak said in a statement Friday morning, she has spoken to Carney about the bill and she is not mollified. The AFN, she said, "remains deeply concerned about the lack of time and appropriate process to carry out the Crown's consultation and consent obligations, especially given the potentially massive impact on the rights of First Nations."
Gift the full article


Though Carney and the Liberal government have been focused on speed, Fiddler suggests they pause and look around at what is happening in Ontario if they want to avoid the missteps of the past. 
[...]

[viper37]

Coast guard is being transferred to Defense.
Military expenses will reach 2% GDP this fiscal year.

It's cheating, but it's also the way the US does it.  Fair game.

I believe, in France, the Gendarmes, their national police force are part of the military, and therefore may be included in their military spending.  Don't know about the DGSE, it's technically under military control, while SCRS is not a military agency here.

[Grey Fox]

Let's just build a damn arctic port.

[crazy canuck]

Coast guard is being transferred to Defense.
Military expenses will reach 2% GDP this fiscal year.

It's cheating, but it's also the way the US does it.  Fair game.

I believe, in France, the Gendarmes, their national police force are part of the military, and therefore may be included in their military spending.  Don't know about the DGSE, it's technically under military control, while SCRS is not a military agency here.

I am sure you did not intend it, but you made it sound like the 2% will be reached by moving the coast guard to the jurisdiction of the military, rather than the additional spending that was announced.

[viper37]

Coast guard is being transferred to Defense.
Military expenses will reach 2% GDP this fiscal year, 2025-2026.

It's cheating, but it's also the way the US does it.  Fair game.

I believe, in France, the Gendarmes, their national police force are part of the military, and therefore may be included in their military spending.  Don't know about the DGSE, it's technically under military control, while SCRS is not a military agency here.

I am sure you did not intend it, but you made it sound like the 2% will be reached by moving the coast guard to the jurisdiction of the military, rather than the additional spending that was announced.

I think it's both.
Otherwise, that's a lot of spending for only this fiscal year.

We already have a lot of coast guard vessels under construction, and it would make sense to repatriate them under the defense budget.

I can't see otherwise how we can reach 2% GDP military expenditures, coming from 1,37% without racking a massive deficit.

Or the GDP has shrunk a lot more than anticipated.

I'll have to read more about this tonight.

Obviously, we have additional investments coming to sustain the expenditure level.  But to reach it this year?  I think it's by bringing the Coast Guard into the military fold.  I can't see any other way.

[viper37]

Let's just build a damn arctic port.

For the military?

I could see a multi use port, civilian and coast guard.

[crazy canuck]

Coast guard is being transferred to Defense.
Military expenses will reach 2% GDP this fiscal year, 2025-2026.

It's cheating, but it's also the way the US does it.  Fair game.

I believe, in France, the Gendarmes, their national police force are part of the military, and therefore may be included in their military spending.  Don't know about the DGSE, it's technically under military control, while SCRS is not a military agency here.

I am sure you did not intend it, but you made it sound like the 2% will be reached by moving the coast guard to the jurisdiction of the military, rather than the additional spending that was announced.

I think it's both.
Otherwise, that's a lot of spending for only this fiscal year.

We already have a lot of coast guard vessels under construction, and it would make sense to repatriate them under the defense budget.

I can't see otherwise how we can reach 2% GDP military expenditures, coming from 1,37% without racking a massive deficit.

Or the GDP has shrunk a lot more than anticipated.

I'll have to read more about this tonight.

Obviously, we have additional investments coming to sustain the expenditure level.  But to reach it this year?  I think it's by bringing the Coast Guard into the military fold.  I can't see any other way.

We are going to get more details about the increased spending over the course of the day, but the thing that stood out for me is the additional 6 billion in new spending this year alone.

[Bauer]

Let's just build a damn arctic port.

For the military?

I could see a multi use port, civilian and coast guard.

They still haven't finished that refueling station that Harper started. 

[crazy canuck]

Ok we have a bit more detail of what the additional spending looks like

$2.6-billion to accelerate recruitment and help retain Armed Forces personnel as well as invest in the civilian work force who support the military.

$844-million to repair and upgrade existing Forces infrastructure and critical equipment in both maritime and aerospace.

$544-million to strengthen the Department of National Defence and the Armed Forces' protection against cyber threats and secure networks. It includes funding for Communications Security Establishment Canada as well.

$1-billion will be allocated to make the military more self-sufficient in defending Canadian territory and citizens, particularly in the Arctic.

$4.1-billion to start to create a made at home military production industry, no more just buying stuff from the Americans.