[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[crazy canuck]

I am also not surprised that you label Poilievre's approach as "appeasement".

Look - I don't know what the right approach is with Trump.  Giving him what he wants doesn't seem to work - because what he wants is tariffs.  But trade war with the US isn't the answer either.  You say "the US needs what we produce" - but with tariffs the US is going to buy less of it, which hurts Canadian workers and industries.

Did you hear Poilievre tell the Americans, when he went on his US podcast tour, that Canada should give the Americans preferential access to Canadian goods and raw resources in return for the tariffs being removed?

We are not in a trade war. Other than the illegal tarriffs Trump has put on goods not expressly within CUSMA, and that trade agreement will be in place into the 30s. So again, what is the big deal, and why should we care about what this President has to say?

One thing for sure, the path the current Conservative leader has of giving the Americans what they want is not the correct strategy.

[crazy canuck]

An interesting take on trade with the Americans from a fellow at the CD Howe Institute published in the Globe.

Half the piece is devoted to explaining that free trade with the Americans is dead and buried.

The second half talks about what comes next, post free trade. Here are the concluding remarks:

It means that there will be ugly battles with the Trump team over this period, not about renewing or modernizing the USMCA, but about the entrance fee each country is prepared to pay for continuing access to the U.S. market. And from what the President has said previously, that fee will include tariffs on Canadian autos, steel, aluminum, copper, softwood lumber and other goods. And maybe other entrance fees as well, such as Canada giving way on regulating online streaming and other things.

This does not mean Canada lacks leverage in negotiating entry. That leverage includes Canadian energy, critical minerals, important high-end biotechnology, cybersecurity and related fields. It includes uranium supplies and nuclear stuff. It includes pressure from American businesses that rely on Canadian products, from U.S. consumers who are paying added costs for a range of goods supplied by Canada, such as lumber, furniture and aluminum.

In the give-and-take of bargaining, Canada has cards to play and a strong and experienced team that knows how to play those cards. But one thing is clear: The nature of the game has shifted. We are no longer playing in the North American free-trade arena but horse-trading for entry into the U.S. tent.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/commentary/article-north-american-free-trade-usmca-trump-maga/

[viper37]

Remember that free pass Americans were using to get their Canadian citizenship?

Well, the government has once again made an abrupt u-turn.

The Libs can never do the right thing the first time.

Government abruptly suspends citizenship certificates issued under 'lost Canadians' law


Too complicated to do a proper analysis the first time.

[Grey Fox]

I wonder why. Did they start agreeing with CCs argument? Of course, they aren't saying anything.

[Jacob]

I forget, how did it come to be in the first place? Was it the courts interpreting existing legislation, was it new legislation, or simply the ministry issuing new guidance based on existing legislation?

[viper37]

I forget, how did it come to be in the first place? Was it the courts interpreting existing legislation, was it new legislation, or simply the ministry issuing new guidance based on existing legislation?

1) The courts interpreting the Constitution.
2) The Liberal Party legislating on the ruling (C-3)
3) The governmment delivering citizenship certificate to anyone who applied regarding C-3, it seems, without bothering to check the validity of said applicant
4) The Liberal Party making a u-turn faced with public criticism and ordering their bureaucrats to double and triple check the validity of applicants

[crazy canuck]

I forget, how did it come to be in the first place? Was it the courts interpreting existing legislation, was it new legislation, or simply the ministry issuing new guidance based on existing legislation?

It came about because of a charter challenge in the courts

[crazy canuck]

I wonder why. Did they start agreeing with CCs argument? Of course, they aren't saying anything.

Somebody must have actually read the legislation rather than the Press clippings

[viper37]

I wonder why. Did they start agreeing with CCs argument? Of course, they aren't saying anything.

Somebody must have actually read the legislation rather than the Press clippings

Since they issued the citizenship certificate and only now are revoking them, that invalidates your theory.

[crazy canuck]

I wonder why. Did they start agreeing with CCs argument? Of course, they aren't saying anything.

Somebody must have actually read the legislation rather than the Press clippings

Since they issued the citizenship certificate and only now are revoking them, that invalidates your theory.

How?

[HVC]

Remember that free pass Americans were using to get their Canadian citizenship?

Well, the government has once again made an abrupt u-turn.

The Libs can never do the right thing the first time.

Government abruptly suspends citizenship certificates issued under 'lost Canadians' law


Too complicated to do a proper analysis the first time.

Doesn't look like a u-turn, but a lack of documentation. In theory, as reported in the article, additional documentation would fix it.

As an aside, is a certificate the same as having citizenship? And if it is can citizenship be revoked? I mean just in general.

[crazy canuck]

Remember that free pass Americans were using to get their Canadian citizenship?

Well, the government has once again made an abrupt u-turn.

The Libs can never do the right thing the first time.

Government abruptly suspends citizenship certificates issued under 'lost Canadians' law


Too complicated to do a proper analysis the first time.

Doesn't look like a u-turn, but a lack of documentation. In theory, as reported in the article, additional documentation would fix it.

As an aside, is a certificate the same as having citizenship? And if it is can citizenship be revoked? I mean just in general.

The immigration lawyer summed it up nicely

"It's almost as if they realized there were some errors made at some point in some files and they are not comfortable with the certificates that were issued."

Edit, the other clue to what was happening is that when the legislation was first passed it was estimated that a little over 100,000 people worldwide would be eligible under the new definition.  However, they quickly had a little over 80,000 applicants.

What that says to me is a lot of people were buying into the hype that was being reported about the restrictions on citizenship being very loose.  And now I'm just speculating, but I'm wondering whether some lower level civil servants who are processing the applications also didn't have a good idea of what the new legislation meant and how restrictive it was it still was.

[garbon]

Edit, the other clue to what was happening is that when the legislation was first passed it was estimated that a little over 100,000 people worldwide would be eligible under the new definition.  However, they quickly had a little over 80,000 applicants.

Where is that from? All I see in the CBC article is that in 2024 there were 56,235 pending citizenship certificates and there were 82,475 in 2025. Gone up a lot surely.

[PRC]

After 75 years, Hockey Night in Canada will not return to CBC next year.  Rogers has the rights with the NHL and they're going to keep it on their own platforms moving forward.

[Grey Fox]

  I loved watching the Saturday broadcast on OTA antenna.