Support NeoGAF

[bremon]

Lol yeah. Private means better right? And less expensive because of competition. Like my insurance in Alberta vs SGI and MPI. Big bad government! Oh, wait. The amount of people in Alberta I hear spouting off about how great private everything is is pretty wild.

What did the spray tan buffoon have to say about the meeting with Joe firehawk?

 

[firehawk12]

What did the spray tan buffoon have to say about the meeting with Joe firehawk?

Oh just the meeting about female business owners. He's going to help lots of women with Justin's support!

 

[cryptosporidium]

Who the hell is the dude in the oilers uniform at this CPC debate. also so many CPC leader hopefuls have terrible, weak, and nerdy voices. Trost and Leitch have the worst voice ive heard so far


Edit, Add saxton to that.

 

[firehawk12]

Who the hell is the dude in the oilers uniform at this CPC debate. also so many CPC leader hopefuls have terrible, weak, and nerdy voices. Trost and Leitch have the worst voice ive heard so far


Edit, Add saxton to that.

In the superficial nature of politics, I feel bad for the guy with the lisp who would just get destroyed if he actually won, particularly against Trudeau.

One of them took a shot at O'Leary for not coming though, which was funny.

 

[matthewwhatever]

Who the hell is the dude in the oilers uniform at this CPC debate. also so many CPC leader hopefuls have terrible, weak, and nerdy voices. Trost and Leitch have the worst voice ive heard so far.

I missed the debate, but judging from Twitter, it seems to have been Rick Peterson -- who, if I'm not mistaken, is a Vancouver businessman who decided to wear an Edmonton jersey, all while announcing that he was planning on being the CPC candidate in the Saint-Laurent (Montreal) by-election. He doesn't have a hope of winning there, obviously, but it's still pretty bizarre. Not only does running as both a riding candidate and a leadership candidate necessitate keeping two sets of books, it seems like it'd be really expensive to fly back and forth from Vancouver to Montreal for all-candidates debates, on top of already traveling the country while trying to win the CPC leadership. Considering he's not exactly breaking fundraising records, I wonder if he thought through his pledge before making it. I mean, it allows him to further highlight the fact that O'Leary won't even commit to running if he wins the leadership, which is a bonus, but still.

Speaking of O'Leary: it seems he -- or at least his campaign -- realized that bragging about flying around in a private jet was actually a really bad idea. Quite apart from the optics of flying around in a private jet (which, Trump notwithstanding, aren't great), he could get in trouble with Elections Canada for illegal campaign contributions. It'd be amazing if he won the leadership, but was barred from running for a seat because of massive Elections Act violations.

 

[Mr.Mike]

Peterson seems to be very combative, what with calling out Scheer the way he did. I wonder if that's his whole MO here. He's a VC banker, so maybe the expense isn't a big deal to him.

 

[ShinRPGamer]

So I missed the debate unfortunately. Can someone give me a summary of how things played out?

 

[cryptosporidium]

So I missed the debate unfortunately. Can someone give me a summary of how things played out?

watched it for like 20 mins cuz it was live on fb. A whole bunch of "IM a real conservative", "Im a proud so-con", the indian dude (sorry cant remember his name) gave a good speech about inclusiveness through a story of his grandson and Chong also made the same sentiments but said he wanted to be like Mulroney and Thatcher which makes me like him less, uhhh Leitch was being leitch, Bernier was good. Thats all i got from it. nothing substantial tho





Edit: If Chong won I might actually vote for him. He tries to playoff that hes of the reform ilk and such but in the recent AMA he says one of his favourite books is George Grants Lament of the Nation (essential to the Red Tory tradition). If he proved popular enough it might push for more PCs from the libs and greens to come back to the CPC. Personally Im a democratic socialist but I value red toryism and want it back in canada god damnit. And with the NDP pushing me away and the libs dropping electoral reform I kinda wanna see a Chong canada. Though Chong is the only way Id vote CPC. If he loses, depending on who wins the NDP leadership and what direction they go (like going more centrist while being social progressives) I might vote libs.

 

[S-Wind]

Edit: If Chong won I might actually vote for him. He tries to playoff that hes of the reform ilk and such but in the recent AMA he says one of his favourite books is George Grants Lament of the Nation (essential to the Red Tory tradition). If he proved popular enough it might push for more PCs from the libs and greens to come back to the CPC. Personally Im a democratic socialist but I value red toryism and want it back in canada god damnit. And with the NDP pushing me away and the libs dropping electoral reform I kinda wanna see a Chong canada. Though Chong is the only way Id vote CPC. If he loses, depending on who wins the NDP leadership and what direction they go (like going more centrist while being social progressives) I might vote libs.

I'm trying to wrap my head around how the heck you reconcile those 2 political persuasions...

 

[AuthenticM]

Kellie Leitch's video in silence

lol

 

[Simon Belmont]

Kellie Leitch's video in silence

lol

Maria. Bamford.

 

[matthewwhatever]

Peterson seems to be very combative, what with calling out Scheer the way he did. I wonder if that's his whole MO here. He's a VC banker, so maybe the expense isn't a big deal to him.

I just read about the Scheer thing, but that seems like a bizarre allegation to make. Does he not know that Speakers don't vote?

And he may be a venture capitalist, but that doesn't matter -- you can't self-fund a campaign. You can loan your leadership campaign something like $25k, but that's only going to go so far when the other campaigns are raising $1m+. For nomination contests, it's even less: $5k. He also can't move money from one pot to the other, if I'm not mistaken. In the big scheme of things, it doesn't mean much, since he's not winning the leadership and he'll be lucky to finish third in Saint-Laurent, but it's still a weird move to make.

 

[gutter_trash]

Kellie Leitch's video in silence

lol

Is there are non-huffington post link available ?

I hate Huffington Post.

 

[Alavard]

Is there are non-huffington post link available ?

I hate Huffington Post.

So you want to watch Huffington Post content on a non-Huffington Post site because you hate Huffington Post?

 

[gutter_trash]

So you want to watch Huffington Post content on a non-Huffington Post site because you hate Huffington Post?

HuffPo is a click bait trash site,
their 1st videos usually don't match their news article,
their Quebec tab is a horrible cesspool of Parti Quebecois columnists with an anti-Liberal slant.

 

[cryptosporidium]

I'm trying to wrap my head around how the heck you reconcile those 2 political persuasions...

Red Toryism is a political ideology really only found in Canada and apparently somewhat in the UK. It shares little with dem socs besides communitarianism (where as liberalism generally is more about individualism though that gotten blurrier). I can respect a Mulroney or Diefenbaker canada but I will barely tolerate a manning or harper Canada. Social conservatism from what Ive read of our conservative PMs hasnt had as strong of a presence as it does today though I could be wrong. Mulroney strove for a united Canada and to do that tried to alliviate (grammer) quebecs soveriengty problems, Diefenbaker fought against systemically racist immigration policies etc. Mulroney supports fighting against climate change as does chong. It also helps that one of my professors is an expert in the Red Tory tradition. also im not partisan and will vote for the party i see most fit to lead.


TLDR Id rather have a Progressive conservative party because i can appreciate some of their ideas unlike a soc-con reform party whose neoliberal beliefs and wedge issue rhetoric I despise

 

[gutter_trash]

also Mulroney was vocal early on about his opposition to South Africa's Apartheid and was frustrated that his friends Reagan and Thatcher who didn't want to budge on their positions on the subject

 

[CazTGG]

Red Toryism is a political ideology really only found in Canada and apparently somewhat in the UK. It shares little with dem socs besides communitarianism (where as liberalism generally is more about individualism though that gotten blurrier). I can respect a Mulroney or Diefenbaker canada but I will barely tolerate a manning or harper Canada. Social conservatism from what Ive read of our conservative PMs hasnt had as strong of a presence as it does today though I could be wrong. Mulroney strove for a united Canada and to do that tried to alliviate (grammer) quebecs soveriengty problems, Diefenbaker fought against systemically racist immigration policies etc. Mulroney supports fighting against climate change as does chong. It also helps that one of my professors is an expert in the Red Tory tradition. also im not partisan and will vote for the party i see most fit to lead.


TLDR Id rather have a Progressive conservative party because i can appreciate some of their ideas unlike a soc-con reform party whose neoliberal beliefs and wedge issue rhetoric I despise

Except voting in Chong and the Conservative Party under his leadership won't magically make the rest of those Reform elements disappear, it'll just allow them to push their . While Harper was able to rein in the Reform elements to an extent, even he saw the creation of and gave his support for the cultural barbaric practices hotline as an election promise and the niqab ban among other legislation such as those cutting back on Canada's environmental protection. With Chong being as divisive as he is in the CPC (who, incidentally, supported the niqab ban), it leads me to believe his leadership would see a lot of pushback from said Reform remnants, with several of the more socially conservative elements of the party crop up once more and enact legislation based on those beliefs. Just look at how many of the leadership hopefuls see M-103 as an attack on free speech and value that more than the safety of Canada's Muslim community in the increasing waves of hate crimes. Short of a split, that component of the party isn't going away for some time now so giving them power under Chong, even with a minority government, is a no-go for the time being.

In short: Red Tory or not, the Conservative Party's never getting my vote even if Chong is the party's leader. He's certainly the best choice among the candidates but that's not saying much when there's maybe two people who won't churn my stomach if they become the party's leader.

 

[djkimothy]

Kellie Leitch's video in silence

lol

Even in silence she still boils my blood.

 

[cryptosporidium]

paragraph

You're right in that he wouldnt have the support of the party, perhaps if he used the party whip heavily he could make change... I just really dont want the CPC to turn into what 'is' down south.

 

[Mr.Mike]

Liberals Spending $186B On Infrastructure Without A Real Plan: Senate Finance Committee

A Senate committee warns that the Liberal government could end up wasting billions in new infrastructure money unless it develops a detailed strategy to dole out the cash in the coming years.

The national finance committee said in some cases, the only metrics that Infrastructure Canada uses to measure success are the number of projects completed and the value attached to them — how much money goes out the door rather than what the money is buying.

...

Absent a strategic plan, the government can't develop meaningful objectives or performance measures, leaving parliamentarians and Canadians in the dark about whether the infrastructure program will meet the Liberals' goal of growing the economy.

The committee's report released Tuesday morning warned the Liberals to invest the right amount in infrastructure and invest in the right places — particularly in trade infrastructure.

The report recommended the government create a single window for funding, instead of spreading it across multiple departments and agencies, and take into account the needs of municipalities when deciding how money will be spent.

...

A spokesman for Infrastructure Minister Amarjeet Sohi said the government will release its long-term infrastructure plan with the Liberals' "vision, outcomes, indicators and program details" some time this spring. Brook Simpson said the government will work with municipalities and parliamentarians on the design of the plan.

The federal government is set to dole out $186 billion in infrastructure money over the coming decade, with almost half of that stemming from the Liberals' new infrastructure plan.

The first phase of that program was aimed at renovating and repairing existing infrastructure in order to get some stimulus money into the economy while the Liberals worked on the plan for the second phase of the program, valued at around $80 billion.

The Liberals say that money will be aimed at large, transformational projects that will also help grow the economy.

The government has been slow to allocate the first tranche of money from its infrastructure program to provinces and cities. The Senate committee found that as of December, 308 projects worth $806 million had actually started, far below the 719 projects worth $1.5 billion that the government said were to immediately start after the 2016 budget.

The slow pace of project work puts Liberal economic projections at risk. But the slow pace also has a political advantage, as projects may still be underway in 2019 when voters head to the polls.

The committee said problem is symptomatic of an overly complex funding system, where too many department and agencies are responsible for slices of the infrastructure pie. Cities find the federal funding web confusing to navigate, the report said.

Simpson said the government has already started streamlining approval processes and tried to simplify funding programs by letting provincial and local official prioritize projects.

A certain somebody in the Reddit comments mentioned a Windsor-QC high speed rail line, and I would like to see that as well.

 

[explodet]

"We spent all the money on a single subway stop in Toronto."

whoopsiedaisy.gif

 

[killer rin]

Liberals Spending $186B On Infrastructure Without A Real Plan: Senate Finance Committee



A certain somebody in the Reddit comments mentioned a Windsor-QC high speed rail line, and I would like to see that as well.

We really need to be building High Speed Rail as a form of regional and city-city transportation. As a country we are so spread apart that unless you have a ton of money and time, it's almost impossible for us to see any other portion of it.

High Speed Rail would be a great way to connect the country. If we could get from Toronto to Montreal in 2 hours, to Quebec City in ~4, to the Maritime Provinces in under 7.... or looking at things from the west coast and having a line that allows people to get from Edmonton to Vancouver in under 7 hours. All of these at a cheap price because they would be dedicated high speed lines with multiple trips a day... we would really be able to connect the country together and start breaking apart the regional differences.

The only other way to achieve this without High Speed Rail would be massive Air Travel subsidies, and all that would be achieving is delaying the inevitable build out of a more permanent solution because you would be stuck always paying those subsidies instead of having a one time cost for the buildout of High Speed Rail followed by the recurrent lower cost maintenance.

Unfortunately however, nobody wants to make these kinds of big investments, and even if they do they spend too much time bickering on what they should do until everybody no longer wants to do it any longer. The west doesn't want to pay for a rail line in the east... and the east doesn't want to pay for a rail line in the west. These are the kinds of infrastructure investments we should be making with the 186 Billion Dollars. Unfortunately however it's in all likelihood just going to get put towards repaving and adding more lanes to roads and unnecessarily twinning random bridges, or as explodet said above spending money on ill-thought out transit plans such as the One Stop Scarborough Subway which would be better served as an LRT which had dozens of stops

 

[Dr Campino]

Ugh, please just build high speed rail. Build it all over, drop one big plan for the whole country, so there's less bickering over why it's out east and not west, etc.

And give a bunch of cash to municipal transit systems for hybrid or electric buses to replace old ones, it blows my mind that places are still using loud-ass buses when hybrid diesel-eletric options exist. Windsor has a ton of them. Guelph, where I live now, for all its positives, has a real shitty transit plan for things like that.

 

[Pedrito]

There's a French version! And it's glorious!

https://www.facebook.com/KellieLeitchMP/videos/1318148691555842/

Kudos for the effort I guess, but it sounds like a parody of an anglophone speaking French.

 

[pr0cs]

186 Billion on infrastructure with no plan, what a surprise.

I still can't believe that we still have single lane highway connecting east to west coast. Like it's still 1950 or something. But hey, high speed rail is a good idea rite?

 

[Pedrito]

Actually, the highway is double lane or larger in many places, where it needs to be.

 

[cryptosporidium]

 

[bremon]

186 Billion on infrastructure with no plan, what a surprise.

I still can't believe that we still have single lane highway connecting east to west coast. Like it's still 1950 or something. But hey, high speed rail is a good idea rite?

Are you talking about a small section outside of Victoria, or should we widen the entire thing just for bragging rights? 4 lanes both ways through rural Saskatchewan and Manitoba, to handle all that impressive traffic?

Actually, the highway is double lane or larger in many places, where it needs to be.

Settle down with your explanations there fella, haven't you heard? Lib'rals are dumb, ok? /s.

In other news, I got an email from Andrew Scheer today. Happy Andy indirectly says that Sir Kevin is no true knight of the realm and only Andrew knows the true weak spot in evil Trudeau's armour. Oh, and also, he will balance the books in 2 years instead of 38 like naive Justin. I don't know about you guys but that intense amount of frugality and cost cutting sounds like just the ticket to managing a household in these tough economic times. And what's the federal government if not a big household, right guys? Right?

 

[CazTGG]

Are you talking about a small section outside of Victoria, or should we widen the entire thing just for bragging rights? 4 lanes both ways through rural Saskatchewan and Manitoba, to handle all that impressive traffic?

Settle down with your explanations there fella, haven't you heard? Lib'rals are dumb, ok? /s.

In other news, I got an email from Andrew Scheer today. Happy Andy indirectly says that Sir Kevin is no true knight of the realm and only Andrew knows the true weak spot in evil Trudeau's armour. Oh, and also, he will balance the books in 2 years instead of 38 like naive Justin. I don't know about you guys but that intense amount of frugality and cost cutting sounds like just the ticket to managing a household in these tough economic times. And what's the federal government if not a big household, right guys? Right?

Right

Spoiler

-wing jargon that will plunge the deficit to levels the Harper government could only dream of.

 

[pr0cs]

Are you talking about a small section outside of Victoria, or should we widen the entire thing just for bragging rights? 4 lanes both ways through rural Saskatchewan and Manitoba, to handle all that impressive traffic?

Settle down with your explanations there fella, haven't you heard? Lib'rals are dumb, ok? /s.

Not dumb just don't know their geography worth shit. You mean you have never driven to Vancouver from Edmonton? Did you miss the god awful highway from Banff all the way to Kamloops?

You, know,the only major highway that connects the major shipping route from Vancouver to the east?

Don't be so bloody short sighted, has nothing to do with what government is in power,they all have forgotten or chose to ignore that deathtrap highway.

I swear,unless the post is stroking Trudeau no one actually thinks about what's being said in this thread.

 

[bremon]

How much traffic is on it pr0cs? How many people use it? More than those who use AB 63? I don't drive to Vancouver, I fly. I've taken 16 well into BC plenty of times and driven 93 plenty too. I don't see the problem with that one in particular.

That "death trap" highway is like plenty of others, and they all deserve more money thrown at them. Could have been done with "Canada's Economic Action Plan" though.

 

[killer rin]

If we are talking about problems with the Trans-Canada Highway, there is only one major one. The fact that in Ontario the whole thing is basically split in half by a river that leads into the far north with the only way over it being a single bridge. A single bridge that for up to a month was down, effectively cutting the country in half to the cost of over 100m/day. For something that important there should be several bridges, maybe a backup tunnel and maybe also a rail you could chuck things on to get over if the previous items failed.

 

[SRG01]

How much traffic is on it pr0cs? How many people use it? More than those who use AB 63? I don't drive to Vancouver, I fly. I've taken 16 well into BC plenty of times and driven 93 plenty too. I don't see the problem with that one in particular.

That "death trap" highway is like plenty of others, and they all deserve more money thrown at them. Could have been done with "Canada's Economic Action Plan" though.

There's not really a problem with Highway 1 or anything with that route -- there's a lot of ecologically sensitive land in that area, so it's understandable why sections haven't been twinned yet. That, and a large amount of our mutual economies comes in and out through rail -- grain, canola, lumber, etc -- so there isn't really a pressing need to expand much of the BC-AB links.

(As an aside, a lot of people took the longer path with Highway 1 rather than BC HW5 because of the toll that existed until the mid 2000s or so.)

If we are talking about problems with the Trans-Canada Highway, there is only one major one. The fact that in Ontario the whole thing is basically split in half by a river that leads into the far north with the only way over it being a single bridge. A single bridge that for up to a month was down, effectively cutting the country in half to the cost of over 100m/day. For something that important there should be several bridges, maybe a backup tunnel and maybe also a rail you could chuck things on to get over if the previous items failed.

Digging through the Shield is hard work, unfortunately

Anecdotally, many of my friends said that it's easier to cross into the states, drive through their highways, and come back up in Ontario than driving directly through the provinces and through Ontario.

 

[bremon]

Rail passage for transport of goods, and the fact that twinning it means an extensive amount of carving out mountains (again) were why I always assumed it hadn't been done and didn't have the need to be.

 

[pr0cs]

How much traffic is on it pr0cs? How many people use it? More than those who use AB 63? I don't drive to Vancouver, I fly. I've taken 16 well into BC plenty of times and driven 93 plenty too. I don't see the problem with that one in particular.

That "death trap" highway is like plenty of others, and they all deserve more money thrown at them. Could have been done with "Canada's Economic Action Plan" though.

It's terrible,lots of shipping/ 18 wheelers on schedules mixed with tourists ,RV trailers and motorhomes,touring bikes all of which are either in a hurry or in no hurry because they don't have any particular place to be.

Long weekend holiday weekends are especially bad there really is no quiet times.

A large portion of the to a section at field BC was closed due to avalanches which meant people were stuck sleeping in their car. I understand this road from The Jasper turn off all the way to Kamloops will cost a fortune to twin. But it blows my mind that in the 20th century in a country as rich As Canada that a road that critical to moving product people from One Coast to the next is a single Lane Road.

It's not going to get cheaper and would save a lot of money and lives.

Make it into the fucking coqahalla part 2 to pay for the thing , I know I'd pay extra to drive on something faster and safer. Seems like a no brainier for something that affects the whole country but it's the government so expect another 50 years of the same old same old

Welcome to Canada the third world nation, this is our goat path we take to get to the sea! One of many dual lane bridges connecting east to west

 

[killer rin]

Rail passage for transport of goods, and the fact that twinning it means an extensive amount of carving out mountains (again) were why I always assumed it hadn't been done and didn't have the need to be.

Still, for something that important there should always be a backup. You can make a single 8 lane bridge instead of 2 4-lanes, but if that one bridge goes down you're fucked, whereas if you had two your only losing 4 lanes.

I've been thinking lately, but given our countries constant tendency to bicker about infrastructure, maybe it would be a good idea to just raise taxes 2% across the board and dedicate those funds specifically to a generic pool for infrastructure. Hell, make it a crown corporation who gets to manage the money and make Municipalities submit plans to the corporation to get access to it. Just we need to fix the way we fund infrastructure in this country that isn't a gas tax that doesn't provide as much as it used to and raiding pennies from Municipalities who can't afford anything as-is.

The Infrastructure Bank Trudeau is making is a good first step, it just needs to go much, much further.

 

[bremon]

Thanks for the explanation pr0cs. That does make sense to me, and the comment about RVs/campers rings true. I've seen plenty of those back traffic up on 16. Does twinning the highway help much with weather shutting things down though?

Killer Rin, I think that's a good idea and part of the reason I'm not against a carbon tax. The idea of it is good, but what they sink that money into will be the deciding factor for me. Renewable resources and safer transport would be hugely beneficial.

Slightly off topic but AB2 strikes me as a death trap highway. I've driven it between Edmonton and Calgary countless times and people are always getting killed. Winter is especially dangerous on it.

 

[SRG01]

Thanks for the explanation pr0cs. That does make sense to me, and the comment about RVs/campers rings true. I've seen plenty of those back traffic up on 16. Does twinning the highway help much with weather shutting things down though?

Killer Rin, I think that's a good idea and part of the reason I'm not against a carbon tax. The idea of it is good, but what they sink that money into will be the deciding factor for me. Renewable resources and safer transport would be hugely beneficial.

Slightly off topic but AB2 strikes me as a death trap highway. I've driven it between Edmonton and Calgary countless times and people are always getting killed. Winter is especially dangerous on it.

AB2 isn't dangerous. People just go too fast on certain sections and don't expect their cars to go out of control -- especially downhill or with wind gusts.

edit: Oh, that reminds me: there are some bends on Highway 3 to Lethbridge that can be tricky, even if the bend is slightly sloped to prevent people from flying off the road o_o

 

[bremon]

And the end result is people killed. It isn't inherently dangerous but stupid people and large stretches of windswept black ice make it an uncomfortable stretch in and out of red deer and south of Edmonton and Leduc. The volume of traffic is the main danger.

 

[SRG01]

The volume of traffic is the main danger.

That part I can agree with. Excessive volume on any highway leads to dangerous conditions...

 

[bremon]

While we are on the subject of travel and highways, I would be onboard with more of Canada following Quebecs lead and legislating mandatory winter tires. I know many people dislike the government telling them how to spend money, or "but my tires are all-season!" but my experience tells me you really can't downplay the difference in performance without lying to yourself. Having 4 tires to store at any given time isn't ideal, especially for condo owners but it's doable and worth it.

 

[Simon Belmont]

While we are on the subject of travel and highways, I would be onboard with more of Canada following Quebecs lead and legislating mandatory winter tires. I know many people dislike the government telling them how to spend money, or "but my tires are all-season!" but my experience tells me you really can't downplay the difference in performance without lying to yourself. Having 4 tires to store at any given time isn't ideal, especially for condo owners but it's doable and worth it.

Most car dealerships will actually store your tires for you (for a small fee, but totally worth never having to lug them around yourself)

The only thing I would say, is that my 4x4 F150 with all seasons performs significantly better in the snow than my escape with winter tires.

 

[gutter_trash]

my Midas accross the street offers tire storage.

I have some room in my condo's locker but I usually dump them in my parents' shed.

IMO, I think it should be up to the Provinces since some have varied climates

 

[Mupod]

winter tires were such a huge difference that I'll always use them from now on. They were an absolute must in Sudbury. But I'm in Brampton now and there was snow on the ground like 3 days total this entire winter.

 

[killer rin]

my Midas accross the street offers tire storage.

I have some room in my condo's locker but I usually dump them in my parents' shed.

IMO, I think it should be up to the Provinces since some have varied climates

For the most part it would be a good idea to mandate it across the country... as long as there were some exceptions for Southwestern Ontario and the Pacific Coast. I'm personally from Southwestern Ontario and I know I can't remember the last time we actually had snow. It mostly melts immediately upon touching the ground, or for a particularly heavy snowfall after a day or two. I mean, I was down in Windsor last week and my parents neighbors were mowing the lawn with almost everybody else out in t-shirts and shorts. I also know that when I did live with them growing up this was a regular occurrence that only got worse, especially in recent years.

 

[maharg]

Feels strange to say this, but I agree with gutter. It doesn't make sense to mandate this above the provincial level. Nearly everything about vehicle and road regulation is provincial anyways.

 

[killer rin]

Feels strange to say this, but I agree with gutter. It doesn't make sense to mandate this above the provincial level. Nearly everything about vehicle and road regulation is provincial anyways.

Well, I do agree that we need to unify regulations. Whether that means having the Federal Government take over portions like a Federation should work or getting the provinces to agree on something is what would be up for debate in this case.

 

[Silver Arrows]

Autopac out here in Manitoba subsidizes winter tires purchases. It's about the closest thing to mandating without requiring it, and if it did go federal, I would prefer that they went this route instead of other options.

 

[gutter_trash]

Well, I do agree that we need to unify regulations. Whether that means having the Federal Government take over portions like a Federation should work or getting the provinces to agree on something is what would be up for debate in this case.

I would preffer opening up the debate of having getting healthcare from other provinces that have better wait times.