Prima facie unconstitutional. The only question is whether Quebec will then resort to the Notwithstanding Clause when the courts strike it down.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Canadian PoliGAF - 42nd Parliament: Sunny Ways in Trudeaupia
- Thread starter matthewwhatever
- Start date
- Status
Greg Johnston, Sarah Terra and Al Adam are just hard working canadians sick and tired of the lieberals' bullshit.
So hard working they spent the day spamming a comments section.
Knowing the history of Quebec and Section 33, they probably will.
You Are Viewtiful
Member
It appears that a handful of people posted hundreds of comments each.
Does one of them happen to be the elusive Pierre Poutine?
I've learned to not bother with the comments on the CBC or its Twitter (there were some pretty ignorant responses to this article's Twitter link: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/virago-nation-burlesque-1.4353649) because it's about as intellectually stimulating as consuming poison ivy; when it's not full of xenophobia, it's just some variation of "Du Lerbturds are hurting our jerbs!!! (they're not)" or "Andrew Scheer 2019!!! (Won't happen short of a massive scandal + vote split; in fact, given Bernier's recent action, I wouldn't be surprised if he loses a leadership vote when Trudeau wins an even larger majority)".
It looks like Naheed Nenshi was reelected as calgary's mayor.
http://calgary.ctvnews.ca/naheed-nenshi-re-elected-as-calgary-mayor-1.3635357
http://calgary.ctvnews.ca/naheed-nenshi-re-elected-as-calgary-mayor-1.3635357
firehawk12
Subete no aware
I thought he was popular, so I was surprised to see it was close.
Here's an article that goes into greater detail about The Rebel's ties to Scheer: https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/ne...campaign-managers-rebel-ties/article36610946/
matthewwhatever
Member
He still lost, and it was less than five months ago. Even Brian Mulroney waited a few years before sticking it to Joe Clark.
I'm not going to complain if the Tories get torn apart by infighting, but it feels like Bernier is starting off a public campaign to replace Scheer a little early.
Between this and the demand to kill the Canadian and Mexican auto industries, I'm starting to get the sense that the US isn't negotiating in good faith.
The part about Marshall continuing to work with The Rebel is new, right? If I'm remembering correctly, during the campaign he was just described as a co-founder of The Rebel, and it was implied that he didn't have much to do with them anymore.
EDIT: Duh, it says that right in the article. Anyway, ending a press conference immediately rather than trying to answer the question looks absolutely terrible. If nothing else, it means the story continues and he gets asked about it again, rather than no one noticing one question in a press conference devoted to something else.
Side note: a lot of NDP-types I follow on Twitter who were screeching about how racist Canadian media were for asking Singh about his ties to extremists and suggesting Scheer would never get asked about his ties to white supremacists are being awfully silent about this.
I think you'll only really be able to judge this when you see what follows who into the election.
I'd lay better odds on Singh's baggage than Sheer's following them there, personally.
matthewwhatever
Member
With the caveat that either or both of them could come up with solid answers that put their respective stories to bed within the next two years...I actually think Scheer's baggage will get more attention in 2019. Based on how they've been treating him so far, painting him as a far-right loon will be a key component of the LPC re-election strategy, plus the whole Trump angle (assuming he isn't dead or impeached by then) will make it irresistable for the media.
With Singh, by contrast, no one really benefits from it being brought up: the CPC want an NDP that can take votes away from the Liberals, and from what little I've read it's divisive enough that the Liberals won't want to wade into it. The media won't want to go after it too aggressively, either, since they'll have seen the pushback CBC got for raising the issue. It won't be totally absent -- obviously the far-right racists won't be able to resist, and I imagine the Bloc will try to use it, plus it may get a fair amount of play within Indo-Canadian communities -- but I don't think it'll have the same kind of legs as Scheer being closely tied to Canada's Breitbart.
(Though, of course, I admit that my perception on all of it as a white anglo is/will be different than yours.)
Simon Belmont
Banned
Even if he is, his ghost will haunt politics for years like Rob Ford's does.
And nothing of value was lost.
Eh, not really a 1:1 comparison since what Singh has been called to answer for is religious extremists (specifically, Sikh extremists) whereas Scheer has, so far as I know, not once been called to answer for radical Christian terrorists, which would be the more apt comparison.
He generally is. The drop in oil prices hit everything hard though and since the city isn't allowed to run a deficit, and downtown office space is around 33% vacant, business taxes went up by a lot and that's been rough on lots of businesses. There's also downtown "revitalization" that's hurting foot traffic even more.
Developers are mad because they won't give them money for a new stadium/arena and the city has only recently started making the developers pay for infrastructure out to new developments. The theory is that a group of prominent developers and PC party interests heavily funded the main competition.
There's always the group that'll never accept a Muslim mayor.
Just a bunch of stuff all going on at once.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
Sure sounds like Canada is going to be on the losing end of the NAFTA negotiations.
Random Human
They were trying to grab your prize. They work for the mercenary. The masked man.
Sounds like all three countries will be on the losing end.
NAFTA negotiations are going to continue until at least 2018 since Trumplestilskin is so desperate for a win to boast about during the midterms and thus far has none to use, not to mention how much political fire he'd be handing Democrats if he did pull out of NAFTA, especially in states where Canada is their largest trading partner that Republicans are running incumbent gubernatorial and senators. They're being protectionist in their neogations (see also: Chapter 19/tribunal discussions which are going nowhere) but the U.S. will ultimately be a loser if they pull out of NAFTA and Canada will not be going along with many of their suggestions, to say nothing of Mexico prior to their federal elections next year which will certainly changes the topics of discussion and how they're discussed. I will reiterate this as many times as possible: The original NAFTA took years to negotiate with people who were competent throughout the negotiations (for the most part). Trump may be very, very, very stupid, but Republicans across the U.S. know that sinking NAFTA would be political suicide so it's better to keep up his (weak) bluster on "Murica Furzt!".
EDIT: Well that didn't last very long, did it? Conservatives name former Rebel Media director as 2019 campaign chair
No. The American president can withdraw the USA from any treaty immediately and without any vehicle for redress. Trump could withdraw from the UN and the Geneva Conventions tomorrow and there wouldn't be anything anybody could do about it.
Silent Chief
Member
There's more to lose by signing a bad deal than by not signing any deals.
First of all, Trump can't cancel NAFTA on his own. He needs congress to vote on it and the US businesses like NAFTA, it's the Mexican jobs and the trade deficits that Americans don't like. There's all those US farmers selling billions in corn to Mexico every year.
Things tend to balance themselves, which mean a bad deal would bring the Canadian dollar down. The US can't have a trade surplus with us. Where would the money come from? A prosperous Canada sends troves of snowbirds to Florida and Arizona. Less if our dollar is at 50 cents US.
Yes, he can. See above.
The Senate's approval is only needed to ratify a treaty, not to withdraw from one.
KernelPanic
Member
Its more likely he pulls out of NAFTA.
Those demands are so ridiculous the media is reporting that Trumps negotiatiors dont really believe them, theyre forced to.
Smells more like PR to look tough negotiations or throw a bunch of non starter poison pills on the table.
See? Look how broken NAFTA is. We are out!
Sales pitch of protectionism to their base.
Ether_Snake
å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®å®
So let's say the US does pull out of NAFTA. Unlikely, as said he needs congress to agree on it, but let's say it happens. Regardless of what it does to the US, Canada would be hurt seriously.
edit: He doesn't need congress? Then it's certain he's pulling out. Congress pleading no will just incite him further to do it.
Pancake Mix
Copied someone else's pancake recipe
Everyone should be very happy about CETA being a thing, which according to Wikipedia is being provisionally applied (so not the whole document but a substantial amount of it) right now.
Better than nothing. Yes, NAFTA is far more important to the Canadian economy but it's better than literally having nothing to fall back on, nor can you simply submit to unreasonable demands. A period of WTO rules may be better in the long run, despite initial pain, and have the added bonus of reducing dependency on one foreign market in particular, even if that foreign market is so important precisely because it's so close.
Better than nothing. Yes, NAFTA is far more important to the Canadian economy but it's better than literally having nothing to fall back on, nor can you simply submit to unreasonable demands. A period of WTO rules may be better in the long run, despite initial pain, and have the added bonus of reducing dependency on one foreign market in particular, even if that foreign market is so important precisely because it's so close.
gutter_trash
Banned
Canada should stall on NAFTA
Allow Mueller enough time to wrap up his Russia investigation
Allow Mueller enough time to wrap up his Russia investigation
I tought it was more complicated than that?
I know that the president has the power to terminate any treaties like Kimmy carter once did, but it's also in the constitution that Congress is the one in charge of dealing with tax,tarrif and whatever else.
Would it not fall on the supreme court to decide who has power over it?
After Trump canceled NAFTA, border tariffs, etc. for Canadian and Mexican goods would revert to whatever the default is for countries with which the US doesnt have a trade deal.
Congress could theoretically alter those over a presidential veto if two thirds of each house vote to override.
matthewwhatever
Member
I guess the thinking being that if they're going to get tagged with Rebel Media associations, they may as well embrace it? If most of their voters are with them no matter what, they may as well take things as far as they can, and hope they disgust enough non-CPC voters into just not voting at all.
That's, uh...that's certainly one way to take approach things.
I don't think its as simple as that. From a few months ago:
If NAFTA falls apart, it'd be terrible for Canada, for sure. But I don't think he fully understands just how much damage that would do to the US as well.
His style worked with Bombardier so far. After all the tariffs (300%) he dropped on their C-Series they had to make a deal with Airbus. Airbus became the major shareholder of the C-series and will use their factory to build the planes in one of their factory in the US. So instead of being built in Canada it will be built in the states to evade the tariffs. Protectionism just like Trump wanted.
KernelPanic
Member
I dont think he knows but I think hes being spoon fed an agenda by his advisors. I think the question is does he care?
His whole agenda is a toxic ideology that doesnt really care if its the right thing to do or how many people it will screw over. They will make up whatever facts they need to justify it.
Were still spoiled up here by having a government that at largely tries to do the right thing based on facts from within reality.
We only had a brief taste with Harper of a government doing stupid things out of twisted ideology and not any sort of rational thinking.
It's the most annoying thing right now. It's completely pointless to deal with the US government while he's president. They day he's gone, things should go back to normal for the most part. And everyone seems to think he won't last long, himself included probably. Yet, we have to endure his fuckeries that are nothing more than a show for his base of deplorables. So much time and work wasted on that buffoon...
Ehh, I'm not sure if that was an actual Trump win. That was more of a Boeing misstep than a push by the Trump admin, IIRC.
And about the C-Series, the facility in Canada will be maintained, with some additional assembly/manufacturing lines in the states.
It's unlikely moreso because he's already threatened to pull out of NAFTA before and fallen through on every single boast he's made on the matter. In fact, Justin called him on the phone and explained to him that pulling out of NAFTA would affect workers on both sides of the border so he's well aware of how bad a look it would be despite his bluster. That aside, all that highly unlikely event (I know some have said they're trying to frame current discussions as "oh Canada and Mexico aren't playing fair so we're out" but that's a pathetic excuse given some of their demands) would do is provide an incentive for the Canadian government to increase their trade with the EU following CETA's ratification and consider joining the single market.
gutter_trash
Banned
Premier Philippe Couillard is prepping for a photo-op this week at the Bombardier plant in Mirabel.
The Laurentiennes region is dominated by the 2 main opposition parties. The CAQ was critical of Couillard's Bombardier deals. Couillard is going in/ "see, the Bombardier bail-out was a good deal, jobs were saved."
It is going to get used as a campaign tactic in a region that is unfriendly to the Qc Liberals.
Bombardier jobs saved being a talking point while the Right leaning CAQ was critical of government interventions on corporate bail-outs. But the bail-out "saved jobs"
gutter_trash
Banned
this will be fun in winter time
Pancake Mix
Copied someone else's pancake recipe
The question now is: can they amend that bill to add the legislative override clause after it already passed?
I don't think It will ever be applied anyway. They are already stating it will be put in place progressively. This is more or less Couillard trying to appeal to nationalists because he's in panic mode. Many columnists and pundits here have accused him of pandering only to immigrants and communities in the last few weeks because they are his biggest base.. La Presse is also reporting he has removed the Racial Discrimination inquiry from the hands of the human rights commission.
The hilarious thing is that all of the other parties voted against bill 62.
Yeah, but not exactly for the right reasons.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/quebec-niqab-burka-bill-62-1.4360121
gutter_trash
Banned
Quebec politics will always suck because of nationalism. It's a taint no matter Left, Center or Right. It's the annoying part of Provincial Politics that makes Quebec politics super stupid
gutter_trash
Banned
Support for separation is at an all time low yeah, but nationalism is still strong.
Look at the Alt-Right, it's majorly composed of Millennials who are busy on social media.
and the Alt-Right is not exclusive to the US. Canada and Quebec have seen some of it on the internets and in stupid Facebook Groups
The Beaverton is usually a bit too on the nose for me to find funny, but I did chuckle at this one.
The alt-right's millennial support is primarily elsewhere in the world. When you look at groups like La Meute marching, it's mostly people in their 40s or older. Proud Boys have a near-glacial growth in Canada and are probably the most likely to inherit any small number of millennial supporters because of how they try to couch their approach as "reasonable" and "not racist" (despite any number of actions to the contrary).
If they're going to exist anywhere in Canada, it will be online predominantly, because being alt-right in public has very VERY little breathing room in the open air in Canada.
Its existence at any age range is drastically limited, however, simply by being so drastically outnumbered. I have no doubt the alt-right will continue to exist in Canada, but it'll never be something we as a country can't easily oppose so long as we continue doing just that, both at a civic and governmental level.
And that's thankfully not a personal opinion, it's the opinion of more learned people than I am that the alt-right appears destined to stay at the fringe without a supreme shift in how the country behaves civically and governmentally.
I've seen it suggested that the federal government should have the "religious neutrality" legislation immediately brought to the Supreme Court of Canada (via the Supreme Court Act) instead of having it go through a lower court and be appealed up to the Supreme Court: Yay or nay?
Proud Boys were founded in Canada! Let's not pretend like these heinous roots weren't here to begin with or that there isn't a concerning growth of far-right cretins "thanks" to The Rebel. Canadian alt-right is still alt-right, regardless of whether they have a 2nd Amendment to get, for lack of a better word, to get up in arms about like their American counterparts.
Proud Boys were founded in Canada! Let's not pretend like these heinous roots weren't here to begin with or that there isn't a concerning growth of far-right cretins "thanks" to The Rebel. Canadian alt-right is still alt-right, regardless of whether they have a 2nd Amendment to get, for lack of a better word, to get up in arms about like their American counterparts.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked