• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Liberal Minority Government 2021 - ????

Holy shit Brihard.... you don't think the 84 independent Trudeau appointments of the 105 member senate aren't going to go his way?
I was curious about this, so did some digging on the Senates website. Going back 2 years, no senate vote had all 105 senators present, with most votes having a maximum of 87 votes, and a minimum of 27. I scanned several individual votes to determine if the ISG, PSG, CSG, Conservative, or non affiliated senators tended to vote in specific blocks to adopt or defeat bills. To be honest, it was pretty random. While certain individuals always seemed to vote with the Gov't, many others appeared to vote (or not show up) issue by issue, and not always for the affiliated/nonaffiliated political leaning.
 
Holy shit Brihard.... you don't think the 84 independent Trudeau appointments of the 105 member senate aren't going to go his way?
He’s didn’t say that. He said “swiftly”. The Bloc put a tight timeline on it. One the senate could easily stifle. Not that hard for conservative senators to create a procedural quagmire to stall things.
 
He’s didn’t say that. He said “swiftly”. The Bloc put a tight timeline on it. One the senate could easily stifle. Not that hard for conservative senators to create a procedural quagmire to stall things.
So, maybe Trudeau can get them through first and second reading and off to the upper chamber by the deadline and then tell Blanchette "it's out of my hands". Would it be wise for Blanchette to "force and election" when Trudeau has "done his best" to meet the Bloc's "reasonable" demands "which will be good for all Canadians" in the HoC? Blame then falls on the Senate and those obstructionist Conservative and independent Senators.
 
So, maybe Trudeau can get them through first and second reading and off to the upper chamber by the deadline and then tell Blanchette "it's out of my hands". Would it be wise for Blanchette to "force and election" when Trudeau has "done his best" to meet the Bloc's "reasonable" demands "which will be good for all Canadians" in the HoC? Blame then falls on the Senate and those obstructionist Conservative and independent Senators.
Like I mentioned the Bloc could vote with CPC and the NDP could still support the LPC. It’s all smoke and mirrors. But the bloc gets to show everyone they are serious.
 
Holy shit Brihard.... you don't think the 84 independent Trudeau appointments of the 105 member senate aren't going to go his way?
I’m sorry, I can’t make my key points any more italic for you than I already did.
 
You're kidding aren't you?

There have been 84 independent (Ha Ha) appointments to the Senate made on the advice of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. Total Senate 105.

I think you meant “independent”. 😉

Austin Powers Laser GIF
 
I am not kidding. Read my words again- he appointed them, yes, but they have the protection of senate tenure. He cannot ensure any particular result. He also cannot compel the Senate to move swiftly if it’s not so inclined. While the Senate rarely outright rejects something from HoC, it might languish in committee for quite a while, and/or face significant amendment.
While what you say is true, and should be the case - my fear is that all of these individuals appointed to the Senate by Justin creates a Senate that feels obliged, at least to some degree, to support and pass whatever legislation Justin manages to get past the HoC

(I refuse to address him as PM Trudeau, he sure as hell isn't my PM that's for sure)



I don't even know how one PM can appointed 84 out of 105 Senate seats to begin with, but that's another issue for another time...
 
While what you say is true, and should be the case - my fear is that all of these individuals appointed to the Senate by Justin creates a Senate that feels obliged, at least to some degree, to support and pass whatever legislation Justin manages to get past the HoC

(I refuse to address him as PM Trudeau, he sure as hell isn't my PM that's for sure)
Refuse as you may, he is in fact your PM. Until he isn’t.
I don't even know how one PM can appointed 84 out of 105 Senate seats to begin with, but that's another issue for another time...
Harper appointed 56 then stopped. He left 22 unfilled. He refused to fill anymore until the provinces figured out how to reform the senate. So his number after 10 years would have been comparable to Trudeau’s after 10 years. In fact if he hadn’t left 22 seats vantant he would have filled more.

So with 22 vacancies going in, Trudeau appointed people to those plus the other vacancies that came up over 10 years.
 
While what you say is true, and should be the case - my fear is that all of these individuals appointed to the Senate by Justin creates a Senate that feels obliged, at least to some degree, to support and pass whatever legislation Justin manages to get past the HoC
As evidenced by Bills C-21 and C-71, the government can encourage the Senate to pass them quickly without significant amendment in the best interests of Canada but they need not do so. Admittedly, my two examples were government Bills and key planks of the Liberal platform, so maybe not the best comparisons. However, should the PM believe these Bloc bills to be in the "best interests of Canada (i.e. keeping his government alive)" similar encouragement could be applied. Whether it works is another story.
(I refuse to address him as PM Trudeau, he sure as hell isn't my PM that's for sure)
So who is your PM, then? Like it or not, he was elected by Canadians for Canadians? (Yes, I'm poking the bear :).)
 
I don't even know how one PM can appointed 84 out of 105 Senate seats to begin with, but that's another issue for another time...
Repeatedly winning elections.

13 senators must retire before the presumptive October 20 2025 election date, 8 LPC appointees, 5 CPC.

25 must retire between Oct 2025 and Oct 2029, 20 of them LPC, 5 CPC. So by the end of a Poilievre government, there should be a net increase of no less than 15 CPC senators and a decrease of no less than 15 LPC appointees.

If CPC win a second majority term, another 28 must retire, all but one of them LPC appointees.

So two consecutive CPC four year governments beginning in Oct 2025 would effectively guarantee 43 more CPC appointed senators than there are now.

That’s just how it goes with mandatory Senate retirements and lengthy stints in government.
 
So who is your PM, then? Like it or not, he was elected by Canadians for Canadians? (Yes, I'm poking the bear :).)
Okay okay FINE...

Justin Trudeau is the Prime Minister of Canada, and therefore he's technically my Prime Minister 🙄😮‍💨

(I'm still only referring to him as Justin tho, as I don't believe he's deserving of the title of Prime Minister)
 
Okay okay FINE...

Justin Trudeau is the Prime Minister of Canada, and therefore he's technically my Prime Minister 🙄😮‍💨

(I'm still only referring to him as Justin tho, as I don't believe he's deserving of the title of Prime Minister)
sure he is. That is his title. There is a word missing in my mind and that is more significant, I think:"honourable".
 
Andrew Coyne, writing in today's Globe and Mail, suggests that we might want. to prepare ourselves for the mother of all fiscal policy U-turns:

----------

Is Mark Carney’s new job to provide cover for the mother of all U-turns?​

ANDREW COYNE
PUBLISHED 2 HOURS AGO

So what was that Mark Carney appointment about, anyway? The former Bank of Canada governor, it was announced recently, is to chair something called a Leader’s Task Force on Economic Growth – reporting not to the Prime Minister, but to the Leader of the Liberal Party, whoever that is.

According to a Liberal press release, Mr. Carney’s task is to develop “new ideas for the next phase of Canada’s strategy” for economic growth, “building on” the economy’s already “strong foundations.” You get the picture: when we say new ideas, that should not be taken to mean there is anything wrong with the old ideas.

As always in Liberalspeak, there is never any need to deviate from the One True Path, but only to “continue” doing what is already being done. Mr. Carney, then, will be “building on the Liberal government’s work” to date – “shaping the next steps,” as the Prime Minister is quoted saying, “in our plan to continue to grow our economy.”

Perhaps you are wondering why Mr. Carney’s services are needed, if the economy is continuing to grow on the strong foundations of the Liberal plan. Or even if it is not: Do we not already have a Finance Minister? A Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry? A Minister of Economic Development, and several more economic ministers besides? What is their job, but to continue to build next steps in the strategy?

It will perhaps not surprise you to learn that politics is involved. The assignment is, one suspects, not to “continue to” or to “build on” anything but to prepare the ground for a fairly abject about-face, of a kind familiar from recent months – see housing, immigration, etc. – but on a much grander scale.

With per-capita GDP having shrunk in eight of the last nine quarters – it is no higher than it was in the fourth quarter of 2014 – and the country now among the poorer of the richer countries, it will have occurred even to this government that its economic plan is not, in fact, working.

It’s not that the Trudeau government has had no interest in growth until now. It came to power, recall, complaining of the sluggish growth the country had allegedly endured under the Harper government. Its first seven budgets mentioned “growth” an average of more than 220 times.

It’s just that it had no clue what to do about it. So far as it gave the matter any thought, the answer it came up with was “innovation” (110 mentions per budget). But it was no closer to knowing how to boost innovation, nor any idea of what it was for.

Innovation was plainly considered an end in itself, rather than a means of increasing productivity – the productivity that is behind those dreadful per-capita GDP numbers.

Of late, however, it seems to have got the message. The word “productivity” appeared just 14 times, on average, in those first seven budgets, but suddenly jumped to 63 this year.

Well all right. If productivity is the problem, after nine years of Liberal “innovation” policies, perhaps the solution is to be found in a different set of policies. So, out with massive infrastructure spending and hefty industrial subsidies, all financed with borrowed money – the government-first approach – and in with the sorts of policies that will spur private businesses to invest more capital and deploy it more efficiently: balanced budgets, sweeping tax reform and pro-competition shock therapy.

Problem: how do you adopt these new policies without confessing your previous policies have failed? How do you impose these upon your existing Finance Minister, without making her look like a prat? And how do you do all this, without knowing whether anyone will buy it?

Answer: you bring in an outsider. Someone with stature and credibility. Someone you’ve been trying to bring on board your rapidly sinking ship, but who has been reluctant to drown with the rest of the crew. Someone like Mark Carney.

For the Prime Minister, it allows him to borrow Mr. Carney’s credentials on economic issues without committing to the final result. For Mr. Carney, it gives him a chance to get involved without getting too close – to be seen to be helping out before the election without being tainted afterward by the expected defeat.

For the party, it offers an opportunity to test out Mr. Carney as a potential leader. That he has the policy chops is undoubted. But can he put together a package of reforms that is not only good policy but politically saleable?

And can he make it all sound as if he is merely building on the foundations of the continued plan?

----------

So, is it bye, bye PM Trudeau and bye bye Ministers Freeland, Champagne, Joly, and LeBlanc in 2025?
 
We have missed so many economic opportunities it isn’t even funny. One of the most basic and easiest for us to do would have been selling oil and natural gas to Europe and Japan to get them off Russian oil.
 
We have missed so many economic opportunities it isn’t even funny. One of the most basic and easiest for us to do would have been selling oil and natural gas to Europe and Japan to get them off Russian oil.

That is not only an economic opportunity but also a strategic opportunity in the war against Russian aggression. You have to wonder wtf is going on.
 
sure he is. That is his title. There is a word missing in my mind and that is more significant, I think:"honourable".
I'm still trying to utter the words 'Prime Minister Justin Trudeau' without my gag reflex kicking in, let's slow it rrriiiggghhhttttt down with using the word Honourable...

Unless I shifted into a different dimension (which I suppose is a possibility) we all know he isn't honourable in the slightest


...Give me some time here to start using these auggested words y'all are trolling me with, I'll see what progress I've made come Monday
 
I'm still trying to utter the words 'Prime Minister Justin Trudeau' without my gag reflex kicking in, let's slow it rrriiiggghhhttttt down with using the word Honourable...

Unless I shifted into a different dimension (which I suppose is a possibility) we all know he isn't honourable in the slightest


...Give me some time here to start using these auggested words y'all are trolling me with, I'll see what progress I've made come Monday
The PM is actually The Right Honourable so we’ll give you until Wednesday.

But if you want a Cole’s note to make you gag less. It refers to the position held not necessarily the individual in question.

To dumb it down more, think of it like saluting an officer, you don’t salute the man but you do salute the rank/commission he represents.
 
The PM is actually The Right Honourable so we’ll give you until Wednesday.

But if you want a Cole’s note to make you gag less. It refers to the position held not necessarily the individual in question.

To dumb it down more, think of it like saluting an officer, you don’t salute the man person but you do salute the rank/commission he they represents have received.
FTFY

We salute commissions, otherwise a CWO would be saluted for promotion based on merit, rather than a Lt/SLt/Capt/Lt(N) promoted based on time in.
 
FTFY

We salute commissions, otherwise a CWO would be saluted for promotion based on merit, rather than a Lt/SLt/Capt/Lt(N) promoted based on time in.
I used rank/commission for a reason. A Major doesn’t salute a Lt. Both hold commissions but only one salutes the other.

My comparison stands regardless.
 
Back
Top