PMJT: The First 100 Days

[Altair]

Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions of the Copyright Act from the Globe and Mail, is another assessment of the new, Justin Trudeau government:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/globe-politics-insider/the-trudeau-government-is-looking-a-lot-like-the-harper-government/article28046655/
Caveat lector: my assessment is that John Ibbitson thinks that 40% of those of us who voted made a mistake and, amongst other things, reelected the old Librano$ ...

Additionally, it is, still, early going and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau may have enough guile and real leadership to shift his party, as his father did, from campaigning from the left and then governing from the right to governing from the left, too.

But, for those who are convinced that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, like President Barack Obama, represents real change, consider three things:

    1. This is still the Liberal Party of Canada, it's a big, traditionally successful, highly skilled "machine" that aims to secure and maintain power;

    2. The ministry consists of some bright, young newcomers and some very smart, seasoned professionals but, not matter which, no minister is ever "on top" of her/his department and they come to every meeting with detailed briefs
        and positions prepared by these guys ~

       

        (Remember, always that "Yes, Minister" was a documentary, not a comedy.) and

    3. "Events, dear boy, events."
       

Could also be that Trudeau isn't just blinding pandering to his base and is governing for all Canadians.

Not that it matters, a lot of right leaning folks around here seem to hate him for breathing their air.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Not that it matters, a lot of right leaning folks around here seem to hate him for breathing their air.

Well with all the silly campaign promises he's breaking he seems more and more okay every day.

 

[PuckChaser]

Not that it matters, a lot of right leaning folks around here seem to hate him for breathing their air.

Much like those that think he walks on water, and we shouldn't question the decisions and actions of our new overlord, right?

You're really starting to move away from supporting your position intelligently, and just trolling people who disagree for the sake of creating arguments.

 

[Altair]

Much like those that think he walks on water, and we shouldn't question the decisions and actions of our new overlord, right?

You're really starting to move away from supporting your position intelligently, and just trolling people who disagree for the sake of creating arguments.

Are you saying that I'm not being very objective?

Weird argument to make considering how I have openly wondered what promises are going to die come budget time. I'm pragmatic. Trudeau is a politician. My best hope is that he makes some headway on some of his promises.

As for my last comment, I cannot for the life of me think of one positive thing you have wrote about trudeau. Same for George Wallace. Like literally every single thing he's done since becoming leader of the LPC has been a disaster.

As for the first half of my comment, it's a different take on E.R. Campbell's view. One not quite so...cynical? How that translates to trolling is beyond me.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

You're really starting to move away from supporting your position intelligently, and just trolling people who disagree for the sake of creating arguments.

Pot - it's kettle.  You're black, over.

 

[PuckChaser]

Pot - it's kettle.  You're black, over.

I've used personal examples on how Trudeau's policies directly effect me, a median income, middle-class Canadian with children (Trudeau's target demographic). Let me know when that approaches trolling Liberal supporters. I was unaware using real-world examples to debate topics is trolling, but hey, learn something new on the internet everyday.

 

[Kirkhill]

Next....

 

[Eye In The Sky]

ISIS aren't a military problem for Canada: they're a domestic-security problem caused by a foreign group (so the business of the RCMP, CSIS, and so on) and a foreign-policy and trade issue (and even that only because of where they are, not what they are), so Global Affairs' and those departments dealing with internal trade-related matters. They represent nothing like the hegemonizing threat of the Soviets, Nazis, or Japanese.

Unless I misunderstand the meaning of hegemonizing, I think what they are doing be said to qualify.  They may be at a smaller scale now than the say, the Nazi's were in their peak, but can we say for certain that will remain the case in the near/distant future?

That they are evil is clear: sending Canadian forces of any kind to deal with them, though, is perhaps better considered as a part of other Ministries' response. If evilness, demonstrated by e.g. killing civilians, torture, mandated rape, etc. is cause for CAF involvement, there's plenty of other groups (I'm thinking primarily of Africa) who must be placed on the to-do list. Many of those are less effectively opposed than ISIS.

And perhaps we can maintain what we've contributed to the MESF while concurrently contribute to a blue-hats boots on the ground mission to, as you mentioned, Africa.  The taking/holding of ground in Iraq/Syria should be done by folks in that region; and there are many irons in that fire with different objectives/end-states.  The 'advisors' mission can go on, along with the ATF-I operation.  The question, I think, is  "is there political will and public support to spend the $ all of this takes".  Bombs and bullets cost money, kill people and are usually done in a 'risk' environment. 

MESF has a primary task to support and enable the GoI forces to do the hard(er) work of taking back real estate.  It is of course far more complex than that simple statement but that is the nuts and bolts of it.

How much of our entire force are we able and willing to deploy on the ground, in the air and on the water across all missions/Ops in the near, mid and distant futures and how much $ are we as a country willing to spend?  I am not sure that has been defined yet.

What sort of response would you like to see, by the way? Continued air contribution? Operators on the ground training locals? Operators engaging ISIS directly? To what end, at what scale - individuals with local units, or as their own raiding force with vehicles, helicopters, etc? Or something larger: turn out "the army" for a maximum-effort short campaign, or commit to an Afghanistan-style long series of rotations?

IMO, there will be no maximum-effort short campaign [if there was going to be, why wait this long, and who would it consist of?] and if there is, it shouldn't involve conventional ground forces from our ORBAT.  Continue to assist and enable; the ground fight conventional ORBAT should be from the region itself.  That is another kettle of fish though, IMO. 

The most prominent fact to consider is there is no easy or timely solution in the ME.  Therefore, we can still be involved but in a capacity we are now and if/when things go really south, we are not right at ground zero.

:2c:

 

[Remius]

Here's an interesting project...

https://www.trudeaumetre.ca/

 

[PuckChaser]

Here's an interesting project...

https://www.trudeaumetre.ca/

What a fantastic website. Too bad there wasn't one previously, for Harper/Martin/Chretien. At least we can start somewhere.

 

[Edward Campbell]

What a fantastic website. Too bad there wasn't one previously, for Harper/Martin/Chretien. At least we can start somewhere.

Indeed, but it's unfair to hold Prime Minister Justin Trudeau to a (high) standard we have never applied to anyone else.

I agree it's a good start, as long as we understand that we have no fair basis for comparison with e.g. Prime Ministers Harper, Chrétien, Mulroney or Trudeau (père).

 

[PuckChaser]

I think it was up to the media to hold politicians to account for broken promises, be they Tory or Liberal. They dropped the ball, so private citizens had to pick it up.

It would be nice to have historical data to compare to, but with what we have, it should be used as a barometer of success/failure, without comparisons to anyone else.

 

[Rocky Mountains]

Here's an interesting project...

https://www.trudeaumetre.ca/

This is achieved?  "Do not use prorogation to avoid difficult political circumstances."

It's achieved until he prorogues Parliament.  Whether it is under difficult political circumstances would be subjective.  It's up to the Governor General to prorogue Parliament upon the recommendation of the Prime Minister and any law or regulation changing that reality has no effect.

 

[Remius]

This is achieved?  "Do not use prorogation to avoid difficult political circumstances."

It's achieved until he prorogues Parliament.  Whether it is under difficult political circumstances would be subjective.  It's up to the Governor General to prorogue Parliament upon the recommendation of the Prime Minister and any law or regulation changing that reality has no effect.

Read the accompanying notes.  Basically they are putting it in the achieved column until he does.  Like all those promises they can swing from achieved to broken and back again.

They also have him as having broken his promise on pulling out the CF-18s.  I agree with their reasoning on that one.

 

[PuckChaser]

Most commenters agreed that the prorogation should be "in progress", until the next election. Minor error though.

 

[Brad Sallows]

"Do not use prorogation to avoid difficult political circumstances."

Duh. Not really at risk of being "broken" when you have a majority vice minority.

 

[Remius]

"Do not use prorogation to avoid difficult political circumstances."

Duh. Not really at risk of being "broken" when you have a majority vice minority.

To be fair, that promise was likely made when they probably didn't think they'd get a majority. But yes.  In a majority there is not likely going to be a prorogation used in that fashion, so I guess they get a freeby on this one. 

 

[Edward Campbell]

Those who voted for "change" and trusted Justin Trudeau to bering "change" away from the tight, central control of the Stephen Harper years are going to get some "change" ...

... back to a system, peioneered by Pierre Trudeau and used by Ontario premier Kathleen Wynne, of even tighter control from the centre.

The Ottawa Citizen reports that Matthew Mendelsohn, formerly an Ontario deputy minister (several different provincial portfolios) who worked with Queen’s Park veterans Katie Telford, now Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s chief of staff, and Gerald Butts, his principal secretary, has joined the Privy Council Office as the first deputy secretary responsible for “results and delivery.”

His job, the Citizen reports, is to "ensure the Liberals’ priorities are watched, tracked and delivered by the next election in 2019."

This is a return to, even beyond, the state of affairs when Pierre Trudeau's friend, Michael Pitfield, was parachuted into the PCO with the express mission of making the public service dance, wholly, to the government's tune. Public servants and scholars resisted on the grounds that PCO is responsible for the "machinery of government," for making the whole of government work, all the time, respecting all the laws, not just the ones favoured by the government of the day. The idea of an "independent" and apolitical public service is a complex and difficult thing, especially if (when) we accept that the public service is the in the service of the public, not of the government of the day.

So, boys and girls, we're getting "change," but, in my view, it is dangerous change that benefits them ...

                                                                                   

                                                                                                                        ... but not Canada.

 

[jollyjacktar]

Which means business as usual.

 

[Stoker]

Whats frustrating is that everything that's going wrong with the economy or anything else now is still being blamed on Harper. Its almost like a personality cult around Trudeau like he's the second coming.