Politics in 2017
- Thread starter Edward Campbell
- Start date
- Status
- Reaction score
- 26
- Points
- 430
Rifleman62 said:
Does it matter? He will likely answer in both official languages, unless he is in Quebec and then he will answer in Quebecois.
I am still trying to figure out why he is answering in both languages in Peterborough and Calgary, but only in the opposite language (Quebecois to an English question) in Sherbrooke. There is no continuity to his logic.
- Reaction score
- 26
- Points
- 430
How stupid does this moron really think intelligent Canadians are? He is now taking credit for KEYSTONE. Claims that Harper couldn't get it passed in ten years and now we have it. What a fucking MORON. The LIBERALS didn't do anything. TRUMP did.
The Liberals would never have gotten it done either, if Obama was still in office. The Part-time Drama Teacher is playing the Drama Queen.
The Liberals would never have gotten it done either, if Obama was still in office. The Part-time Drama Teacher is playing the Drama Queen.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
"stupid, moron, *******MORON, playing a Drama Queen". Interesting comments from an older person. Potential members of the CAF and young soldiers read this forum. Ironic comments on Bell Let's Talk Day. I hope your day gets better George.George Wallace said:
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
- Reaction score
- 265
- Points
- 980
George Wallace said:
I've had about enough of your terms of endearment for people here, including the PM. We have rules on the site.
We KNOW you HATE the current PM. You DO NOT need to keep reminding us with MORE AND MORE vitriol. Your regular amount was ENOUGH.
- Reaction score
- 26
- Points
- 430
RocketRichard said:
Hmmm? In continuing in his "Controversy of the Day" during his "Cross Canada Try To Get In Touch With The Middle Class Tour", that is but one of his many controversies. I would venture to say that the PM and the Liberal Party of Canada have been using, what the Trump Presidency is being accused of, the "
Not only is he taking credit for the Keystone XL deal going through, but apparently he has also "MISSPOKE" when commenting on the Alberta Oil Sands. Do you seriously think that intelligent Canadians don't see these "
[Edit: ??? This has nothing to do with Bell Let's Talk Day. ]
J
jollyjacktar
Guest
The PM seemed to be, at least by the sound of the sound bites on radio this morning, more than a little flustered and frustrated by his reception in Calgary. I'm starting to wonder if he will be so foolish as to do another one of these "speaking to the Peasants" jaunts across the country. I'd wager he is regretting his choice to do this one. I will hand it to him for sticking to the plan over the rough ride he'll be getting more and more.
gryphonv
Sr. Member
- Reaction score
- 336
- Points
- 780
At first, I was pleasantly surprised he choose to do the town hall tour.
Unfortunately after shooting himself in the foot so many times he just reinforced my opinion of him. I feel its been a huge political blunder, I can't wait until parliament goes back into session, he's handed so much ammo to them it's hilarious. I'm generally interested to see his approval ratings before and after this 'tour'.
Unfortunately after shooting himself in the foot so many times he just reinforced my opinion of him. I feel its been a huge political blunder, I can't wait until parliament goes back into session, he's handed so much ammo to them it's hilarious. I'm generally interested to see his approval ratings before and after this 'tour'.
George Wallace said:
The term Drama Queen is sometimes associated with histrionic personality disorder, a mental health condition. I suspect that might have been the reference to Bell Let's Talk Day.
At the same time I don't think it was your intent to link the two.
But I agree with jmt18325. I think your anger is misplaced. The Liberals always supported the pipeline. They are taking credit for moving energy projects forward whereas the Conservatives didn't for a variety of reasons. So, sure under Obama it probably wouldn't have happened but their plan would still have had pipelines created, something the CPC didn't achieve or come close to achieving.
This is a good article that explains the Liberal's approach to getting it done.
http://www.canadianbusiness.com/economy/how-the-trudeau-government-tore-up-the-rulebook-on-pipelines/
Specifically this para:
Top of the list will be consulting provincial governments, something Harper refused to do. (He never met with the premiers after 2009.) “The Conservatives were so constrained by their ideology that they couldn’t imagine any sort of direct interference with the market. They had such a strict view of the federal-provincial division of power that they wouldn’t touch natural resources. They left everything up to the provinces and the oil and gas sector,” Brownsey says. Into that political vacuum stepped B.C. Premier Christy Clark with her “five conditions” for oil pipeline support, a strategy the wily former talk radio jock used against Harper whenever it was convenient, and a Quebec government eager to assert its environmental review authority over Energy East. Carr says the Liberals are returning to “co-operative federalism” and a hands-on approach: “It’s not possible to consider major national projects and a nation building policy if you don’t have all levels of governments talking to each other.”
- Reaction score
- 26
- Points
- 430
gryphonv said:
One of his conditions stated was that the Pipe be all "American steel". I have no problems with that comment, as referring to pipe installed in the USA. I would have a problem if he insists ALL pipe for the project be "American steel" even if it was in Canada. TCP has already pipe ready for the project, none of it from American mills. We shall see what all the details are soon enough, I suppose.
- Reaction score
- 26
- Points
- 430
jmt18325 said:
No. As you said: Trump supported it and has put his OK to it. It was Trump who OK's Keystone XL and for Trudeau to take any credit for it is an "Alternative Fact".
- Reaction score
- 26
- Points
- 430
gryphonv said:
I too doubt that his staff would think of doing this again. As I see it, those in his "Lovefest" are still in the "Lovefest". Those who were not, are still not overly impressed, and some may even be more alienated. As for his approval ratings before and after, I am sure the polls will show little change.
George Wallace said:
Oh come on. So Trudeau didn't support it and didn't Ok it? It takes two for this deal. Heck, even the Conservatives insisted the Liberal Government make Keystone a priority given that Trump had been elected.
So he supports and approves of Keystone and he still takes flak from his detractors. I bet his opponents here would still decry him for something if he doubled the defence budget.
I for one am happy the project will go ahead. I see no need to get angry at Trudeau or anyone else for that matter because of it.
- Reaction score
- 3,948
- Points
- 1,260
More on the "what if?" on U.S.-made pipe, from a media outlet with its eye on things steel ...
More tea leaves to read ...
- Reaction score
- 1,257
- Points
- 1,160
Finally, the wait is over. Bombardier gets money!!
While we the taxpayer are forking over money to Bombardier, a private, family owned company, this from my MP:
http://business.financialpost.com/fp-comment/kevin-libin-bombardier-played-hard-to-get-but-the-federal-liberals-were-determined-to-hand-it-money-it-didnt-need
Kevin Libin: Bombardier played hard to get, but the federal Liberals were determined to hand it money it didn’t need
Kevin Libin | February 8, 2017 | Last Updated: Feb 9 8:14 AM ET
Justin Trudeau defends Bombardier loans in the House (video at link. I didn't watch it as can stand the PM's whining child voice)
It seems like just a few weeks ago that everyone was tut-tutting Donald Trump for using Twitter threats of a border tax to keep the maker of Carrier air conditioners from moving jobs out of the States. Well, actually, it was just a few weeks ago. The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board blasted what it called Trump’s “shakedown,” with bad economics that would “hurt workers and the economy.”
But Americans could have it worse. Up here in Canada, it’s taxpayers who always find themselves on the receiving end of job-preserving shakedowns, the latest being Tuesday’s announcement from the federal Liberals that they would be handing Bombardier $372 million as an “an investment in thousands of middle-class jobs.”
Perhaps Ottawa’s carrot, in the form of giving a company money in hopes it will keep jobs at home, looks less obnoxious than Trump’s stick, a threat to take money from a company if it ships jobs away, although it’s hard to see much difference. But at least after Trump tweeted Carrier into submission he got a firm commitment from the company to cancel plans to send hundreds of Indiana jobs to Mexico.
Nothing in this Bombardier announcement stipulates anything so irresponsibly uneconomic as requiring the company to promise to keep jobs here that would be more efficiently done elsewhere, or even promising to create new ones. There is no need for Bombardier to invest anything more in the economy than it otherwise planned to. Ottawa calls the $372 million a “repayable loan,” which also has an inoffensive ring to it, but don’t put much stock in that. There’s no complete record on whether such “loans” are ever repaid. Bombardier forcefully fights requests for those public disclosures in court. And it wins.
The Liberals had to buckle on virtually every condition they put to Bombardier to convince it to take federal cash
In fact, Tuesday’s announcement specified no details of the terms of the loan at all. No repayment schedule, or whether Bombardier put up any assets to secure it, as any private lender would naturally require. But then, if Bombardier were interested in the features of a normal lending arrangement, it could have just borrowed from a normal lender. And that would be silly, when politicians proved so eager to fork over cash with so few strings attached.
The Liberals clearly put in much effort to get Bombardier to even agree to take the money. They had to buckle on virtually every condition they had originally stipulated Bombardier must meet before it could have access to any federal cash. First they said Bombardier would have to make a “business case” for why it needed a $1.3-billion bailout — to match one from Quebec — for its struggling CSeries program.
That was in November 2015. But then the aerospace company’s executives rather smirked at that condition, when they publicly stated, not long afterward, that they didn’t really need the money anyway. “Really, the federal funding would just be an extra endorsement” for its CSeries program, said Bombardier vice president Rob Dewar last March. “That’s really just an extra bonus that would be helpful but is very clearly not required.”
Next the Liberals talked of wanting changes to Bombardier’s family-run dual-class governance structure. But then it turned out they didn’t even feel confident enough to put those stipulations to the company.
Running out of demands, the government floated a last-ditch “six-point checklist” that it wanted satisfied, including figuring out why previous handouts to Bombardier had only led to more. With Bombardier having accumulated more than $2 billion in aid from various levels of government since the 1960s, perhaps the Liberals were considering that it might be wise if the handouts would, at some point, finally stop.
That there seems to have been no longer any desire to get tough on Bombardier over governance, over its “business case,” or even over an undemanding six-point checklist is itself the answer to the question of why the giveaways never stop (the previous Conservative government, too, handed Bombardier $350 million in 2008 to develop the CSeries). They can’t, they won’t, and they don’t stop because politicians are more hooked on Bombardier handouts than the company itself is.
As Bombardier’s executives point out, they’re now past the worst of their troubles, which hit their nadir roughly a year ago, back when the federal government first started talking about attaching conditions to federal aid. Since then, the CSeries booked 117 orders for new planes, after winning none during a particularly miserable 2015. Big names like Air Canada and Delta bought a bunch. Swiss Air, started flying the plane commercially and was praising to the skies the CSeries’ reliability, its reduced cabin noise and improved light, and its “intuitive flying experience.” Bombardier’s shares have more than tripled in 12 months.
Far from looking like a failure, then, the CSeries suddenly looks like a successful, innovative globally admired product — and the Liberals, having stalled on providing any federal aid, had no way to claim any credit at all for it. Why, Canadians might just begin to get the idea that federal government involvement isn’t even necessary for companies to compete globally.
The federal Liberals were left with little choice. If Bombardier wasn’t going to shake Ottawa down, the Liberals would just have to go ahead and shake down themselves.
Even there, their efforts fell pitifully short. Coming up with just a fraction of the original $1.3 billion that Quebec politicians had expected, the Bloc Québécois scoffed it was “too little, too late.” The federal Liberals could barely even get a piece of the CSeries; Bombardier said most of the money would instead now go to its Global business jet program, which has been around for 20 years. Compared to Trump’s shakedowns, the Liberals efforts compare pitifully. Sad! Troublingly, that can only mean they’ll keep trying until they get better at it.
Related:
http://business.financialpost.com/news/transportation/brazil-makes-good-on-threat-to-take-canada-to-wto-over-bombardier-loans
Brazil makes good on threat to take Canada to WTO over Bombardier loans
While we the taxpayer are forking over money to Bombardier, a private, family owned company, this from my MP:
http://business.financialpost.com/fp-comment/kevin-libin-bombardier-played-hard-to-get-but-the-federal-liberals-were-determined-to-hand-it-money-it-didnt-need
Kevin Libin: Bombardier played hard to get, but the federal Liberals were determined to hand it money it didn’t need
Kevin Libin | February 8, 2017 | Last Updated: Feb 9 8:14 AM ET
Justin Trudeau defends Bombardier loans in the House (video at link. I didn't watch it as can stand the PM's whining child voice)
It seems like just a few weeks ago that everyone was tut-tutting Donald Trump for using Twitter threats of a border tax to keep the maker of Carrier air conditioners from moving jobs out of the States. Well, actually, it was just a few weeks ago. The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board blasted what it called Trump’s “shakedown,” with bad economics that would “hurt workers and the economy.”
But Americans could have it worse. Up here in Canada, it’s taxpayers who always find themselves on the receiving end of job-preserving shakedowns, the latest being Tuesday’s announcement from the federal Liberals that they would be handing Bombardier $372 million as an “an investment in thousands of middle-class jobs.”
Perhaps Ottawa’s carrot, in the form of giving a company money in hopes it will keep jobs at home, looks less obnoxious than Trump’s stick, a threat to take money from a company if it ships jobs away, although it’s hard to see much difference. But at least after Trump tweeted Carrier into submission he got a firm commitment from the company to cancel plans to send hundreds of Indiana jobs to Mexico.
Nothing in this Bombardier announcement stipulates anything so irresponsibly uneconomic as requiring the company to promise to keep jobs here that would be more efficiently done elsewhere, or even promising to create new ones. There is no need for Bombardier to invest anything more in the economy than it otherwise planned to. Ottawa calls the $372 million a “repayable loan,” which also has an inoffensive ring to it, but don’t put much stock in that. There’s no complete record on whether such “loans” are ever repaid. Bombardier forcefully fights requests for those public disclosures in court. And it wins.
The Liberals had to buckle on virtually every condition they put to Bombardier to convince it to take federal cash
In fact, Tuesday’s announcement specified no details of the terms of the loan at all. No repayment schedule, or whether Bombardier put up any assets to secure it, as any private lender would naturally require. But then, if Bombardier were interested in the features of a normal lending arrangement, it could have just borrowed from a normal lender. And that would be silly, when politicians proved so eager to fork over cash with so few strings attached.
The Liberals clearly put in much effort to get Bombardier to even agree to take the money. They had to buckle on virtually every condition they had originally stipulated Bombardier must meet before it could have access to any federal cash. First they said Bombardier would have to make a “business case” for why it needed a $1.3-billion bailout — to match one from Quebec — for its struggling CSeries program.
That was in November 2015. But then the aerospace company’s executives rather smirked at that condition, when they publicly stated, not long afterward, that they didn’t really need the money anyway. “Really, the federal funding would just be an extra endorsement” for its CSeries program, said Bombardier vice president Rob Dewar last March. “That’s really just an extra bonus that would be helpful but is very clearly not required.”
Next the Liberals talked of wanting changes to Bombardier’s family-run dual-class governance structure. But then it turned out they didn’t even feel confident enough to put those stipulations to the company.
Running out of demands, the government floated a last-ditch “six-point checklist” that it wanted satisfied, including figuring out why previous handouts to Bombardier had only led to more. With Bombardier having accumulated more than $2 billion in aid from various levels of government since the 1960s, perhaps the Liberals were considering that it might be wise if the handouts would, at some point, finally stop.
That there seems to have been no longer any desire to get tough on Bombardier over governance, over its “business case,” or even over an undemanding six-point checklist is itself the answer to the question of why the giveaways never stop (the previous Conservative government, too, handed Bombardier $350 million in 2008 to develop the CSeries). They can’t, they won’t, and they don’t stop because politicians are more hooked on Bombardier handouts than the company itself is.
As Bombardier’s executives point out, they’re now past the worst of their troubles, which hit their nadir roughly a year ago, back when the federal government first started talking about attaching conditions to federal aid. Since then, the CSeries booked 117 orders for new planes, after winning none during a particularly miserable 2015. Big names like Air Canada and Delta bought a bunch. Swiss Air, started flying the plane commercially and was praising to the skies the CSeries’ reliability, its reduced cabin noise and improved light, and its “intuitive flying experience.” Bombardier’s shares have more than tripled in 12 months.
Far from looking like a failure, then, the CSeries suddenly looks like a successful, innovative globally admired product — and the Liberals, having stalled on providing any federal aid, had no way to claim any credit at all for it. Why, Canadians might just begin to get the idea that federal government involvement isn’t even necessary for companies to compete globally.
The federal Liberals were left with little choice. If Bombardier wasn’t going to shake Ottawa down, the Liberals would just have to go ahead and shake down themselves.
Even there, their efforts fell pitifully short. Coming up with just a fraction of the original $1.3 billion that Quebec politicians had expected, the Bloc Québécois scoffed it was “too little, too late.” The federal Liberals could barely even get a piece of the CSeries; Bombardier said most of the money would instead now go to its Global business jet program, which has been around for 20 years. Compared to Trump’s shakedowns, the Liberals efforts compare pitifully. Sad! Troublingly, that can only mean they’ll keep trying until they get better at it.
Related:
http://business.financialpost.com/news/transportation/brazil-makes-good-on-threat-to-take-canada-to-wto-over-bombardier-loans
Brazil makes good on threat to take Canada to WTO over Bombardier loans
Attachments
- Status
Similar threads
