Canadian Politics

[The Unknown Poster]

MP Rempel:

I believe that he PM just suggested that TFSAs only benefit wealthy Canadians. I wonder what he defines as wealthy.

PM doesn't answer question regarding who he defines as middle class.

[max power]

Didn't he promise to reverse this?

PM won't commit to fully restore mail home delivery, but vows no new community boxes. Will consult with Cda Post on next steps. #cdnpoli

 

THANK GOODNESS. Finally someone doing something about an important issues that matters to Canadians!!!

 

Just kidding.  I'm pretty sure we've had community boxes out here in Steinbach/rural Manitoba for decades. Seems like not many old people have died getting their mail yet.

[max power]

WHEN WILL TRUDEAU DO SOMETHING ABOUT HOME MILK DELIVERY????

 

Hey, at least we have our provincial NDPs enacting new laws every year to prevent us from the insidious evils of gift card expiry dates.

[The Unknown Poster]

To be honest, it doesnt mean much to me.  I'd probably check the mail box once a week if it wasnt home delivery.  And people would get used to it in time.  There is something to be said for the elderly and disabled however, and the fact the Postal Service is a business that users pay for.  I think there were better options, such as reduced delivery (ie. three days a week). 

 

But if the PM promised to reverse it and is now not doing so, it's a broken promise.  And this early in his tenure, he's had a few misses.

To be accurate, this is what he promised:

 

We will save home mail delivery.

By ending door-to-door mail delivery, Stephen Harper is asking Canadians to pay more for less service. That is unacceptable.

We will stop Stephen Harper’s plan to end door-to-door mail delivery in Canada and undertake a new review of Canada Post to make sure that it provides high-quality service at a reasonable price to Canadians, no matter where they live.

 

So he sort of hedged.  But certainly made it seem that anyone losing home mail delivery would get it back.

[Rich]

All new developments also already get the boxes.  

 

I'd actually be more mad if he reversed it after all the money they paid to roll-out the new delivery plans and installation of the mail boxes.

[The Unknown Poster]

All new developments also already get the boxes.  

 

I'd actually be more mad if he reversed it after all the money they paid to roll-out the new delivery plans and installation of the mail boxes.

So you were unhappy with his promise to "save home mail delivery" during the election?

[tacklewasher]

 

All new developments also already get the boxes.  

 

I'd actually be more mad if he reversed it after all the money they paid to roll-out the new delivery plans and installation of the mail boxes.

So you were unhappy with his promise to "save home mail delivery" during the election?

 

Speaking for myself, yes, I thought it was an idiotic promise.

[Rich]

All new developments also already get the boxes.

I'd actually be more mad if he reversed it after all the money they paid to roll-out the new delivery plans and installation of the mail boxes.

So you were unhappy with his promise to "save home mail delivery" during the election?

Didn't realize it was a promise. But if it meant going back and wasting all the work and planning that has already been done, then yes it was a stupid promise.

For this was really the plan I'd also have to ask why we would only reverse this for people that had already been converted? Wouldn't all people, including new developments who typically pay much higher taxes, deserve mailbox delivery?

The answer is of course not. With the Internet, mail delivery today isn't as core a service as it was 20 years ago.

[The Unknown Poster]

Another win for the Cons

But really it seems Liberals made a pandering promise and now aren't really going to ahem deliver.

In my area we have home delivery but there is a community mail box just down the street from me so I assume some close by do not have it.

My family was among the first in our area of Waverly Heights and we didn't have home delivery for awhile. Once the neighbourhood built up I bleieve the residents petitioned for it and got it.

[Rich]

My Mom is retired (a senior), lives in a condo complex and was really worried about the boxes when they were first getting them, but now actually prefers them.  It is very convenient if she wants to mail things out, because each box also acts as an outgoing mailbox.  Of course it is relatively convenient for her because her box is pretty close to her entry and she hasn't gone through a winter yet.

 

I see no problem with box delivery for the majority of Canadians, with to the door service on an exception basis for those that are unable to go get their own mail for health reasons.  

[max power]

All new developments also already get the boxes.  

 

I'd actually be more mad if he reversed it after all the money they paid to roll-out the new delivery plans and installation of the mail boxes.

So you were unhappy with his promise to "save home mail delivery" during the election?

Speaking for myself, yes, I thought it was an idiotic promise.

Most of his promises were idiotic in my opinion. You won't see me complaining if he breaks every promise he made.

[The Unknown Poster]

Trudeau admits deficit spending could go higher than initial campaign promise of $10B #cdnpoli

[Mark H.]

Trudeau admits deficit spending could go higher than initial campaign promise of $10B #cdnpoli

 

The entire deficit debate between the Cons and the Libs - you just can't make this stuff up!

 

The reality is whichever party formed the government would have run a deficit. One promised no deficit at all, the other said 10 billion

 

IMO, same manure, different barn

[The Unknown Poster]

Except the only manure we have is Trudeau.

[The Unknown Poster]

CBC

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has defended using tax dollars to pay for two nannies, insisting he is only shuffling the household budget to suit his young family.

"Obviously it will come as no surprise to people that we have a different family situation with three small children than the Harpers did," he said during a news conference in Ottawa Wednesday. "That means we will operate within the same family budget that the previous prime minister had, but we will shuffle it around so that it fits better our priorities.

"And that is what Canadians expect."

[Fatty Liver]

CBC

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has defended using tax dollars to pay for two nannies, insisting he is only shuffling the household budget to suit his young family.

"Obviously it will come as no surprise to people that we have a different family situation with three small children than the Harpers did," he said during a news conference in Ottawa Wednesday. "That means we will operate within the same family budget that the previous prime minister had, but we will shuffle it around so that it fits better our priorities.

"And that is what Canadians expect."

 

Valid explanation, so how was Harper spending those funds within the same family budget?

[The Unknown Poster]

 

CBC

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has defended using tax dollars to pay for two nannies, insisting he is only shuffling the household budget to suit his young family.

"Obviously it will come as no surprise to people that we have a different family situation with three small children than the Harpers did," he said during a news conference in Ottawa Wednesday. "That means we will operate within the same family budget that the previous prime minister had, but we will shuffle it around so that it fits better our priorities.

"And that is what Canadians expect."

 

Valid explanation, so how was Harper spending those funds within the same family budget?

 

Cats.  And Cat-wranglers.

[rebusrankin]

The Liberals first spending bill got sent back by the senate because it didn't include the required spending schedules. How stupid is that entire crew?

 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/liberals-1st-money-bill-sent-to-senate-missing-essential-information-1.3360929

[kelownabomberfan]

 

CANADA-U.S RELATIONS

Trudeau to get red carpet treatment during White House visit

Roberta Rampton

WASHINGTON — Reuters

Last updated Wednesday, Dec. 09, 2015 7:43AM EST

 

President Barack Obama will roll out the red carpet for a planned visit next year by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, hosting a formal state dinner for the new leader, the White House said on Tuesday.

Obama and Trudeau met for the first time in Manila at a summit last month, and discussed a bilateral meeting at the White House early in 2016.

But the meeting will also include the pomp and pageantry of a state dinner, a lavish honour that the Obama White House has extended to only a small, select group of world leaders who have come to Washington.

The White House has not yet announced a date for the dinner.

Trudeau vowed to put a priority on improving Canada’s relationship with its neighbour after ties were strained over energy and climate issues during the tenure of former Prime Minister Stephen Harper, whom he defeated in October.

The last White House state dinner for a Canadian leader was in 1997, when President Bill Clinton hosted Prime Minister Jean Chretien.

Trudeau’s father, Pierre Trudeau, was invited to two White House state dinners during his time as prime minister – by President Gerald Ford in 1974 and by President Jimmy Carter in 1977.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/pol ... e27655638/

 

 

How come Harper never got a dinner in Washington?  What's that about?
 

[JuranBoldenRules]

 

CBC

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has defended using tax dollars to pay for two nannies, insisting he is only shuffling the household budget to suit his young family.

"Obviously it will come as no surprise to people that we have a different family situation with three small children than the Harpers did," he said during a news conference in Ottawa Wednesday. "That means we will operate within the same family budget that the previous prime minister had, but we will shuffle it around so that it fits better our priorities.

"And that is what Canadians expect."

 

Valid explanation, so how was Harper spending those funds within the same family budget?

 

 

Wrote it all on sticky notes so no one would ever know.

[Fatty Liver]

 

 

CANADA-U.S RELATIONS

Trudeau to get red carpet treatment during White House visit

Roberta Rampton

WASHINGTON — Reuters

Last updated Wednesday, Dec. 09, 2015 7:43AM EST

 

President Barack Obama will roll out the red carpet for a planned visit next year by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, hosting a formal state dinner for the new leader, the White House said on Tuesday.

Obama and Trudeau met for the first time in Manila at a summit last month, and discussed a bilateral meeting at the White House early in 2016.

But the meeting will also include the pomp and pageantry of a state dinner, a lavish honour that the Obama White House has extended to only a small, select group of world leaders who have come to Washington.

The White House has not yet announced a date for the dinner.

Trudeau vowed to put a priority on improving Canada’s relationship with its neighbour after ties were strained over energy and climate issues during the tenure of former Prime Minister Stephen Harper, whom he defeated in October.

The last White House state dinner for a Canadian leader was in 1997, when President Bill Clinton hosted Prime Minister Jean Chretien.

Trudeau’s father, Pierre Trudeau, was invited to two White House state dinners during his time as prime minister – by President Gerald Ford in 1974 and by President Jimmy Carter in 1977.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/pol ... e27655638/

 

 

How come Harper never got a dinner in Washington?  What's that about?

 

 

 

Pretty clear that Obama didn't like Harper and Harper didn't like Obama.  George Bush had 3 years to throw a state dinner for Harper and didn't bother to do so. George was a frat boy and Harper was a nerd, can't see the problem.

[The Unknown Poster]

Can't say I agree with this

 

   

 

 

---

Your Balance $3.51^+tax

Canada

Liberals put halt to controversial finance disclosure rules for unions

By: Jordan Press, The Canadian Press
Posted: 12/21/2015 11:04 AM | Last Modified: 12/21/2015 2:12 PM | Comments: 1

•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  
•  

OTTAWA - The federal government has taken its first step towards repealing a controversial law that would have required unions to disclose finite details of their spending.

The government says it is waiving requirements for unions to track every dollar of spending so it could one day be publicly disclosed by the Canada Revenue Agency.

 

The rules were contained in a Conservative private member's bill passed in June over objections from unions, police associations, the federal privacy commissioner, the Canadian Bar Association and seven provinces who called it unconstitutional and argued it would cost millions for the federal government to enforce.

Bill C-377 required unions to disclose all transactions over $5,000, reveal the details of officers or executives who make over $100,000 to the Canada Revenue Agency, which would publicly post the information to its website.

 

[tacklewasher]

Disclosure for unions should be consistent with disclosure for public companies. They should be accountable to their members, and that they are not is borderline criminal.

[FrostyWinnipeg]

Stephen Fletcher somehow got 2 guys to quit a nomination meeting and will represent Assiniboia for the PC's in the next prov. election.

 

 

[The Unknown Poster]

Premier Fletcher anyone?