Consevative Party leadership contest
- Thread starter Walter
- Start date
ANyone with a french accent is not going to go over well in the west. For that matter anyone born east of Winter peg is suspicious.
A Kellie Leitch government won’t pump federal gas tax dollars into Toronto transit and roads as long as the city remains a haven for illegal refugees and immigrants.
“If I’m Prime Minister of this country and you have a Sanctuary City, it’s at your own peril,” Leitch told a Toronto Sun editorial board Wednesday.
The City of Toronto is expecting almost $1.7 billion through the federal Gas Tax Fund over the next decade to pay for replacement and renewal of buses, streetcars and subways.
Leitch is prepared to withhold as much of that funding as possible, and leave it to the mayor to explain the slow commute to constituents.
“If all of a sudden there’s even fewer dollars for making sure that their roads or subways or other things are being built, they’ll definitely be talking to their mayor about their decision to make a Sanctuary City,” she said.
Toronto city council has officially declared that the municipality is a Sanctuary City, ordering staff to provide city services to any resident, regardless of immigration status, without tipping off the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA).
Recently, the city tried to get Toronto Police to expand its “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.
Don Peat, a spokesman for Toronto Mayor John Tory, said the city needs a federal partner that understands the city’s transit needs, not only to fight congestion but to keep the country's “largest and most important” economy moving.
“What we don’t need is a lot of political rhetoric designed to prop up a candidate’s leadership campaign,” Peat said in an e-mail.
Leitch is campaigning for the leadership of the federal Conservative Party on a “Canadian values” platform, and has said she would turn back asylum seekers who cross into the country illegally from the U.S. if she were prime minister.
Conservative leadership hopeful Kellie Leitch would pull gas tax cash if Toronto
“If I’m Prime Minister of this country and you have a Sanctuary City, it’s at your own peril,” Leitch told a Toronto Sun editorial board Wednesday.
The City of Toronto is expecting almost $1.7 billion through the federal Gas Tax Fund over the next decade to pay for replacement and renewal of buses, streetcars and subways.
Leitch is prepared to withhold as much of that funding as possible, and leave it to the mayor to explain the slow commute to constituents.
“If all of a sudden there’s even fewer dollars for making sure that their roads or subways or other things are being built, they’ll definitely be talking to their mayor about their decision to make a Sanctuary City,” she said.
Toronto city council has officially declared that the municipality is a Sanctuary City, ordering staff to provide city services to any resident, regardless of immigration status, without tipping off the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA).
Recently, the city tried to get Toronto Police to expand its “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.
Don Peat, a spokesman for Toronto Mayor John Tory, said the city needs a federal partner that understands the city’s transit needs, not only to fight congestion but to keep the country's “largest and most important” economy moving.
“What we don’t need is a lot of political rhetoric designed to prop up a candidate’s leadership campaign,” Peat said in an e-mail.
Leitch is campaigning for the leadership of the federal Conservative Party on a “Canadian values” platform, and has said she would turn back asylum seekers who cross into the country illegally from the U.S. if she were prime minister.
Conservative leadership hopeful Kellie Leitch would pull gas tax cash if Toronto
CPC leadership poll from MS: Bernier 31.2%, Sheer 22.0%, O'Toole 11.3%, Leitch 8.2%, Raitt 5.5%...all the rest are below 5%
https://ipolitics.ca/2017/05/02/bernier-takes-daunting-lead-in-cpc-race/
https://ipolitics.ca/2017/05/02/bernier-takes-daunting-lead-in-cpc-race/
I'm telling ya, deck of cards, cut for boss.
We did it, in the town of Show Low, Arizona. That's how it got its name. They had a mayoral election that was a dead tie. So the two winners (or two losers, depending on your point of view) agreed to cut a deck and the one who showed low would be mayor.
History notes that the following administration of Show Low was neither notably better nor notably worse'n any other.
We did it, in the town of Show Low, Arizona. That's how it got its name. They had a mayoral election that was a dead tie. So the two winners (or two losers, depending on your point of view) agreed to cut a deck and the one who showed low would be mayor.
History notes that the following administration of Show Low was neither notably better nor notably worse'n any other.
Where would you like him to go? Somehow I don't think another Quebecois politician is going to have much appeal west of Ontario.
A Conservative leadership candidate’s longshot private member’s bill to privatize the CBC has been overwhelmingly rejected by the House of Commons, including members of his own caucus.
Brad Trost’s Bill C-308 was defeated by a vote of 260-6 at second reading Wednesday.
Just five other members of Parliament — all of them Tories — backed the Saskatchewan MP’s bill: Ontario MP Harold Albrecht, Saskatchewan MP David Anderson, and Alberta MPs Blake Richards, Arnold Viersen, and Kevin Sorenson.
In a lengthy interview with HuffPost Canada in March, Trost — who promotes himself as “100 per cent Conservative” — said that his calls to privatize the CBC are “red meat” to rank-and-file Tories.
“Ask me why any Conservative believes there should be a state-run broadcaster,” Trost said.
https://openparliament.ca/votes/42-1/264/
Maxime Bernier is still leading the Conservative leadership race — but Erin O’Toole’s support is up from last week, while Andrew Scheer’s appears to be stagnant.
According to the latest iPolitics CPC Leadership Tracker, powered by Mainstreet Research, 28.41 per cent of Conservative party members say Bernier is their first choice.
Mainstreet reached 9,111 Conservative Party of Canada members from May 11-14 and found — with a margin of error of +/- 1.01 per cent, 19 times out of 20 — that while Bernier is still leading, O’Toole is closing in on both Bernier and Scheer.
: Bernier: 28.4 Sheer: 19.5 O'Toole: 15.2 Chong: 7.7 Leitch: 6.2 Lemieux: 5.0 Raitt: 4.3 Trost: 3.7 Alexander: 1.1 Blaney: 1.1
https://ipolitics.ca/2017/05/16/the-cpc-race-bernier-leads-otoole-rises-scheer-stands-still/
According to the latest iPolitics CPC Leadership Tracker, powered by Mainstreet Research, 28.41 per cent of Conservative party members say Bernier is their first choice.
Mainstreet reached 9,111 Conservative Party of Canada members from May 11-14 and found — with a margin of error of +/- 1.01 per cent, 19 times out of 20 — that while Bernier is still leading, O’Toole is closing in on both Bernier and Scheer.
: Bernier: 28.4 Sheer: 19.5 O'Toole: 15.2 Chong: 7.7 Leitch: 6.2 Lemieux: 5.0 Raitt: 4.3 Trost: 3.7 Alexander: 1.1 Blaney: 1.1
https://ipolitics.ca/2017/05/16/the-cpc-race-bernier-leads-otoole-rises-scheer-stands-still/
Could Maxime Bernier kill universal health care?
Maxime Bernier’s proposal to end federal transfer payments to provinces to help fund health services would make the Canada Health Act “unenforceable,” says a spokesman for his front-running campaign for the Conservative Party of Canada’s leadership—which means the fate of universal care would rest entirely in the hands of provincial governments.
In an email exchange with Maclean’s this week, Bernier’s director of communications, Maxime Hupé, at first asserted that even if Ottawa stopped sending the provinces any money for health, the law would continue to apply. “Provinces would still have to respect the Canada Health Act that ensures universal coverage,” Hupé initially said.
But that was a strange claim. The landmark 1984 federal law’s purpose, as clearly set out in the act, is to establish the rules provinces must comply with to qualify for transfers. Provincial health insurance plans, the act stipulates, must be publicly administered, comprehensive, available to everybody, portable and accessible—or the federal government can hold back money.
Pressed for reasons why provinces would still have to adhere to the act’s five principles if billions in annual transfers were no longer at stake, Hupé said he consulted with Bernier’s policy advisor and corrected the campaign’s position. “The CHA is only enforceable politically by the threat of reducing transfer payments,” he said. “Without transfer payments, it is unenforceable.”
Yet Bernier argues that universal health care would survive in Canada if Ottawa left it up to the provinces. He points to the force of public opinion—not just in Canada, but throughout the developed world, except in the U.S.—which remains solidly behind universal coverage.
Bernier’s plan calls for the federal government to give the provincial governments room to hike their taxes, making up for the loss of transfers. (In 2017-18, federal Canada Health Transfer to the provinces is expected to total just over $37 billion.) After that, he says the provinces would assume full responsibility for health, which falls under provincial jurisdiction in the Constitution.
“With this reform, the provinces will no longer have excuses, but they will be empowered to fix the system,” Bernier said last fall in his key speech on the subject. “They will stop constantly begging for more money and won’t be able to blame Ottawa for their failure to tackle wait times.”
His reference to wait times is critical. Bernier builds much of his case for radical reform around long waits for care. Indeed, a survey by the Commonwealth Fund, a New York-based foundation that studies health care, found Canadians tend to wait longer to see a doctor than patients in 10 other developed countries.
It’s far from clear, though, that highlighting frustrations over wait times will be enough to make Bernier’s plan a politically saleable one for Conservatives. In the past, the party’s election strategists have rejected Liberal and NDP claims that Tories were not really committed to universal care backstopped by Ottawa’s spending power. On his way to winning a majority in the 2011 campaign, for example, Stephen Harper’s campaign repeatedly declared that Conservatives “strongly support for the Canada Health Act.”
Ontario MP Michael Chong in the leadership race. Chong has been blunt in his criticism of Bernier’s health policy. “By eliminating the federal health transfer, and proposing to do a one time tax-point transfer from the federal government to the provinces, he’s effectively eliminating the Canada Health Act,”
more
Could Maxime Bernier kill universal health care? - Macleans.ca
Maxime Bernier’s proposal to end federal transfer payments to provinces to help fund health services would make the Canada Health Act “unenforceable,” says a spokesman for his front-running campaign for the Conservative Party of Canada’s leadership—which means the fate of universal care would rest entirely in the hands of provincial governments.
In an email exchange with Maclean’s this week, Bernier’s director of communications, Maxime Hupé, at first asserted that even if Ottawa stopped sending the provinces any money for health, the law would continue to apply. “Provinces would still have to respect the Canada Health Act that ensures universal coverage,” Hupé initially said.
But that was a strange claim. The landmark 1984 federal law’s purpose, as clearly set out in the act, is to establish the rules provinces must comply with to qualify for transfers. Provincial health insurance plans, the act stipulates, must be publicly administered, comprehensive, available to everybody, portable and accessible—or the federal government can hold back money.
Pressed for reasons why provinces would still have to adhere to the act’s five principles if billions in annual transfers were no longer at stake, Hupé said he consulted with Bernier’s policy advisor and corrected the campaign’s position. “The CHA is only enforceable politically by the threat of reducing transfer payments,” he said. “Without transfer payments, it is unenforceable.”
Yet Bernier argues that universal health care would survive in Canada if Ottawa left it up to the provinces. He points to the force of public opinion—not just in Canada, but throughout the developed world, except in the U.S.—which remains solidly behind universal coverage.
Bernier’s plan calls for the federal government to give the provincial governments room to hike their taxes, making up for the loss of transfers. (In 2017-18, federal Canada Health Transfer to the provinces is expected to total just over $37 billion.) After that, he says the provinces would assume full responsibility for health, which falls under provincial jurisdiction in the Constitution.
“With this reform, the provinces will no longer have excuses, but they will be empowered to fix the system,” Bernier said last fall in his key speech on the subject. “They will stop constantly begging for more money and won’t be able to blame Ottawa for their failure to tackle wait times.”
His reference to wait times is critical. Bernier builds much of his case for radical reform around long waits for care. Indeed, a survey by the Commonwealth Fund, a New York-based foundation that studies health care, found Canadians tend to wait longer to see a doctor than patients in 10 other developed countries.
It’s far from clear, though, that highlighting frustrations over wait times will be enough to make Bernier’s plan a politically saleable one for Conservatives. In the past, the party’s election strategists have rejected Liberal and NDP claims that Tories were not really committed to universal care backstopped by Ottawa’s spending power. On his way to winning a majority in the 2011 campaign, for example, Stephen Harper’s campaign repeatedly declared that Conservatives “strongly support for the Canada Health Act.”
Ontario MP Michael Chong in the leadership race. Chong has been blunt in his criticism of Bernier’s health policy. “By eliminating the federal health transfer, and proposing to do a one time tax-point transfer from the federal government to the provinces, he’s effectively eliminating the Canada Health Act,”
more
Could Maxime Bernier kill universal health care? - Macleans.ca
Yet more downloading...
Eventually, public health care will be the responsibility of municipalities, who will have to fund it from property taxes and parking fines.
Maxine will balance his budget, show a great surplus be remembered as the man "who repaired Canada's finances".
Eventually, public health care will be the responsibility of municipalities, who will have to fund it from property taxes and parking fines.
Maxine will balance his budget, show a great surplus be remembered as the man "who repaired Canada's finances".
Depends how it's implemented.
Canada's health care is in dire need of reform.
Yet the left has a panic attack when you suggest this.
I can tell you a few things about the inefficiently of our healthcare inOntario, based on my world's being an RPN in the system and my own recent contacts with our local hospital.
First, during the Harris years, they forced similar hospitals in the same geographic regions into "super entities" ... Halton Healthcare, William Osler, Trillium, etc. the logic being that shared administrative overhead would be less in total than the individual hospitals going it alone. What happened in my wife's hospital, is that their administration actually GREW, they turned bed space into office space and admin salaries WENT UP with the "greater responsibility" that they were to bear. Her's was NOT a headquarter hospital in the new regime. It happened to all of them in her region.
Fundamental problem: ... and this applies to all government enterprises... The positions that need to be cut are usually the ones charged with doing the cutting. Those who feel threatened will structure themselves to protect and enhance their empires. Asking a hospital to cut their own resources WILL NOT WORK. Some external bean counter slash Oliver Cromwell needs to make the hard decisions, not the victims, themselves.
This is neither a left not a right wing phenomenon. It is human nature, pure and simple.
Last edited:
Bingo, the same is happening with education.
Oh and it's not Mike's fault....move on.
It's those f@ckers at Queens park now...if you vote Liberal you're f@cked in the head.
My own recent experience: I was referred to the Emergency felt. at our local hospital by my family physician, who (tightly) decided that what we needed to deal with was beyond the scope of a family quackand too urgent to grow shunted of to a specialist.
I was processed by the Triage nurse ... an RN ... wasted twenty minutes keying in basic information that was clerical, not medical in nature. I spent many hours in Emergency. It was not unreasonable considering what all they did and thecwziitng period needed to get back pertinent information. I was with a group of other patients in similar circumstances and we struck up a temporary, little community.
The next day, I had to go back. They do not, however, carry any information forward from visit to visit, once you have been discharged. I even had my barcode bracelet from the day before, still on. Guess what? An RN wasted another significant portion of her day in a really crowded emergency taking down the same basic information as the day before. They did not/could not read the bracelet from yesterday. Everytime you go through the door, you are a new file. My whole group from the day before came back, too.We compared notes and they all went through the same rigamarole.I'd calculate that typing in our names, addresses, etc.killed a half a man day of hospital time.
Our healthcare cards should have a chip on them that holds all of the basic information about "you", as a bank card does, rather than wasting highly trained resources duplicating mundane things.
I was processed by the Triage nurse ... an RN ... wasted twenty minutes keying in basic information that was clerical, not medical in nature. I spent many hours in Emergency. It was not unreasonable considering what all they did and thecwziitng period needed to get back pertinent information. I was with a group of other patients in similar circumstances and we struck up a temporary, little community.
The next day, I had to go back. They do not, however, carry any information forward from visit to visit, once you have been discharged. I even had my barcode bracelet from the day before, still on. Guess what? An RN wasted another significant portion of her day in a really crowded emergency taking down the same basic information as the day before. They did not/could not read the bracelet from yesterday. Everytime you go through the door, you are a new file. My whole group from the day before came back, too.We compared notes and they all went through the same rigamarole.I'd calculate that typing in our names, addresses, etc.killed a half a man day of hospital time.
Our healthcare cards should have a chip on them that holds all of the basic information about "you", as a bank card does, rather than wasting highly trained resources duplicating mundane things.