Trudeau 'welcomes' ethics probe of alleged PMO interference in SNC-Lavalin case

VIBC

Electoral Member
Mar 3, 2019
673
0
16
And your first sentence provided the key . How can I possibly get through life as painlessly as possible , while my federal government takes more and more of my hard earned money .

This is not a "key" thought for me.

What levels of taxation I will approve, in what prevailing conditions, and how the money gets used, are extremely complex issues; not expressible in a short statement. Although I'm not wealthy, overall I don't feel significantly victimized by our tax system.
 

Mowich

Hall of Fame Member
Dec 25, 2005
16,649
998
113
76
Eagle Creek
I think this line best describes the whole article

It most certainly provides a different narrative around the cabinet shuffle that saw the former AG removed from her post, now doesn't it, TM. And, this took place long before any hint of the SNC Lavalin issue.
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
28,350
7,981
113
B.C.
This is not a "key" thought for me.

What levels of taxation I will approve, in what prevailing conditions, and how the money gets used, are extremely complex issues; not expressible in a short statement. Although I'm not wealthy, overall I don't feel significantly victimized by our tax system.
No one disputes the necessity of taxes , however watching the shear disregard our tax dollar is held in is annoying . It is easy to not notice the tax hit if your employer deducts taxes , most people look at the bottom line and that is all they see . When you own a business dealing with the government becomes more complex and monies must be remitted . When you actually see the money leave it tends to make one pay attention to wasteful spending and practices . A prime example is our illustrious Prime Minister with his personal government jet plane , it is in the air practically daily. He is being neither frugal nor carbon conscious. And in my experience his is no different then other Liberal governments of the past , they are always do what I say not what I do . And don’t forget I am entitled to my entitlements . There is a reason why Liberals were the third place party these number of years .

That’s my rant for the day .
 

spilledthebeer

Executive Branch Member
Jan 26, 2017
9,296
4
36
I don't have anything I think of as an agenda other than to get through the remainder of my life as painlessly, as interestingly and causing as little harm as possible. That certainly wouldn't involve supporting or getting involved with a political party. My outlook is what you might call small-L liberal; i.e open minded and supportive of 'the common good.' Paying more attention to the potential consequences of actions, rather than their fit within any predefined ideology.

See, this is very hard to summarize when you believe, as I do, in considering the pros & cons of each new issue on its unique merits. In the past I've referred to this as 'situational ethics.' But that gets misinterpreted as not having any ethics at all, by those who believe we have to cling to hard ideologies. Too bad, I thought it was a useful phrase. Oh, well ....




LIE-berals can help you with that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Just GIVE THEM whatever money you have!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


And ask for euthanasia?????????????????????????????


ALL your problems will be ENDED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Twin_Moose

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 17, 2017
22,031
6,152
113
Twin Moose Creek
Become a corporation

Yep and we seen a rise in corporate investment in Canada at that time, now we are seeing the investment South of the border with the same tax incentive. Coincidence I think not
 

VIBC

Electoral Member
Mar 3, 2019
673
0
16
No one disputes the necessity of taxes , however watching the shear disregard our tax dollar is held in is annoying . It is easy to not notice the tax hit if your employer deducts taxes , most people look at the bottom line and that is all they see . When you own a business dealing with the government becomes more complex and monies must be remitted . When you actually see the money leave it tends to make one pay attention to wasteful spending and practices . A prime example is our illustrious Prime Minister with his personal government jet plane , it is in the air practically daily. He is being neither frugal nor carbon conscious. And in my experience his is no different then other Liberal governments of the past , they are always do what I say not what I do . And don’t forget I am entitled to my entitlements . There is a reason why Liberals were the third place party these number of years .
That’s my rant for the day .


Everyone's entitled to their rant. Here's mine:

I don't need any lectures from anyone about my ability to notice how much I am taxed, or how I should feel about it. The suggestion that I only paid attention to it when I was a businessman but not when I was an employee is fatuous. If the statement is supposed to imply some intellectual or managerial superiority of businesspeople over regular employees I reject it completely both intiutively and from experience. It has been my observation that businesses large, small & global - and those who run/own them - are as liable to engage in corruption and/or gross mismanagement as any government. (i.e. VERY liable)

I have no affiliation with, or admiration for, any political party. In fact I despise our partisan political system as well as those who fall for, and join in, the silly rhetoric it spawns.
 

VIBC

Electoral Member
Mar 3, 2019
673
0
16
It most certainly provides a different narrative around the cabinet shuffle that saw the former AG removed from her post, now doesn't it, TM. And, this took place long before any hint of the SNC Lavalin issue.

It's very interesting. But hard to see why, if that's what this is all about, he took so long to move her out of the AG position. I'm not sure why we (the people :)) would object to the AG having an opinion different from the PM's. He might be more offended about that idea than I am of course.


On the question of parliamentary supremacy (over the courts) I have a dilemma: 'On principle' I don't want the courts to be able to hog-tie the government; on the other hand I do like some of the results the court championed; the ability to choose assisted death for example.


"The thinker without a paradox is like a lover without feelings"
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
28,350
7,981
113
B.C.
Everyone's entitled to their rant. Here's mine:

I don't need any lectures from anyone about my ability to notice how much I am taxed, or how I should feel about it. The suggestion that I only paid attention to it when I was a businessman but not when I was an employee is fatuous. If the statement is supposed to imply some intellectual or managerial superiority of businesspeople over regular employees I reject it completely both intiutively and from experience. It has been my observation that businesses large, small & global - and those who run/own them - are as liable to engage in corruption and/or gross mismanagement as any government. (i.e. VERY liable)

I have no affiliation with, or admiration for, any political party. In fact I despise our partisan political system as well as those who fall for, and join in, the silly rhetoric it spawns.
Not trying to lecture you or anyone else . I specifically tried to generalize so as not to put you in one box or another . Nor was I implying that business people were somehow smarter or superior to anyone else . My rant was intended in a friendly fashion to convey my disdain for the liberal party and have a discussion proceed from there . I was in no way trying to argue or belittle your position simply trying to grasp it .
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
28,350
7,981
113
B.C.
Sources say Trudeau rejected Wilson-Raybould's conservative pick for high court


OTTAWA — Jody Wilson-Raybould recommended in 2017 that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau nominate a conservative Manitoba judge to be chief justice of the Supreme Court, even though he wasn’t a sitting member of the top court and had been a vocal critic of its activism on Charter of Rights issues, The Canadian Press has learned.

Well-placed sources say the former justice minister’s choice for chief justice was a moment of “significant disagreement” with Trudeau, who has touted the Liberals as “the party of the charter” and whose late father, Pierre Trudeau, spearheaded the drive to enshrine the Charter of Rights and Freedoms in the Constitution in 1982. The sources spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss internal discussions about a Supreme Court appointment, which are typically considered highly confidential.

For her part, Wilson-Raybould said Monday “there was no conflict between the PM and myself.”

In an email, she characterized the matter as part of the normal process of appointing a Supreme Court justice, which involves “typically CONFIDENTIAL conversations and communications — back and forths between the PM and the AG (attorney general) on potential candidates for appointment.”

She said she’s “not at liberty to comment” on the “veracity” of what the sources said occurred, adding, “Commentary/reporting in this regard with respect to a SCC appointment(s) could compromise the integrity of the appointments process and potentially sitting justices.”

The issue suggests Trudeau may have had reasons unrelated to the SNC-Lavalin affair for moving Wilson-Raybould out of the prestigious Justice portfolio earlier this year — a cabinet shuffle that touched off a full-blown political crisis for the governing Liberals.

Wilson-Raybould has said she believes she was moved to Veterans Affairs as punishment for refusing to intervene to stop a criminal prosecution of the Montreal engineering giant on bribery charges related to contracts in Libya. Trudeau has denied the SNC matter had anything to do with the decision. She resigned a month later amid allegations she was improperly pressured by the Prime Minister’s Office to interfere in the SNC-Lavalin case, triggering a furor that has engulfed the Trudeau government ever since.

The issue, the sources say, arose after Beverley McLachlin announced in June 2017 her decision to retire that December after 28 years on the highHer retirement meant the government would have to choose a new chief justice and find another bilingual judge from western or northern Canada to sit on the nine-member bench.

Trudeau created an independent, non-partisan advisory board, headed by former Conservative prime minister Kim Campbell, to identify qualified candidates to fill the western/northern vacancy and submit a short list of three to five names for consideration.

According to the sources, one of the names on the eventual list was Glenn Joyal, who had been appointed in 2011 by former Conservative prime minister Stephen Harper as chief justice of Manitoba’s Court of Queen’s Bench.

Wilson-Raybould then sent Trudeau a 60-plus-page memo arguing that Joyal should not only be added to the top court but should be named chief justice as well.

Only once before in Canadian history — in 1906, when Sir Wilfrid Laurier appointed his justice minister to the top judicial job — has a prime minister chosen a chief justice who was not already sitting on the Supreme Court.

Wilson-Raybould’s pick puzzled Trudeau but he became disturbed after doing some research into Joyal’s views on the charter, the sources said.

Joyal had criticized the judiciary for broadly interpreting charter rights and expanding them to apply to things not explicitly mentioned in the charter or, in his view, intended by provincial premiers when they agreed to enshrine a charter in the Constitution. The Supreme Court’s liberal interpretation has led to things like legalization of same-sex marriage, the right of women to choose to have an abortion and the legalization of medical assistance in dying, among other things Â*– developments Trudeau has celebrated.

In a January 2017 speech to the Canadian Constitution Foundation’s Law and Freedom Conference, Joyal echoed conservative arguments that the top court has usurped the supremacy of elected legislatures to determine social policy. The charter, Joyal argued, was the result of a compromise between Pierre Trudeau and premiers, most of whom had originally opposed inclusion of a charter in the Constitution. The compromise was intended to maintain a balance between the judiciary and the legislative branch of government, with provisions allowing governments to limit or override rights altogether in some circumstances.

Since then, judicial interpretation of the charter has ignored the intentions of the drafters and “led without question to a level of judicial potency that was not anticipated back in 1982,” Joyal said in the speech, a video of which is available on the foundation’s website.

That, in turn, has resulted in a “less potent and less influential legislative branch that seldom has the final word.”

“With the ‘constitutionalizing’ of more and more political and social issues into fundamental rights, the Canadian judiciary has all but removed those issues, in a fairly permanent way, from the realm of future civic engagement and future political debate,” he said.

Joyal was particularly critical of the Supreme Court’s interpretation of section 7 of the charter Â*– the section which guarantees everyone the right to life, liberty and security of the person and under which the top court struck down Canada’s abortion law and the prohibition on medically assisted death.

The court’s liberal interpretation of that section “has become, particularly in recent years, the single most fertile source for the discovery of new rights and the de facto constitutionalization of political and social issues,” he said.

Trudeau rejected Wilson-Raybould’s advice. He ended up appointing Sheila Martin, a judge on the appeal courts of Alberta, Northwest Territories and Nunavut, to fill the vacant western Canadian seat on the bench. Sitting Supreme Court Justice Richard Wagner was elevated to the role of chief justice.

Wilson-Raybould’s advocacy of Joyal for the top judicial job may not come as a total surprise to some Liberals, who’ve privately noted what they consider her conservative, restrictive approach to charter rights in a number of bills, including those dealing with assisted dying, impaired driving and genetic discrimination. Jane Philpott, as health minister at the time, was jointly responsible with Wilson-Raybould for the assisted dying legislation. She quit the cabinet earlier this month in solidarity with Wilson-Raybould, saying she no longer had confidence in the government’s handling of the SNC-Lavalin affair.
nationalpost.com/pmn/news-pmn/canada-news-pmn/sources-say-trudeau-rejected-wilson-rayboulds-conservative-pick-for-high-court
Interesting, I can see that creating a rift , but not enough to remove from cabinet . They must have disagreements around the cabinet table on a regular basis . There are still the two wings of the Liberal party fighting the Paul Martin Jean Cretien battles . The thing is they also have newer members that are idealistic and not aligned with either faction . Oh to be a bug on the wall .
 

Mowich

Hall of Fame Member
Dec 25, 2005
16,649
998
113
76
Eagle Creek
Interesting, I can see that creating a rift , but not enough to remove from cabinet . They must have disagreements around the cabinet table on a regular basis . There are still the two wings of the Liberal party fighting the Paul Martin Jean Cretien battles . The thing is they also have newer members that are idealistic and not aligned with either faction . Oh to be a bug on the wall .
It has been said that she was difficult to get along with and her having the gall to tell the PM who he should pick for a Supreme Court Justice was the final straw. I think we can agree that the little potato is arrogant to the nth degree. As such, I doubt he would put up long with someone who had their own agenda which differed from that of the party. Too bad the optics were so bad, or she may very well have been shown the door long ago.
 

VIBC

Electoral Member
Mar 3, 2019
673
0
16
Not trying to lecture you or anyone else .... I was in no way trying to argue or belittle your position simply trying to grasp it.
Thanks for that. I myself often have trouble trying to grasp my position.

My rant was intended in a friendly fashion to convey my disdain for the liberal party and have a discussion proceed from there
.
Ah now, there we'd have trouble on account of my preference for discussing specific issues & possible solutions rather than political parties and their alleged characteristics.
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
28,350
7,981
113
B.C.
It has been said that she was difficult to get along with and her having the gall to tell the PM who he should pick for a Supreme Court Justice was the final straw. I think we can agree that the little potato is arrogant to the nth degree. As such, I doubt he would put up long with someone who had their own agenda which differed from that of the party. Too bad the optics were so bad, or she may very well have been shown the door long ago.
Could be it is an angle not considered . I may be to hung up on the my perception of the internal struggle inside the party . Maybe I am reading to much into the still warring factions thing . But I agree the current Trudeau doesn’t have the same dominant personality his father had , charisma, style , looks , but like Clint said an empty suit .
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
28,350
7,981
113
B.C.
.
Thanks for that. I myself often have trouble trying to grasp my position.

.
Ah now, there we'd have trouble on account of my preferences for discussing specific issues & preferred solutions rather than political parties and their alleged characteristics.
Why ?
 

VIBC

Electoral Member
Mar 3, 2019
673
0
16

Because you said "My rant was intended in a friendly fashion to convey my disdain for the liberal party and have a discussion proceed from there."

Whereas my preference is for discussion of issues & possible (or attempted) solutions, not the supposed characteristics of specific political parties. That's a discussion I'm not interested in; my disdain is for party politics itself.

I realize that partisanship is addictive but I think of Julius Caesar's "Give them bread & circuses and they will never revolt." The circuses I refer to in this case being our adversarial parliamentary system and its millions of enthusiasts.

Maybe it's odd, but however much I deprecate our MPs & MLAs - and mostly I do - I wouldn't want their jobs for any amount of money.
 

VIBC

Electoral Member
Mar 3, 2019
673
0
16
It has been said that she was difficult to get along with and her having the gall to tell the PM who he should pick for a Supreme Court Justice was the final straw. I think we can agree that the little potato is arrogant to the nth degree. As such, I doubt he would put up long with someone who had their own agenda which differed from that of the party. Too bad the optics were so bad, or she may very well have been shown the door long ago.

Mixing my metaphors (it's fun) - if that was the final straw it took an awful long time for the other shoe to drop. Maybe it was just the first straw, the one that made the camel notice an irritating itch that would eventually have to be scratched.
 

Curious Cdn

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 22, 2015
37,070
8
36
Mixing my metaphors (it's fun) - if that was the final straw it took an awful long time for the other shoe to drop. Maybe it was just the first straw, the one that made the camel notice an irritating itch that would eventually have to be scratched.
As they say: "A rolling Stone is worth two in a bush."