Throne Speech...

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
22,847
7,794
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
I stand corrected. The government must allow for six days of debate on the throne speech but they don't have to be consecutive days. Blanchet said he and Conservative Leader Erin O'Toole, both of whom are currently in isolation after testing positive for COVID-19, are to join the debate on Tuesday.

No date has yet been set for the vote but, when it comes, the government will need the support of at least one of the main opposition parties to avoid being defeated.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
22,847
7,794
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Depends on Jagmeet, he's driving the bus right now.
The Liberals just have to out-NDP the NDP and give Jagmeet promises & they stay in power. Took less than 48 hours since the throne speech to buy him this round. Little does he realize that it’s making him & the NDP more irrelevant every time this happens, & the next election those that did vote NDP last time might as well cut out the middleman and vote Liberal. Bye-bye NDP in a few more elections.
 

JamesBondo

House Member
Mar 3, 2012
4,158
37
48
government must pass a budget each year, is this fall's budget for 2020 and 2021? if not we can boot them in the spring
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
22,847
7,794
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
The Bloc Québécois and Conservative parties promised Wednesday to vote against the speech. If NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh and his caucus also vote against the speech, Canadians will be headed to the polls for a fall federal election. Singh told reporters that he had not yet decided how his caucus will vote when it's given the chance in the Commons in the days ahead, etc....

....& he caves. I had erections as a young teen that lasted longer than it took Jagmeet to be bought with more Trudeau Promises this time around.

 

harrylee

Man of Memes
Mar 22, 2019
2,494
3,370
113
Ontario
Like it or not, the conservatives are not ready for an election right now....New leader, who can't attend Parliament right now. They haven't had time to get their strategy together.
Another year and TrustFund Boy should have another scandal or two under his belt and his sheep might get tired of following him
 

bob the dog

Council Member
Aug 14, 2020
1,086
852
113
Like it or not, the conservatives are not ready for an election right now....New leader, who can't attend Parliament right now. They haven't had time to get their strategy together.
Another year and TrustFund Boy should have another scandal or two under his belt and his sheep might get tired of following him

This is where a Canadian Taxpayer Party could win with an honest leader and a strong reform platform. It's the one cause that can unite the country. French, English, West, East; we all know when we are getting screwed over.

Reminds me of the doing the same thing and expecting a different response theory.
 

bob the dog

Council Member
Aug 14, 2020
1,086
852
113
Governor General Julie Payette acknowledged how the pandemic impacted low-income women in the Speech From The Throne and described an action plan that would recruit a “task force of experts” with “diverse voices”.

Sounds like they have found work for the rest of the family. Selling the dream 101
 

Twin_Moose

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 17, 2017
21,301
5,727
113
Twin Moose Creek
Why nobody's likely to win a federal-provincial turf war in a pandemic

On Thursday — a day after a throne speech vowed to take action on pharmacare, long-term care and child care — Conservative House leader Gerard Deltell stood in the House of Commons and accused the Liberal government of "setting the stage for fights with the provinces."

"Before the throne speech was even finished," Deltell reported, "Quebec Premier François Legault was already saying that he was disappointed because this speech once again showed the federal government meddling in provincial jurisdictions, especially health."

The prime minister was ready with a retort.

"Mr. Speaker, I am sorry to hear the member for Louis-Saint-Laurent say that the federal government does not have a role in protecting our seniors," Justin Trudeau said. "That was not how the premier of Quebec felt when he asked us to send in the armed forces to help seniors in our long-term care homes."

That statement might seem glib. Jurisdictional divisions generally exist for good reasons. Even when they don't, they're basically impossible to ignore completely — as demonstrated by the fact that federal lawyers were before the Supreme Court this week to defend the Liberal government's national carbon price.

But Trudeau's observation could serve as a warning for both federal and provincial leaders: no one is likely to come away from this moment looking good if disputes over jurisdiction and intergovernmental responsibility end up preventing meaningful action to improve the welfare of Canadians.

The Liberal government offered up a very long list of ambitious goals in that throne speech — "a Canada-wide early learning and childcare system," "new, national standards for long-term care" and "a national, universal pharmacare program."

The premiers made their own desires clear in a statement issued the next day. They would like more money. A lot of it. And for things other than child care, long-term care and pharmacare.

When jurisdiction mattered less
Specifically, the provinces would like the federal government to cover 35 per cent of all public health care costs, up from the 23 per cent it covers now. They would like the fiscal stabilization program changed to provide more funding to provinces that experience economic downturns. And they would like $100 billion in additional federal funding for infrastructure over the next ten years.

There was relatively little fussing over who was constitutionally responsible for what over the first six months of this pandemic — perhaps because the federal government, with its greater fiscal capacity, was doing most of the spending. From the spring through July, the federal government provided 91 per cent of all direct aid to Canadians.

In July, the federal government announced that the provinces would receive $19 billion for specific areas of their pandemic response, including municipalities and child care. A month later, Trudeau offered another $2 billion for schools. Those forays into provincial jurisdiction followed the federal government's offer of rent assistance for commercial businesses — another area that is not strictly within federal purview.

"The starting point, I think, has to be that at the end of the day, there isn't a single government in the country at any level that doesn't want to see the economy recover as quickly as possible and as fairly as possible," said Andrew Bevan, who was chief of staff to former Ontario premier Kathleen Wynne (and before that, a senior aide to federal Liberals in both government and opposition).

"That point of view, I think, has been instructive over the course of the [last] six months. It became very clear that leaders were going to set aside differences and allow for a few things to happen. The premiers allowed the federal government to step in, at a moment of obvious national concern, financially and fiscally, but beyond that as well."

Permanent changes to the federal-provincial spending relationship will necessarily be harder to make. The federal government will want to be able to say exactly what its money is accomplishing. Provinces will be reluctant to take on costly new services when they know they'll inevitably be blamed if something goes wrong.

Watch: Alberta Premier Jason Kenney rips into throne speech

Some premiers — Alberta's Jason Kenney, in particular — would rather be seen fighting the federal government. Activists calling for change might be reluctant to accept compromises. Even the quickest resolution will involve no small amount of shouting and chest-puffing.

Money changes everything — usually
Trudeau's political leverage likely is limited by his government's minority status and the constant threat of an election. At some point, the prime minister might also come to regret the loss of Bill Morneau, who successfully negotiated deals with the provinces on reform of the Canada Pension Plan and funding for mental health and home care during his time as finance minister.

On child care, Social Development Minister Ahmed Hussen told the Toronto Star that the federal government wants national standards and proper enforcement mechanisms. Provinces will object, no doubt. Perhaps their objections would be somewhat muffled if, as Bevan recommends, all new funding for child care comes from the federal government. (Bevan, who is among those pushing for action on child care, also thinks the federal government should be carrying a larger share of health spending.)

Money is the federal government's greatest source of power and it has signalled it's willing to use it. But there will be a limit on how much it can offer without creating a significant structural deficit.

Bevan argues that the greatest incentive for governments to come to an agreement now is the broad public consensus and desire for action — not just on child care but on other fronts as well.

"It's a complicated federation, but it's usually possible to find common interests. And I would say that at this moment, probably more so than ever, there is an expectation that governments will," he said.

"There's a pretty broad middle understanding of what is required. So you can't really be offside with that because you don't think the jurisdictional authority exists to have one government or another do something — that's just ridiculous. I don't think people will put up with it in the short term. And I think there would be electoral consequences in the medium to longer term if that were to happen."

It's easy enough to look at the Canadian federation and explain why things are hard to do. But it may be a lot less acceptable as an excuse now.

Federal promises on Provincial dimes are not cool
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
22,847
7,794
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Health Care is a Provincial Jurisdiction. Labour Law (Overtime and Minimum Wages and Holiday and such...) are a Provincial Jurisdiction. Jagnut was bought with the promise of paid sick time within 48hrs of the Throne Speech, but wouldn't that also be a Provincial Jurisdiction that Trudeau promised Singh from a Federal level? Does it even matter if it's a Liberal promise to the NDP to again buy their support regardless if it's within their purview or not?
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,336
113
Vancouver Island
Health Care is a Provincial Jurisdiction. Labour Law (Overtime and Minimum Wages and Holiday and such...) are a Provincial Jurisdiction. Jagnut was bought with the promise of paid sick time within 48hrs of the Throne Speech, but wouldn't that also be a Provincial Jurisdiction that Trudeau promised Singh from a Federal level? Does it even matter if it's a Liberal promise to the NDP to again buy their support regardless if it's within their purview or not?
It might be applied to federally regulated companies such as banks and railroads.
 

Hoid

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 15, 2017
20,408
3
36
Health Care is a Provincial Jurisdiction. Labour Law (Overtime and Minimum Wages and Holiday and such...) are a Provincial Jurisdiction. Jagnut was bought with the promise of paid sick time within 48hrs of the Throne Speech, but wouldn't that also be a Provincial Jurisdiction that Trudeau promised Singh from a Federal level? Does it even matter if it's a Liberal promise to the NDP to again buy their support regardless if it's within their purview or not?
It seems far-fetched but is it possible that you are wrong?
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
22,847
7,794
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Health Care is a Provincial Jurisdiction. Labour Law (Overtime and Minimum Wages and Holiday and such...) are a Provincial Jurisdiction. Jagnut was bought with the promise of paid sick time within 48hrs of the Throne Speech, but wouldn't that also be a Provincial Jurisdiction that Trudeau promised Singh from a Federal level? Does it even matter if it's a Liberal promise to the NDP to again buy their support regardless if it's within their purview or not?
It seems far-fetched but is it possible that you are wrong?
Anything is possible but what part do you think is wrong??
1) Where I state that healthcare is a provincial jurisdiction? This is stated as a fact.
2) Where I state that labour standards are provincial jurisdiction? This is stated as a fact.
3) Where I ASK THE QUESTION, wouldn’t paid sick time also be a provincial jurisdiction?
4) Where I ASK THE QUESTION, would it matter if it was or wasn’t for the Liberals to promise it to the NDP anyway even if they didn’t have the authority to promise it anyway?
What do you think is incorrect? One of the two points stated as a fact, or one of the two questions asked as questions? Please expand upon what you are alluding to.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
22,847
7,794
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Ok, I’m going to assume that the two questions I asked or not what you are stating could be wrong because they’re questions. That leaves the two things that I stated as a fact. That healthcare and labour standards are both under the purview of provincial jurisdiction. Which one of these two statements do you think is an error?
 

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
26,543
6,923
113
B.C.
Ok, I’m going to assume that the two questions I asked or not what you are stating could be wrong because they’re questions. That leaves the two things that I stated as a fact. That healthcare and labour standards are both under the purview of provincial jurisdiction. Which one of these two statements do you think is an error?
You expect an answer ?
 

Hoid

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 15, 2017
20,408
3
36
Ok, I’m going to assume that the two questions I asked or not what you are stating could be wrong because they’re questions. That leaves the two things that I stated as a fact. That healthcare and labour standards are both under the purview of provincial jurisdiction. Which one of these two statements do you think is an error?
I think your problem is that you don't understand what it is you are talking about.

What the NDP are talking about is not what you think they are talking about.
 

Hoid

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 15, 2017
20,408
3
36
Perhaps - and I know this is pretty out there - if you were to actually read some of the millions of cut and pastes you put up every day you would not go off on these wild goose chase things.

The NDP arranged for whatever replaces the CERB payments to remain the same instead of being reduced and have made sure that people who get sick or have to isolate because of covid are eligible for sick days through the emergency federal measures.