Trudeau. Is he an idiot or what?

JLM

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
Danbones said:
Like I said: keep yer eye on the ball

SUBVERTING PARLIAMENT: Trudeau Liberals Caught Trying To Create $7 BILLION ‘Slush Fund’ To Escape House Of Commons Oversight

The Trudeau government is seeking to create a fund that will let them spend billions of our tax dollars now, without anyone knowing how it was spent until after the 2019 election.
The Trudeau Liberals have been caught trying to establish a $7 BILLION ‘slush fund,’ that would subvert the Parliamentary budget process.

As explained by Conservative Finance Critic Pierre Poilievre and Conservative MP Kelly McCauley, the fund would let the Liberals have a $7 billion stash of taxpayer dollars that they could spend without any accountability between now and the next federal election, without having to explain where that money would be spent until after the 2019 campaign.

This totally goes against how Parliament is supposed to work, because the government is mandated by law to show where every dollar is going in the budget estimates process. That’s basically the entire reason we have a Parliament in the first place, so those who represent the people vote on whether or not to approve how the government is spending our money.

If those representatives don’t know where the money is going, then they can’t do their jobs, and we aren’t a democracy
https://www.spencerfernando.com/201...on-slush-fund-escape-house-commons-oversight/


ought to keep an eye on this story here
;)
just to see...
Click to expand...

Typical of the innate arrogance! His father was the same way. It would have been nice if when the young people voted for him they'd have consulted with some of us old timers and we wouldn't have this shit today!
 
pgs

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
26,898
7,125
113
B.C.
JLM said:
Typical of the innate arrogance! His father was the same way. It would have been nice if when the young people voted for him they'd have consulted with some of us old timers and we wouldn't have this shit today!
Click to expand...
I tried however Justine was oh so cute and it was 2015 after all . Even many of my friends that lived through Trudeaumania cast their votes to sunny ways . Most seem to be regretting that decision .
 
Twin_Moose

Twin_Moose

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 17, 2017
21,599
5,916
113
Twin Moose Creek
Justin Trudeau’s latest stumble: snubbing Sri Lanka

A spokesperson for the Sri Lankan government tells Maclean’s the country is concerned that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau repeatedly sidelined the South Asian nation’s majority ethnic group in his festive statements—one of which was described internally as “clearly out of step” by his national security advisor Daniel Jean.
Sri Lanka’s concerns, expressed publicly for the first time, represent yet another South Asian diplomatic hiccup for Trudeau, who, despite a personal charm that has won fans abroad, had a backlash-laden trip to India in February, a matter that also involved Jean.
In May 2016, Jean, then-deputy foreign affairs minister, wrote at least two separate internal briefing notes about the damage to Canada-Sri Lanka relations that could result from the lack of inclusiveness in Trudeau’s greetings for the Tamil New Year, Puthandu, which happens usually on April 14.
Trudeau’s statement—“clearly out of step with the messaging of like-minded countries”—did not mention the Sinhalese Buddhist event Aluth Avurudda, which happens on the same day, according to the briefing notes, obtained under access-to-information laws.
Sri Lanka—majority Sinhalese, minority Tamil and recovering from a civil war—subsequently raised the issue privately with the Canadian government, according to the notes, which were addressed to then-Foreign Affairs Minister Stephane Dion.
It is unclear if the notes’ contents ever made it to Trudeau, who, despite his progressive image of valuing cultural diversity, did not appear to have heeded Sri Lanka’s concerns or listened to Jean’s advice. Trudeau issued statements for the Tamil New Year in 2017 and this month again without mentioning the Sinhalese event.
READ MORE: How Trudeau’s top national security advisor lost the plot in India
A spokeswoman for the South Asian country, Mahishini Colonne, says it would have been more appropriate if Trudeau’s greetings had also mentioned the Sinhalese Buddhist event, as the United Kingdom has done, or if he had addressed all Sri Lankans without mentioning specific holidays, as the United States has done. Sri Lanka’s concerns “still *remain valid and relevant,” she says.
When asked what the rationale was for seemingly ignoring both Sri Lanka and Jean, Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) spokeswoman Eleanore Catenaro says Trudeau had been consistent with his festive greetings.
The Global Affairs Canada foreign office acknowledged a request for comment, but did not provide a response. The Privy Council Office, the top-level civil service body to which Jean currently belongs, did not respond to a request for comment.
Trudeau, who aims for greater international engagement for Canada, has run into trouble in his overseas visits lately. His rocky Chinese trip last December failed to advance trade talks, and his recent Indian trip had been derailed by his repeated donning of ethnic clothing, criticized as over-the-top, and the invitation of a convicted attempted murderer to a Canadian reception.
Jean was then quoted anonymously in media,
Click to expand...
 
captain morgan

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
146
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
Twin_Moose said:
Justin Trudeau’s latest stumble: snubbing Sri Lanka

A spokesperson for the Sri Lankan government tells Maclean’s the country is concerned that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau repeatedly sidelined the South Asian nation’s majority ethnic group in his festive statements—one of which was described internally as “clearly out of step” by his national security advisor Daniel Jean.
Click to expand...

Sri Lanka should be thankful that 'lil potato didn't visit their nation and play dress up
 
Twin_Moose

Twin_Moose

Hall of Fame Member
Apr 17, 2017
21,599
5,916
113
Twin Moose Creek
Braid: Is Canada 'broken' or just badly bent?

UCP Leader Jason Kenney recently prompted a Twitter uproar with one short sentence: “Canada is broken.”
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau responded sharply at the national Liberal convention last weekend: “I love this country down to my bones and I will defend it — and our values — against anyone who says it’s broken.”
The truth may be in the middle: Canada isn’t broken yet, but it’s bending dangerously.
The key symptom is a growing refusal to respect legitimate decision-making, whether by the courts or regulatory bodies.
“I’m very concerned about how this will impact Canadian unity in the longer terms,” says Jim Horsman, who was Alberta’s intergovernmental minister during the great constitutional battle of the early 1980s.
He saw key institutions hold firm under great pressure. Today, he fears that acceptance of national norms is breaking down.
“We saw the example of how Quebec — or at least Montreal — took steps to prevent the east-west pipeline, successfully,” says Horsman, who calls current B.C. tactics in the Kinder Morgan pipeline dispute “very disturbing.”
Horsman points to B.C. Green Party Leader Andrew Weaver’s demand that the Supreme Court should decide on B.C.’s power to control bitumen. But when asked repeatedly if he’d respect a ruling against B.C., Weaver will not answer.
The federal NDP’s environment critic, Alexandre Boulerice, did exactly the same thing after his party called for a Supreme Court reference.
“Well, we’ll see,” he said, when asked if the NDP would bow to a ruling in favour of the pipeline.
The Supreme Court is supposed to be the ultimate authority on law and governance in Canada. Its rulings are not conditional.
Horsman says, “When people are not ready to accept a Supreme Court ruling, what’s next?”
Advocates now tend to see rulings from all the courts — whether provincial, federal or Supreme — as strategic way stations and prologues to new resistance.
Trudeau carries some responsibility for this. He has often said “even though governments grant permits, ultimately only communities grant permission.”
In my view, that was a horrible mistake.
Burnaby refuses to accept the pipeline. The whole thing is stalled there. And the prime minister has rhetorically endorsed the city’s stance.
If any community along the route of a linear national project has a veto, nothing will ever get built. Burnaby is the nightmare case — adamant refusal at the very end of the line.
Now, Trudeau’s only path to victory appears to include a broken promise and public investment in the project.
The PM provided B.C. with two other bad examples: cancelling the Northern Gateway project and changing emissions rules for the Energy East pipeline.
Northern Gateway had already been set back severely by the Federal Court, which overturned its approval for failing to consult with First Nations. Four months later, Trudeau declared it dead.
Infuriating as B.C. Premier John Horgan turned out to be, you can hardly blame him for drawing two lessons: Approvals are conditional — both in court and at the political level. And, you can change environmental rules halfway through.
The upshot is deep confusion about major projects and Ottawa’s ability to support the national economy.
Horsman contrasts this sharply with the repatriation of the Constitution in 1982.
Trudeau’s father, Pierre, first tried to bring the constitution home from Britain unilaterally, without consulting the provinces.
Eight provinces appealed to the Supreme Court. They won. The constitution was patriated with heavy input from the provinces, except Quebec, which refused to accept it.
Horsman was there for all the meetings. They were intense, complex, emotional and hugely important. One thing that struck him was the acceptance of the final deal, both by politicians and the general public.
Quebec cried betrayal, of course. The separatists were then in power.
But it was remarkable — and quintessentially Canadian — to see how all parties generally respected the ground rules and tolerated key decisions.
Today, that respect is seriously eroded, both by parochial zealots and dithering, confusing politicians.
Jim Horsman has the last words; a classic understatement: “Federal leadership in Canada has to be clear and understandable. And, I don’t think it is at the present time.”
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom