Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

Justin Trudeau - Suffering from Foot in Mouth - Canadian Style


  • Please log in to reply
316 replies to this topic

#211 TimberWolf

TimberWolf

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,292 posts
  • Joined: 28-February 04

Posted 29 November 2012 - 01:07 PM

I'd prefer the NDP way.


Why?

Nice contradiction there Marc :lol:


I had high hopes for him until that quote.

Edited by TimberWolf, 29 November 2012 - 01:13 PM.

  • 0

I was saying Lu-Urns...

star-wars-hockey-goal.gif?w=284

#212 J.R.

J.R.

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,869 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 29 November 2012 - 01:27 PM

Why?


If we're going to get f'd by government either way I'd prefer to see that money going towards positive things like:

-Farming/food quality
-Protecting the environment
-The poor and middle class

...as opposed to the alternative of it going to the wealthy and foreign.

Edited by J.R., 29 November 2012 - 01:27 PM.

  • 0

"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

jg4428.jpg2s9up7p.jpg


#213 ronthecivil

ronthecivil

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,946 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 05

Posted 29 November 2012 - 01:35 PM

Raise taxes and target the natural resources in the West while transferring more and more to Quebec to play for their gold-plated social programs.

The Liberal Way. ::D


Evidence?

So I guess if that's the liberal way our choices are....

Spend way to much on jets and keep raising the CHMC limit to appear to be a country that has a good economy while running up the debt so much it would make the NDP blush.

OR

Raise taxes, suck money west to east, tax carbon. But have a shot at balancing the budget.

OR

Economic ruin (and NDP government).


Find me a liberal candidate that wants to dramatically cut provincial transfer payments along with the carbon taxes to put the federal budgets in the black and I think we will have a winner.
  • 0

#214 ronthecivil

ronthecivil

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,946 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 05

Posted 29 November 2012 - 01:38 PM

Nice contradiction there Marc :lol:


Hey, Quebec is part of Canada.

Frankly I don't care if Marc has a crush on Quebec and Steve has a crush on Alberta. Can we please raise the level above grade school mentality? We have some SERIOUS FREAKING PROBLEMS that could very well BANKRUPT THE COUNTRY GREEK STYLE if w don't deal with them.
  • 0

#215 J.R.

J.R.

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,869 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 29 November 2012 - 01:41 PM

Economic ruin (and NDP government).


Please don't tell me you've fallen for that right wing ruse as well...

"If we give money to the poor, middle class and re-invest it in our own country rather than giving it to foreign billionaires...we'll all go broke!!!" :frantic:

:rolleyes:
  • 0

"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

jg4428.jpg2s9up7p.jpg


#216 ronthecivil

ronthecivil

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,946 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 05

Posted 29 November 2012 - 01:44 PM

If we're going to get f'd by government either way I'd prefer to see that money going towards positive things like:

-Farming/food quality
-Protecting the environment
-The poor and middle class

...as opposed to the alternative of it going to the wealthy and foreign


Just what we need, more slush funds and entitlements.

How about we put the money towards paying off the 600 billion or so we owe already instead of drowning deeper in debt.

Even to maintain the so called lousy status-quo with regards to our apparently insufficient food quality, environmental protection, struggling lower and middle classes, and large deficit budgets would require significant tax increases and cuts to other programs.

If not at the end of the day all those things as well as anything you might feel is going to subsidies the wealthy and foreign (with a knock on effect to investment and jobs which will hit everyone) are in serious risk of getting devastated.
  • 0

#217 J.R.

J.R.

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,869 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 29 November 2012 - 01:47 PM

Just what we need, more slush funds and entitlements.

How about we put the money towards paying off the 600 billion or so we owe already instead of drowning deeper in debt.

Even to maintain the so called lousy status-quo with regards to our apparently insufficient food quality, environmental protection, struggling lower and middle classes, and large deficit budgets would require significant tax increases and cuts to other programs.

If not at the end of the day all those things as well as anything you might feel is going to subsidies the wealthy and foreign (with a knock on effect to investment and jobs which will hit everyone) are in serious risk of getting devastated.


I don't disagree that we need to concern ourselves first with the budget/debt/deficit.

But like I said, if we're getting f'd...I'd rather that money be going to farmers, keeping the resource jobs and money here and going to the middle class etc than overpriced jets and prisons we don't need.
  • 1

"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

jg4428.jpg2s9up7p.jpg


#218 ronthecivil

ronthecivil

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,946 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 05

Posted 29 November 2012 - 01:47 PM

Please don't tell me you've fallen for that right wing ruse as well...

"If we give money to the poor, middle class and re-invest it in our own country rather than giving it to foreign billionaires...we'll all go broke!!!" :frantic:

:rolleyes:


What money? We're massively in debt and that situation is getting worse.

What money is being given to foreign billionaires? This isn't the states, high income earners pay lots of taxes.

We could invest in the country for sure but we have no money to invest atm and the future projection doesn't exactly look bright for having more.
  • 0

#219 J.R.

J.R.

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,869 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 29 November 2012 - 01:50 PM

What money? We're massively in debt and that situation is getting worse.

What money is being given to foreign billionaires? This isn't the states, high income earners pay lots of taxes.

We could invest in the country for sure but we have no money to invest atm and the future projection doesn't exactly look bright for having more.


Largely Chinese owned oil companies.

Again, I don't disagree that we need to cut spending AND raise taxes (GST...stupid Cons). We have plenty of money though...it's just not being spent remotely wisely. I doubt any party will make a major dent in that though.

Edited by J.R., 29 November 2012 - 01:51 PM.

  • 0

"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

jg4428.jpg2s9up7p.jpg


#220 ronthecivil

ronthecivil

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,946 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 05

Posted 29 November 2012 - 01:56 PM

I don't disagree that we need to concern ourselves first with the budget/debt/deficit.

But like I said, if we're getting f'd...I'd rather that money be going to farmers, keeping the resource jobs and money here and going to the middle class etc than overpriced jets and prisons we don't need.


While the jets are a massive cost that would be the first to be cut we need some sort of plane so it's not just a matter of saving all the money.

Resource protectionism (or flat out obstructionism) will ultimately result in less jobs and less money for Canadians (at least anyone with any sort of mutual funds in their retirement plan).

And there's things that could be done other than just build more prisons.

But it's not like anyone else wouldn't fill that extra spending with even more spending. If you think jets are expensive check out the costs of adding even more entitlements in a demographic crunch!

Pretty ridiculous line of reasoning to say well, we're going broke anyways, might as well make it harder to pull ourselves out of the whole when the **** hits the fan.
  • 0

#221 ronthecivil

ronthecivil

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,946 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 05

Posted 29 November 2012 - 02:00 PM

Largely Chinese owned oil companies.

Again, I don't disagree that we need to cut spending AND raise taxes (GST...stupid Cons). We have plenty of money though...it's just not being spent remotely wisely. I doubt any party will make a major dent in that though.


Canada is giving money to Chinese owned oil companies?

The Chinese are trying to buy Nexen, which, if it happens, would be the Chinese giving a lot of money to Canadians. But it's likely the government will block that.

Oil companies (be they foreign or domestic) pay a TON of money to Canada in royalties and taxes, be they foreign or independent. Look at how much a drop in natural gas prices put our provincial budget out of whack! Make no mistake the feds take the lions share of revenue as well.
  • 0

#222 inane

inane

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,651 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 07

Posted 29 November 2012 - 02:00 PM

While the jets are a massive cost that would be the first to be cut we need some sort of plane so it's not just a matter of saving all the money.

Resource protectionism (or flat out obstructionism) will ultimately result in less jobs and less money for Canadians (at least anyone with any sort of mutual funds in their retirement plan).

And there's things that could be done other than just build more prisons.

But it's not like anyone else wouldn't fill that extra spending with even more spending. If you think jets are expensive check out the costs of adding even more entitlements in a demographic crunch!

Pretty ridiculous line of reasoning to say well, we're going broke anyways, might as well make it harder to pull ourselves out of the whole when the **** hits the fan.


Just as ridiculous to perpetuate this notion that there is no money.
  • 0

#223 ronthecivil

ronthecivil

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,946 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 05

Posted 29 November 2012 - 02:04 PM

Just as ridiculous to perpetuate this notion that there is no money.


There's money. There's just more going out that coming in already.

So we either have to cut something, raise taxes, or spiral even faster into debt to spend money on anything else.
  • 0

#224 J.R.

J.R.

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,869 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 29 November 2012 - 02:13 PM

Canada is giving money to Chinese owned oil companies?

The Chinese are trying to buy Nexen, which, if it happens, would be the Chinese giving a lot of money to Canadians. But it's likely the government will block that.

Oil companies (be they foreign or domestic) pay a TON of money to Canada in royalties and taxes, be they foreign or independent. Look at how much a drop in natural gas prices put our provincial budget out of whack! Make no mistake the feds take the lions share of revenue as well.


It would be even more money if we didn't squander it. It's short term thinking that a quick fire sale of our resources to the Chinese because we're in a bit of a financial pickle is a good idea. Long term we're better off to retain those assets here. To create jobs here. Jobs for people who will pay taxes and buy goods and homes.

Edited by J.R., 29 November 2012 - 02:13 PM.

  • 1

"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

jg4428.jpg2s9up7p.jpg


#225 ronthecivil

ronthecivil

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,946 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 05

Posted 29 November 2012 - 02:21 PM

It would be even more money if we didn't squander it. It's short term thinking that a quick fire sale of our resources to the Chinese because we're in a bit of a financial pickle is a good idea. Long term we're better off to retain those assets here. To create jobs here. Jobs for people who will pay taxes and buy goods and homes.



Well they will probably block the Nexen deal anyways.

And the foreign worker program is probably going to be cut down what with the noise over the coal workers here.

But last I checked Fort McMurray is chock a block full of Canadians making big money who do pay taxes and buy goods (if you consider truck balls and meth goods that is) and homes.

If you block (or even look hostile to) foreign investment that means less development, less money for the government, and less jobs.

What do you propose the government do? NEP v 2.0? That would go over like a lead balloon.
  • 0

#226 Wetcoaster

Wetcoaster

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 40,454 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 04

Posted 29 November 2012 - 03:33 PM

Nice contradiction there Marc :lol:

It is not a contradiction if you truly believe that Canada is much better off when Quebeckers run things - like Justin Trudeau said as well.
  • 0
To err is human - but to really screw up you need a computer.

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it.

Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati

Illegitimi non carborundum.

Never try to teach a pig to sing - it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

#227 ronthecivil

ronthecivil

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,946 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 05

Posted 29 November 2012 - 04:00 PM

It is not a contradiction if you truly believe that Canada is much better off when Quebeckers run things - like Justin Trudeau said as well.


So if a local politician announced their support of Northern Gateway and said "This project is good for BC and all of Canada!" would that translate into "Canada is run best by people from BC"?

He was in Quebec at the time. So when he said Quebec he very well could have meant "all you people in the room here" and when he said Canada he very well could have meant "and everyone else in the country too".

Do we really need the eastern Canada language politics garbage (especially tenuous jabs like this) staining the entire country?
  • 0

#228 Shift-4

Shift-4

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,452 posts
  • Joined: 11-August 06

Posted 29 November 2012 - 04:04 PM

Do we really need the eastern Canada language politics garbage (especially tenuous jabs like this) staining the entire country?


When you are running for the job of leader for the COUNTRY you shouldn't leave yourself open for such jabs.
  • 1
Hockey is the only sport, the rest are just games.

#229 Tearloch7

Tearloch7

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,357 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 10

Posted 29 November 2012 - 04:28 PM

Consider this process a "primary" .. all candidates will pamper to their base and where the votes are .. the votes are NOT in the West ..
  • 0

"To Thine Own Self Be True"

 

"Always tell the Truth. That way, you don’t have to remember what you said"  ~ Mark Twain ~
 


#230 ronthecivil

ronthecivil

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,946 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 05

Posted 29 November 2012 - 04:41 PM

When you are running for the job of leader for the COUNTRY you shouldn't leave yourself open for such jabs.


Pssh, why not? It's a good trap.

If someone called him on it he could simply say "Remind the person upset that Quebec is part of Canada. Also, you members of the press, and all Canadians, can quote me on that.!"

How about actually asking what his economic plan is instead of saying "it's just going to funnel money to Quebec" or similar inane statements.

Not sure what it's called when you assume something about someone else but it's still very much a case of making an *** out of both people.
  • 0

#231 Shift-4

Shift-4

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 19,452 posts
  • Joined: 11-August 06

Posted 29 November 2012 - 04:46 PM

:huh: I didn't say anything about him funneling money to Quebec
  • 0
Hockey is the only sport, the rest are just games.

#232 ronthecivil

ronthecivil

    Canucks All-Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,946 posts
  • Joined: 18-August 05

Posted 29 November 2012 - 04:50 PM

:huh: I didn't say anything about him funneling money to Quebec


Never said you did!

The OP (who seems as partisan as a conservative card carrier) certainly did.
  • 0

#233 Wetcoaster

Wetcoaster

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 40,454 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 04

Posted 29 November 2012 - 05:49 PM

Consider this process a "primary" .. all candidates will pamper to their base and where the votes are .. the votes are NOT in the West ..

However in the Liberal leadership race each riding across the country has a vote and is equal regardless of the number of voters and whether or not they have ever elected a Liberal MP.
  • 0
To err is human - but to really screw up you need a computer.

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it.

Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati

Illegitimi non carborundum.

Never try to teach a pig to sing - it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

#234 Electro Rock

Electro Rock

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,633 posts
  • Joined: 17-March 04

Posted 30 November 2012 - 10:58 AM

I have this funny feeling that Harper could kill off what remains of the LPC whenever he wants to by order a full investigation into any number of their activities during the time they were in power.

But, he choses not to because that would, for a time at least, do away with the vote split on the left.
  • 0
"The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened."

Norman Thomas

#235 J.R.

J.R.

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,869 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 30 November 2012 - 11:19 AM

Well they will probably block the Nexen deal anyways.

And the foreign worker program is probably going to be cut down what with the noise over the coal workers here.

But last I checked Fort McMurray is chock a block full of Canadians making big money who do pay taxes and buy goods (if you consider truck balls and meth goods that is) and homes.

If you block (or even look hostile to) foreign investment that means less development, less money for the government, and less jobs.

What do you propose the government do? NEP v 2.0? That would go over like a lead balloon.


Have you not heard of FIPPA? One of the many in a long list of Harper selling off our resources and sovereignty among many other misdeeds.

http://www.vancouver...law-expert-says

Canada-China FIPPA agreement may be unconstitutional, treaty law expert says

The Canada-China Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Act (FIPPA), Canada's biggest foreign trade treaty since NAFTA, will come into effect at the end of October and bind both the federal and provincial governments of Canada to its clauses for the next 31 years until 2043. International investment law expert and Canadian citizen Gus Van Harten says provinces have a strong case for challenging the treaty on constitutional grounds.

With two weeks remaining before the controversial Canada-China Foreign Investment Promotion and Protection Act (FIPPA) is ratified, international investment law and treaty expert Gus Van Harten says BC has the option of delaying the treaty's ratification through the courts.

"The province can call for an injunction in the BC Superior Court, requesting the courts to order the federal government not to ratify the treaty until the constitutional issues are resolved," Van Harten told The Vancouver Observer.

The other option, Van Harten added, was an upswelling of public opinion against the treaty that will pressure elected officials in Parliament as well as provincial legislatures.

According to international law, a foreign investment protection agreement (FIPA) treaty binds the state regardless of changes in federal or provincial governments.

"It's a done deal between the two countries—by signing a treaty, the Harper government can bind future governments and bind the Canadian electorate for 31 years," Van Harten said.

Van Harten—who has a PhD in international law from the London School of Economics, and teaches law at Osgoode Law School—is one of five internationally recognized experts in Canada on international investment and treaty law and how they work on a practical basis. He said that he is an outlier for speaking out, based on his experience.

"The difference between me and many others is that a lot of academics work in the system as lawyers or arbitrators or experts, and they're much more cautious about saying things that are critical of the system," he said.

He noted that FIPPA is a good news for lawyers, who stand to profit off potentially multi-million dollar lawsuits.
"The lawyers who work in this field will like that—their business is to sue," he said. "It's not good for Canadian taxpayers."

Any province with Chinese investors in natural assets over the next 31 years has right to challenge constitutionality of FIPPA
BC isn't the only province that has a strong case in courts against the federal government over FIPPA because they face potentially serious fiscal risk if Chinese companies invest in major assets.

"It could be Ontario down the road, it could be the ring of fire—which is a strip of mineral rich land in Northern Ontario. In the north, there could be development of mines in northern Canada," Van Harten said. "Same with Saskatchewan, with the mineral right there."

"In Alberta, the Alberta economy is going to have a significant portion of Chinese ownership in its resource sector, and if Alberta was concerned for a long time about not having control over its resources vis-à-vis the federal government, how does it feel not having control over its resources vis-à-vis Chinese investors?"

The only provincial governments that shouldn't be concerned about FIPPA are the ones which won't expect to be getting any significant Chinese ownership of assets, Van Harten said.

"I don't think any responsible government can assume that that's going to be the case. In fact, they should be assuming the opposite and asking the questions now before the 31 years kicks into effect on October 31."

Van Harten's concerns "speculative": BC Environment Minister Terry Lake
Van Harten also sent letters to premiers of all across Canada, including BC Premier Christy Clark. He did this to help the provinces understand the scope of the fiscal risks this treaty will have on them and taxpayers.

Clark's Press Secretary Michael Morton confirmed that Clark's correspondence branch received the letter. Clark did not respond to questions from The Vancouver Observer about her reaction to any of the concerns it raised.

BC Minister of Environment Terry Lake responded to Van Harten's letter to the Premier and concerns about FIPPA in a written statement, calling the letter "speculative":

“We are intervenors in the hearing and examining issues that are critical to our five conditions that must be met on all pipeline projects in BC. At the same time we are working with our federal counterparts on [Northern Gateway Proposal] related issues where BC’s interests are at stake."

"As this is ongoing work and international treaties are the purview of the federal government I am not going to comment on speculative comments by Mr. Van Harten.”

No response from feds about concerns over FIPPA
FIPPA is the biggest foreign trade agreement since the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). FIPPA is an agreement with provisions to protect Chinese investors in Canada, and vice-versa. However, it also contains many clauses that have alarmed Van Harten and opposition MPs such as Green Party MP Elizabeth May. May requested an emergency debate on the treaty at the beginning of October to the House Speaker. Her request was denied.

Van Harten wrote a letter to Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Minister of International Trade Ed Fast last week outlining his concerns as a legal expert and Canadian citizen, but has yet to get any confirmation on whether his letter has been recieved.

A spokesperson for Minister Fast responded to questions from The Vancouver Observer about Van Harten's letter and concerns with the following written statement:

"With regards to investor-state dispute settlement, it is Canada’s long-standing policy to permit public access to such proceedings. Canada’s FIPA with China is no different. As we do with all other investor-to-state disputes, this FIPA allows Canada to make all documents submitted to an arbitral tribunal available to the public (subject to the redaction of confidential information).

It is also important to note that under this treaty, both Canada and China have the right to regulate in the public interest. Chinese investors in Canada must obey the laws and regulations of Canada just as any Canadian investor must.

We’ve been clear that Canada wants to continue to expand its relationship with China, but we want to see it expand in a way that produces clear benefits for both sides. By ensuring greater protection against discriminatory and arbitrary practices, and enhancing predictability of a market’s policy framework, this FIPA will allow Canadians to invest in China with greater confidence."

Harper government rushing FIPPA, not allowing enough debate
However, Van Harten disagrees on with the Minister on various points.

"Why it is being concluded now in a form that is not advantageous to Canada is perhaps because the Harper government wants to pass it quickly while it has a majority in Parliament, and has been prepared to give away things that it would not have given away presumably as a minority government because it would not have been able to pass it through Parliament"

He added that the bulk of the responsibility for FIPPA lies at the majority Conservative government.

"To be honest, the provinces didn't start this. It's the federal government which has taken this reckless step," he said.
NDP MP Don Davies proposed a motion in the Standing Committee on International Trade to debate, study, and recommend amendments to FIPPA on October 2.

After the majority Conservative committee voted for a confidential, in-camera meeting, the motion was removed from the Committee's agenda.

International Trade committee member and Liberal MP Wayne Easter decried the killing of the motion, saying it was hindering Parliament from doing due diligence.

"We should be doing what Parliament is supposed to do and hold a consultation so that we know just exactly what is happening under the investment agreement, and so that we can look at the implications," Easter said.

Two weeks won't be enough time to fully debate and study the implications for all provinces, hence Van Harten's recommendation for provinces to request a delay, and then the courts for an injunction based on constitutional grounds.

"I just want to emphasize to you the actor who is to blame at the moment is the federal government," he said.

"The provinces would be to blame if they sat on their hands despite the implications of this treaty."

LeadNow, a citizen's advocacy group, has launched a petition to stop FIPPA.


  • 0

"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

jg4428.jpg2s9up7p.jpg


#236 Tearloch7

Tearloch7

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,357 posts
  • Joined: 15-July 10

Posted 30 November 2012 - 12:16 PM

Investigate the Mulroney regime and we would need a new prison .. they are ALL pigs at the trough when in power ..
  • 0

"To Thine Own Self Be True"

 

"Always tell the Truth. That way, you don’t have to remember what you said"  ~ Mark Twain ~
 


#237 Electro Rock

Electro Rock

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,633 posts
  • Joined: 17-March 04

Posted 30 November 2012 - 03:11 PM

That's true, but it was far worse when the Eastern elites (of which the Progressive Conservative Red Tories were just another faction of) were in power.
  • 0
"The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened."

Norman Thomas

#238 Wetcoaster

Wetcoaster

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 40,454 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 04

Posted 30 November 2012 - 04:40 PM

Today the Commons Standing Committee on Natural Resources has summoned Trudeau and McGuinty to appear before them and explain their anti-Alberta comments.

Seriously????

When the motion first surfaced earlier this week, Liberal MP John McKay successfully staved off a vote by moving amendment after amendment to protest what he dismissed as a partisan witch hunt. It seems the Liberals now see no real downside - and nor do I.

At 12:50 p.m., the sitting resumed in camera.

It was agreed, — That the Committee, in light of the comments by Senior Liberal MP David McGuinty and Liberal leadership candidate Justin Trudeau, conduct hearings on the economic benefits that flow from Alberta's energy sector across Canada; that Members of Parliament David McGuinty and Justin Trudeau be invited as witnesses to explain their comments; and that the Committee report its findings to the House in order to ensure that all Members of Parliament and Canadians are informed of these economic benefits.

http://www.parl.gc.c...1&Parl=41&Ses=1

A spokesperson for the Trudeau campaign sends along this response:


Even though this government has no respect for Parliament, we do. And Justin will be happy to go explain himself and share his vision for natural resources in Canada when we are given the details of the request.


  • 0
To err is human - but to really screw up you need a computer.

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it.

Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati

Illegitimi non carborundum.

Never try to teach a pig to sing - it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

#239 inane

inane

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,651 posts
  • Joined: 06-July 07

Posted 30 November 2012 - 04:41 PM

what a total waste of time, money and energy.
  • 0

#240 J.R.

J.R.

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,869 posts
  • Joined: 04-July 08

Posted 30 November 2012 - 05:44 PM

what a total waste of time, money and energy.


Look! We're agreeing again!
  • 0

"Science is like an inoculation against charlatans who would have you believe whatever it is they tell you."
- Neil deGrasse Tyson

jg4428.jpg2s9up7p.jpg





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.