CanPol 2024: The chamber of sober posting second thought

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > CanPol 2024: The chamber of sober posting second thought

«‹›860 »

(Thread IKs: bunnyofdoom)

DaysBefore: Jan 24, 2019

If the Grits really wanted to Do a Thing they'd nationalise the railroads and start rebuilding the passenger and freight networks that were dismantled in the 90s and also electrify them. But I guess it's something.

Guigui posted:

Hopefully they make a seperate bypass rail line just for freight, and build a seperate passenger rail system that services the downtown core of Lac Megantic - which could then connect to an efficient Windsor-Quebec city system, which would have other passenger rail networks servicing other smaller communities.

Yeah that was my first thought, moving freight rails out of downtown is cool but a lot of cities move their passenger stations way out in the sticks (relatively speaking ofc) so you still have to drive them. And that's without mentioning idiotic designs like a lot Toronto's suburban GO Stations. Got my first taste of those in January when I was down for a trip, wowie.

I know VIA has big plans for extended service in the corridor that is breaking ground pretty soon, if it hasn't started already. There's mention of private service there too though which is unfortunate. Also none of it is electrified

Guigui posted:

(I've been binge-watching Not-Just-Bikes on youtube and the swiss rail network blows my mind...)

It's unbelievable how based the Swiss network is having only known our post-privatisation rail wasteland. That also goes for basically every country that isn't the US though.

# ? Feb 15, 2023 16:08

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 8, 2024 02:30

COPE 27: Sep 11, 2006

DaysBefore posted:

If the Grits really wanted to Do a Thing they'd nationalise the railroads and start rebuilding the passenger and freight networks that were dismantled in the 90s and also electrify them. But I guess it's something.

The fact that it took 10 years to stop spitting on the graves of the victims doesn't fill me with optimism.

# ? Feb 15, 2023 17:50

Femtosecond: Aug 2, 2003

Conservatives seem to be courting Quebec Nationalists pretty hard. Hopefully this blows up in their faces and causes some big caucus split.

quote:

Would Pierre Poilievre�s Tories let provinces strip us of our rights? �Of course,� one of his MPs says

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre�s Quebec lieutenant made a shocking declaration this week that went unnoticed in English Canada, telling reporters that Conservatives �of course� agree with the provinces� pre-emptive use of the notwithstanding clause.

On Tuesday, Quebec MP Pierre Paul-Hus said the party �might not necessarily� contest Quebec�s Bill 21 at the Supreme Court � reversing Poilievre�s previous stance. Then, Paul-Hus added, �Is the use of the notwithstanding clause in a pre-emptive manner, as the provinces have used it � are Conservatives in agreement with that?�

�Bien oui,� he said, meaning, �Of course� � or, literally, �Well, yes.�

That might be news to some of the Conservative MPs who vocally opposed Bill 21, a discriminatory law that bars those wearing religious symbols from holding certain public-sector jobs.

But perhaps they shouldn�t be surprised.

This week, they all sided with the sovereigntist Bloc Qu�b�cois and voted to tell Ottawa � the Liberals and any future federal government � to butt out of the notwithstanding clause debate. (Only Manitoba�s Candice Bergen, Nova Scotia�s Rick Perkins and Ontario�s Alex Ruff, who represents Bruce-Grey-Owen Sound, didn�t show up for the vote, and only the Liberals and NDP opposed.)

The motion proposed by the Bloc read: �That the House remind the government that it is solely up to Quebec and the provinces to decide on the use of the notwithstanding clause.�

The notwithstanding clause was a compromise that allowed prime minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau to enshrine the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms into the Constitution. It gives legislatures the right to override some Charter rights for a renewable period of five years. Several politicians around the table at the time felt the political cost of using the clause would dampen the temptation to use it.

SKIP ADVERTISEMENT
But that thinking has drastically shifted. In 2019, Quebec�s government introduced Bill 21 to popular support. Knowing the legislation was discriminatory, Premier Fran�ois Legault pre-emptively invoked the notwithstanding clause to protect it from court scrutiny. The clause was pre-emptively used again last year by Quebec when it passed Bill 96, legislation that limits the rights of anglophones in the province and curbs the use of other minority languages.

Then, last fall, Ontario Premier Doug Ford attempted to pre-emptively invoke the clause, too � this time to stop educational support workers from striking.

Widespread public opposition and the unions� collective action forced Ford to back down, but not before Ottawa spent days contemplating how it should respond. Should it ask the Supreme Court if the provinces had the right to use the clause pre-emptively? Within Prime Minister Justin Trudeau�s office, staff argued the power of disallowance � a constitutional provision that gives the federal government the right to disallow provincial laws � was outdated (it hasn�t been used since 1943), but they searched for creative ways to send a message that Ottawa wasn�t happy and that it believed the notwithstanding clause needed parameters around it.

At the time, and again this week, Justice Minister David Lametti argued the pre-emptive use of the notwithstanding clause was robbing the courts of having their say.

�It was always meant to be a last resort, in the context of constitutional negotiations,� he said. �It�s a grave matter when we use a law to breach people�s rights in Canada (and) the use of the notwithstanding clause must be an exception.�

The Bloc, unsurprisingly, doesn�t want the federal government telling Quebec what it can and can�t do.

But it is more than noteworthy that the Tories agree � regardless of whether Paul-Hus was making up party policy on the fly or if he had Poilievre�s benediction.

The vote Monday suggests several things.

First, we can expect that as prime minister, Poilievre would sit back and allow any province to pass discriminatory laws using the notwithstanding clause. This is what the Bloc motion called for. This is what Conservative MPs supported.

Second, Poilievre is aggressively courting nationalist voters in Quebec, embracing the same playbook that failed for Erin O�Toole and Andrew Scheer, and his position on Bill 21 may be shifting again. During the French-language Conservative leadership debate last May, Poilievre said he �would not reverse the federal decision� to fight both Bill 21 and 96 at the Supreme Court. But if the Liberals are no longer in office when these laws reach the country�s top court, can Poilievre be counted on to defend minority rights? Monday�s vote suggests not.

Lastly, the Conservative MPs who vehemently opposed Bill 21, who argued against O�Toole�s non-intervention policy and paved the way for his ouster and Poilievre�s leadership, acted disingenuously. Opposing Bill 21, believing that pre-emptive use of the clause should be limited, or that the federal government should fight the bill at the Supreme Court, meant voting against this motion.

Several MPs I spoke with said they believed they were simply reaffirming what the Constitution states, making a statement of fact.

It clearly was about much more than that.

Either you believe in something, or you don�t.

# ? Feb 16, 2023 01:45

DaysBefore: Jan 24, 2019

Lol he's definitely going to win the next one

# ? Feb 16, 2023 01:56

COPE 27: Sep 11, 2006

Would liberals allow provinces to violate our rights?

# ? Feb 16, 2023 02:10

infernal machines: Oct 11, 2012; we monitor many frequencies. we listen always. came a voice, out of the babel of tongues, speaking to us. it played us a mighty dub.

Yes?

I mean, the province of Ontario has already done that via the Notwithstanding Clause and as noted, the feds didn't do jack poo poo. It was the threat of a massive labour disruption that got them to repeal the legislation.

# ? Feb 16, 2023 02:14

teethgrinder: Oct 9, 2002

infernal machines posted:

I mean, the province of Ontario has already done that via the Notwithstanding Clause and as noted, the feds didn't do jack poo poo. It was the threat of a massive labour disruption that got them to repeal the legislation.

I fundamentally agree with where you're coming from, but the entire point of the Notwithstanding Clause is that the feds can't do jack poo poo. That's written into our confederacy.

# ? Feb 16, 2023 03:37

infernal machines: Oct 11, 2012; we monitor many frequencies. we listen always. came a voice, out of the babel of tongues, speaking to us. it played us a mighty dub.

Right, so yes, all of the federal parties will *allow* provinces to violate our rights based on the legal mechanism created for them to do so.

*Allow isn't the correct term, but it's the one COPE 27 used, and functionally, I don't think it matters.

infernal machines fucked around with this message at 03:53 on Feb 16, 2023

# ? Feb 16, 2023 03:49

teethgrinder: Oct 9, 2002

I am not an expert on this by any means, but my understanding is that there's legally jack poo poo they can do about it. You can see the Trudeau Libs are trying to write laws/agreements that work around it, but it's still a major blocker and a condition of how this country even ever came together. It was so controversial when Quebec first invoked it but welp, these fascist fucks give a poo poo about pulling this lever as much as it suits them.

# ? Feb 16, 2023 03:58

Bleck: Jan 7, 2014; No matter how one loves, there are always different aims. Love can take a great many forms, whatever the era.

infernal machines posted:

It was the threat of a massive labour disruption that got them to repeal the legislation.

We should do that again except this time replace "labour disruption" with "those big wooden things that separate heads from bodies."

# ? Feb 16, 2023 04:02

COPE 27: Sep 11, 2006

infernal machines posted:

Right, so yes, all of the federal parties will *allow* provinces to violate our rights based on the legal mechanism created for them to do so.

*Allow isn't the correct term, but it's the one COPE 27 used, and functionally, I don't think it matters.

I'm not sure how many layers deep your irony is going but I was making a direct comparison to the post before mine

# ? Feb 16, 2023 04:03

infernal machines: Oct 11, 2012; we monitor many frequencies. we listen always. came a voice, out of the babel of tongues, speaking to us. it played us a mighty dub.

Bleck posted:

We should do that again except this time replace "labour disruption" with "those big wooden things that separate heads from bodies."

Frankly, I'm surprised it worked that time. Majority governments at the provincial level generally don't have much to fear except maybe the threat of a 1-foot haircut

teethgrinder posted:

I am not an expert on this by any means, but my understanding is that there's legally jack poo poo they can do about it. You can see the Trudeau Libs are trying to write laws/agreements that work around it, but it's still a major blocker and a condition of how this country even ever came together. It was so controversial when Quebec first invoked it but welp, these fascist fucks give a poo poo about pulling this lever as much as it suits them.

I think we'll probably see more of it as more of the hard-right true believers get into government, get majorities, and discover that decorum is a false idea

COPE 27 posted:

I'm not sure how many layers deep your irony is going but I was making a direct comparison to the post before mine

Whoops. I do still laugh a bit at people panicking about PP though. Sure, the CPC could form a government if the Liberals completely self-immolate. Head to head with a Trudeau led Liberal party, in the absence of a scandal anyone cares about? Seems unlikely. He's less popular outside the party than the last two leaders were, and they both lost hands down, in elections that went straight back to the status quo.

infernal machines fucked around with this message at 04:11 on Feb 16, 2023

# ? Feb 16, 2023 04:04

flashy_mcflash: Feb 7, 2011

I had to see this and now you have to see it

# ? Feb 16, 2023 05:34

Tippecanoe: Jan 26, 2011

Stupid sexy Tory

# ? Feb 16, 2023 05:35

infernal machines: Oct 11, 2012; we monitor many frequencies. we listen always. came a voice, out of the babel of tongues, speaking to us. it played us a mighty dub.

flashy_mcflash posted:

I had to see this and now you have to see it

Why?

Why would you post the words of Rosie DiManno in this place?

# ? Feb 16, 2023 05:39

flashy_mcflash: Feb 7, 2011

infernal machines posted:

Why?

Why would you post the words of Rosie DiManno in this place?

We all had to picture John Tory dicking down this week, just thought I'd put a little cherry on top

# ? Feb 16, 2023 05:41

infernal machines: Oct 11, 2012; we monitor many frequencies. we listen always. came a voice, out of the babel of tongues, speaking to us. it played us a mighty dub.

Actually, I didn't have to picture that. At all.

# ? Feb 16, 2023 05:44

flashy_mcflash: Feb 7, 2011

infernal machines posted:

Actually, I didn't have to picture that. At all.

Do you think he goes in halfway, pulls out, and then refers it back to staff to report back on the results of a pilot study in 12 months?

# ? Feb 16, 2023 05:59

infernal machines: Oct 11, 2012; we monitor many frequencies. we listen always. came a voice, out of the babel of tongues, speaking to us. it played us a mighty dub.

I have difficulty believing he can get his zipper down without lengthy stakeholder consultations and a staff report

# ? Feb 16, 2023 06:01

McGavin: Sep 18, 2012

https://twitter.com/CBCQueensPark/status/1625895454205521932?s=20

# ? Feb 16, 2023 08:54

Paper Lion: Dec 14, 2009

love it when they say the quiet part really loud, right before a byelection. too bad about amalgamation making it impossible to push a real mayor through

# ? Feb 16, 2023 10:41

Wistful of Dollars: Aug 25, 2009

https://twitter.com/viceuk/status/1624037702902349825?s=46&t=Te8cvg7NXJGzhYkbORuqwA

# ? Feb 16, 2023 14:20

infernal machines: Oct 11, 2012; we monitor many frequencies. we listen always. came a voice, out of the babel of tongues, speaking to us. it played us a mighty dub.

Paper Lion posted:

love it when they say the quiet part really loud, right before a byelection. too bad about amalgamation making it impossible to push a real mayor through

It's also complete nonsense. The strong mayor powers only apply where the legislation would align with provincial interests, which is malleable enough to be arbitrarily inapplicable. And regardless, Doug Ford with a majority government can still override anything the City of Toronto attempts to pass, because the province still has absolute control over all aspects of the city's governance.

# ? Feb 16, 2023 14:45

Fidelitious: Apr 17, 2018; MY BIRTH CRY WILL BE THE SOUND OF EVERY WALLET ON THIS PLANET OPENING IN UNISON.

Wistful of Dollars posted:

https://twitter.com/viceuk/status/1624037702902349825?s=46&t=Te8cvg7NXJGzhYkbORuqwA

Started reading through it. My first laugh occurs when the writer describes a middle-of-nowhere type location where it's "a brisk 12-minute walk to the nearest train station" as a horrible occurrence. I mean, yes, it is. But my god it really drives home how lovely it is over here. I live a few blocks outside of a very core area in our capital city. It is a very desirable location. It is a 15-minute walk to the nearest train station.

# ? Feb 16, 2023 15:08

Kraftwerk: Aug 13, 2011; i do not have 10,000 bircoins, please stop asking

infernal machines posted:

It's also complete nonsense. The strong mayor powers only apply where the legislation would align with provincial interests, which is malleable enough to be arbitrarily inapplicable. And regardless, Doug Ford with a majority government can still override anything the City of Toronto attempts to pass, because the province still has absolute control over all aspects of the city's governance.

Yeah it seems municipal governments have zero power in Ontario. There's this abomination of condo towers the province is pushing on Yonge and Highway 7 to take advantaged of the subway station there and when I discussed that with the municipality they told me they can't do poo poo about it due to MZOs. Ford is right where he wants to be by being premier of Ontario. He can maximize the grift and help all his developer buddies while making life continuously miserable for everyone else.

# ? Feb 16, 2023 16:02

Powershift: Nov 23, 2009

The report on the clownvoy inquiry is out. I'm trying to find the actual text of it, Roleau found the act was justified and made 56 recommendations to prevent future failures that will no doubt be considered.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poec-report-released-friday-1.6750919

The most shocking bit:

quote:

"I find the Province of Ontario's reluctance to become fully engaged in such efforts directed at resolving the situation in Ottawa troubling," he said.

Rouleau said Premier Doug Ford and his cabinet did not properly respond to a crisis in an Ontario city subject to their jurisdiction.

"Given that the city and its police service were clearly overwhelmed, it was incumbent on the province to become visibly, publicly and wholeheartedly engaged from the outset," wrote Rouleau, a justice of the court of appeal for Ontario.

I wonder if DoFo will even acknowledge the report when he gets back from snowmobiling in March.

e: the full report. https://publicorderemergencycommission.ca/final-report/

Powershift fucked around with this message at 19:54 on Feb 17, 2023

# ? Feb 17, 2023 18:54

Mr. Apollo: Nov 8, 2000

I'm pleasantly surprised they called out Ontario like that (I know it won't amount to anything). I figured they wouldn't.

# ? Feb 17, 2023 23:22

Wistful of Dollars: Aug 25, 2009

https://twitter.com/thebeaverton/status/1626648344666771459?s=46&t=irBY--JHEXD61vwu1lBjHg

# ? Feb 18, 2023 01:30

yippee cahier: Mar 28, 2005

Any strong language for the police or were they the poor overwhelmed victims?

# ? Feb 18, 2023 16:44

bunnyofdoom: Mar 29, 2008; THE HATE CRIME DEFENDER HAS LOGGED ON

yippee cahier posted:

Any strong language for the police or were they the poor overwhelmed victims?

Actually surprisingly yes

# ? Feb 18, 2023 20:30

Noblesse Obliged: Apr 7, 2012

So the report exonerates Trudeau, criticizes the Ford government and police.

Which will make the it the most ignored report in history. May as well written it in a dead language.

# ? Feb 19, 2023 14:39

PT6A: Jan 5, 2006; Public school teachers are callous dictators who won't lift a finger to stop children from peeing in my plane

Noblesse Obliged posted:

So the report exonerates Trudeau, criticizes the Ford government and police.

Which will make the it the most ignored report in history. May as well written it in a dead language.

I'm pretty sure it was already translated into French, actually.

# ? Feb 19, 2023 14:46

Mr. Apollo: Nov 8, 2000

Noblesse Obliged posted:

So the report exonerates Trudeau, criticizes the Ford government and police.

Which will make the it the most ignored report in history. May as well written it in a dead language.

It�s really interesting how the media just ignored the report considering how much coverage and op ed pieces there were in the year since it was invoked.

# ? Feb 19, 2023 22:04

Syfe: Jun 12, 2006

That's because it's easier to pontificate in a vaccum. You can do so endlessly and breathlessly, you can make up various ideas and criticisms.

But a story is a story. It happens once and since it's an objective thing. You're less likely to get people to speculate it and have stuff thrown in their face, not when they can pivot to whatever their latest culture war talking point is to stay relevant.

They can survive in an endless columnist circle just waiting for something to write about.

But the story it happens once.

# ? Feb 19, 2023 22:33

PT6A: Jan 5, 2006; Public school teachers are callous dictators who won't lift a finger to stop children from peeing in my plane

Good news! Extremely not-racist Premier Legault is very not-racistly bitching about Quebec doesn't want any more foreigns coming in!

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/asylum-seekers-quebec-roxham-road-1.6754271

His extremely not-racist worldview really shines through when he speaks about the protection of the province's extremely not-racist culture thusly:

quote:

"The massive arrival of tens of thousands of migrants in the Quebec metropolis, a significant proportion of whom do not speak French, greatly complicates our francization goals," the letter reads.

# ? Feb 21, 2023 16:44

Powershift: Nov 23, 2009

This headline feels like it was written by an AI tasked with writing the most Canadian headline possible.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/prince-edward-island/pei-souris-tim-hortons-evictions-housing-1.6752938

quote:

Tim Hortons franchisee in P.E.I. evicts tenants to make way for temporary foreign workers

# ? Feb 21, 2023 17:07

flakeloaf: Feb 26, 2003; Still better than android clock

PT6A posted:

Good news! Extremely not-racist Premier Legault is very not-racistly bitching about Quebec doesn't want any more foreigns coming in!

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/asylum-seekers-quebec-roxham-road-1.6754271

His extremely not-racist worldview really shines through when he speaks about the protection of the province's extremely not-racist culture thusly:

His argument about social services being overburdened stood up perfectly well on its own. Shame that wasn't the point he wanted to make

# ? Feb 21, 2023 17:28

Lain Iwakura: Aug 5, 2004; The body exists only to verify one's own existence.; Taco Defender

Powershift posted:

This headline feels like it was written by an AI tasked with writing the most Canadian headline possible.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/prince-edward-island/pei-souris-tim-hortons-evictions-housing-1.6752938

Conservatives: "Immigrants are taking away jobs and are responsible for housing problems"

Also Conservatives: "GOTTA GO DOWN TO MY LOCAL TIMMIES AND GET MY DOUBLE DOUBLE. RRRROLL UP THE RRRRIM TO WIN"

# ? Feb 21, 2023 17:36

PT6A: Jan 5, 2006; Public school teachers are callous dictators who won't lift a finger to stop children from peeing in my plane

flakeloaf posted:

His argument about social services being overburdened stood up perfectly well on its own. Shame that wasn't the point he wanted to make

Yeah, there's always an argument to be made that where refugees arrive in great numbers, there is an unequal burden and it's fair to ask the governments in question to help spread the burden -- if not the refugees themselves, since, you know, they're human beings and you can't simply ship them wherever you wish -- more evenly. Mind you, I don't think he made the case the Quebec is uniquely burdened in this case -- merely stating that the numbers are higher than he wishes them to be. How do they compare to refugee arrivals elsewhere?

But in the end, he could not help himself from saying "really, the main problem is how this hampers our plan to re-write Montreal's history as a city for white French people, which is something it has never been but we think it should be." It's no mistake that he mentions it "puts pressure ... most notably in Montreal" because that is the cosmopolitan melting pot that proves Quebec is not and has never been the white French ethnostate his brain-damaged fellow reactionaries want to believe it is.

# ? Feb 21, 2023 18:12

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 8, 2024 02:30

COPE 27: Sep 11, 2006

PT6A posted:

they're human beings and you can't simply ship them wherever you wish

New York: Hold My Beer

# ? Feb 21, 2023 18:20

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > CanPol 2024: The chamber of sober posting second thought

«‹›860 »