CanPol Megathread: Big Changus

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > CanPol Megathread: Big Changus

«‹›29 »

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

I think you missed my point, but I don't disagree with what you're saying.

# ¿ Nov 15, 2015 19:38

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 22, 2024 04:44

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

Dallan Invictus posted:

Fair enough. I think I just have a reflexive reaction to the "we can't tip the scales so don't even bother" argument because it applies in so many other contexts than most people who ever use it think it does, and it won't carry the day for anyone who thinks that campaign is worthwhile, much the same way it does not carry the day for anyone who thinks any other collective initiative is worthwhile.

I'm sure you have other objections to the ISIS campaign and frankly I'm pretty on board with everything Wells is saying in his column (as usual) - while I am more open than most of you to the possibility that military intervention in situations like this can be helpful in theory, Western domestic politics mean it is vanishingly unlikely to be done in the way that is necessary for it to be helpful in practice.

I object to a few Canadian bombers being the key contribution of Canada to combating ISIS, instead of helping train troops and provide humanitarian care which is what this government wants to do and is getting attacked in the press for it. ISIS is a regional problem that's spilled into the global community. The best way to deal with it is by involving the regional powers in pacifying ISIS and protecting the innocent people caught up in a civil war turned ethnic cleansing.

# ¿ Nov 15, 2015 20:49

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

There was a good interview on the Sunday Edition this morning talking about the various strategies of ISIS, including stirring up Islamaphobia in the West to alienate Muslims living there and make them easier targets for recruitment. It's an obvious tactic, but one I haven't thought much about.

http://www.cbc.ca/radio/thesundayedition/special-program-dedicated-to-the-paris-attacks-1.3319706

Dreylad fucked around with this message at 00:50 on Nov 16, 2015

# ¿ Nov 16, 2015 00:42

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

Helsing posted:

Taking a page from that terrible mid-2000s Christian Bale movie, the Trudeau Liberals announce that all New Canadians and refugees with be forced to take mandatory tokes of BC bud throughout the day to keep them passive and docile.

Equilibrium was a great movie and gun-kata was really interfffahahah sorry I couldn't keep going

# ¿ Nov 16, 2015 01:41

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

Heavy neutrino posted:

Are you trolling? None of the articles you posted are about a (your words) "known islamic centre that is radicalizing canadians to go over and fight for ISIS" (only one sentence in the first article refers neutrally to a "downtown Calgary mosque"), and when someone asks you how the hell that demonstrates a "known islamic centre that is radicalizing canadians to go over and fight for ISIS", you accuse them of being intentionally obtuse and go on a tirade against D&D?

How stupid are you?

http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3748577&userid=166032

# ¿ Nov 16, 2015 02:11

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

PT6A posted:

I'd say that there's probably links between that Islamic centre and the people who went to fight with Daesh. I don't suspect for a second it's some kind of a front for Daesh, but I think it may have been used as a recruiting ground by an unaffiliated Daesh operative/sympathizer.

https://news.vice.com/video/homegrown-radicals

VICE investigated the center a while back, and talked to some of the people who work there and knew the Canadians who went over to Syria.

# ¿ Nov 16, 2015 02:22

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

From a national security viewpoint, it's better to leave a place with suspected/known ties to terrorist cells open than to shut it down and drive any links you could monitor underground.

And I don't know if closing down an Islamic Center would survive a charter challenge.

# ¿ Nov 16, 2015 02:39

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

not everyone's been to Boustan, buddy.

# ¿ Nov 16, 2015 03:15

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

PT6A posted:

Is it still good? I was only there once since it changed ownership, it seemed mostly the same.

Man, that poo poo tasted good. I miss it.

Yeah still as good as it's ever been.

# ¿ Nov 16, 2015 04:18

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

I was wrong earlier about the Sunday Edition discussing the goal of anti-Islamic backlash in the west. Here it is on the 180:

http://www.cbc.ca/radio/the180/pari...iment-1.3319618

quote:

When ISIS launches attacks like the one we've just seen in Paris, what are they trying to accomplish?

I think what ISIS wants to do is provoke a right-wing backlash against refugees and immigrant communities that come from Islamic countries, because that conflict gives credence to their world view that there is a war between the West and Islam. This Islamophobic backlash that we see happening is exactly what they want. They think that this will on the one hand, drive Europeans towards that right-wing point, and on the other hand, drive those communities towards them.

How would that work? How would a public backlash against refugees and Muslim communities in Europe affect the ability of ISIS to recruit people and gain public support?

ISIS believes they've set up this Islamic utopia, but all these Muslims are fleeing that Islamic utopia -- so that's kind of embarrassing to them. So they think that by provoking this kind of backlash, maybe it will lead people to sympathize with them more. Because then these people that are being welcomed in Europe will think, well, actually maybe we're not being welcomed in Europe. Maybe ISIS' world view is right, that there is this fundamental difference between our world and the West.

It's been getting most of the coverage, but Paris was not the only target of a terrorist attack this past week. Forty-three people were killed in Beirut on Thursday, and ISIS is claiming responsibility for that as well. What do you think ISIS was trying to accomplish with the Beirut attack?

I actually spent a lot of my childhood in Beirut, so this issue is really close to my heart. I think that, basically, ISIS are operating under a similar logic everywhere, but in Beirut the circumstances are a bit different. You have about a million Syrian refugees in Beirut, and things are tense, but there is some kind of coexistence happening. What ISIS wants is to provoke Lebanese civilians...the sectarian warfare in Beirut is also in their interest and furthers their narrative, similar to what happened in Paris.

These attacks are operating under the same kind of logic and they're killing civilians in order to provoke backlash. They're killing civilians in order for communities to start fighting each other... We need to start seeing these as the same. ISIS is operating under the same logic everywhere, and we need solidarity with all of its victims, not some more than others.

# ¿ Nov 16, 2015 16:22

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

Helsing posted:

If only we made free trade agreements conditional on democratic reforms. Too bad our leaders were more interested in breaking the back of the labour movement rather than thinking about our long term national (or species) interests.

Our leaders found a fine way to fight Stalinist regimes after World War II, it was called the Marshal Plan and it helped make Europe one of the most stable, prosperous and free regions of the globe, as well as an enduring ally to North America. There was discussion of providing similar levels of aid to South America, Africa and Asia but instead we decided to rely on local strongmen, backed up with invasions and coups as necessary. It's really no wonder the Chinese government aren't willing to sacrifice their economic growth: the developed world is merciless toward any country that isn't strong enough to stand up for itself, and the Chinese know better than most what that entails.

I think you guys are missing the point: China isn't responsible for the majority of C02 emissions up to now. The effects of carbon emissions today wont be felt for 20 or 30 years, and the effects we're feeling now originated from some time ago. China's already getting hit pretty hard by climate change -- it is a country, like much of South East Asia that will get hit disproportionately hard by climate change: flooding, desertification of agricultural land, and shifting temperate zone.

The contention has always been that the BRIC countries aren't willing to take on the same emission cutting burden as the countries historically responsible for most of the emissions. They're not willing to curtail their economies and allow the traditional industrialized nations to continue enjoy the economic supremacy they've enjoyed over the last 200 years because they got to industrialize first. Any long-term solution to climate change requires their cooperation since they're future leaders in carbon emissions, so it comes down to all countries to try to figure out a way to allow countries to industrialize in a sustainable way, or find some other path to economic abundance that we enjoy without industrialization, if such a thing is possible.

And most importantly, as people realize we aren't going to meet our C02 emission goals, the conversation is going to turn towards how to artificially keep the average global temperature below triggering any catastrophic positive feedback loops. Which means trying to hash out some kind of global deal on geo-engineering so that we don't have rogue countries or rogue capitalists trying to save themselves without understanding any unintended consequences of their science project.

# ¿ Nov 17, 2015 03:06

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

OSI bean dip posted:

China already seeds clouds on a regular basis so I wouldn't rule them out as trying to proceed forward without taking anybody else's opinion into account.

Hadn't heard about that. That's not good.

All I heard about was the deranged businessman who decided to try iron seeding in Canadian waters.

Also our government knew about it.

# ¿ Nov 17, 2015 03:11

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

Mill Street didn't have a lot of competition in Ontario I think which is why it got away tasting like it does. Beau's is fine if overpriced, but honestly I think everyone would drink Quebec beer if they could.

# ¿ Nov 17, 2015 05:16

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

PT6A posted:

What I've had of Driftwood is indeed superb, but to call DDC "faux-Belgian" is outright insanity. They can do Belgian-style as well as anyone, but they also offer very solid renditions of the West Coast IPA and Double IPA, as well as good pilsner, and even Berliner-style sour, in addition to flavoured stouts, normal stouts, imperial stouts, and flavoured imperial stouts. Then, if you go to the pub instead of buying the bottles, they'll offer up wonderful oddities like a green tea-flavoured wheat bear (which sounds disgusting, but is in fact the greatest thing ever). Or they'll give into whimsy and combine a fine IPA with a cream ale, to create a nicely balanced, yet hoppy India Cream Ale.

Basically what I'm getting as is: we need to have a showdown between Driftwood and DDC and we need to be the judges. There's so much amazingly fantastic beer in this country BUT NONE OF IT loving COMES FROM ALBERTA, because everyone in this province has a child's palate. That's why I'm against the new tax structure: because we're literally protecting the least competent brewers in the entire goddamn country.

Beau's, to me, has the same creative approach as DDC and if you get a chance you should try some of their beer. Not as world class, and with less selection though since I think they're a smaller operation. Although chances are all you'll be able to get is Lug Tread.

# ¿ Nov 17, 2015 17:23

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

All of Canada can be seen as a historically specific order of rule, following a socio-political logic: liberalism.

(I think only Hand Knit will get this)

# ¿ Nov 18, 2015 06:45

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

Whiskey Sours posted:

Western governments arm and train the Kurds.

The Kurds declare war on Turkey, a member of NATO.

Western governments declare war on the Kurds.

Yeah, and especially with this most recent election in Turkey the idea of Turkey accepting a Kurdish state right on their border is even less likely. Turkey's headed in a pretty dark direction and there's not much anyone can do about it, unless the rest of NATO was able to apply some serious pressure on the Turkish government.

Jordan7hm posted:

Farm Boy is good so that's good.

What a stupid loving system though.

How Ontario gets it so wrong when neighbouring Quebec gets it so right is beyond me.

Dreylad fucked around with this message at 19:14 on Nov 18, 2015

# ¿ Nov 18, 2015 19:11

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

I've noticed a ton of new breweries east of Toronto but 200 in Ontario alone? Holy crap that's a lot of craft breweries. I wonder how many the ~market~ can really support.

Was the big boom after 2007-2008? Because I don't really remember many before I moved to Quebec, but when I came back there seemed to be tons.

# ¿ Nov 19, 2015 17:28

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

saints gambit posted:

Quality will get better too, which is a pet project of mine.

Quality of ingredients, product, or both?

In my pet product I've been trying to get some local farmers I know to consider growing hops/barley/etc with the growth of the craft beer industry in Durham, but it's still not as lucrative year-to-year as cash crops like soy and corn.

# ¿ Nov 19, 2015 18:37

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

saints gambit posted:

Products, processes. I'm giving everyone quality constructive feedback when I can. I trained as a brewer so I'm a fresh set of eyes.

Ingredients, I don't know. I think Ontario is going to have a pretty significant learning curve on hops especially. Odd varieties grow here with slightly different flavours and aromas. We probably can't grow the really popular west coast stuff, but we'll have other stuff for sure and it'll add a colour to the palette so to speak.

From a growing perspective, the shifting climate is opening up land that wouldn't be any good for hop growing normally. If we can stop paving over good farmland I think there'd be a decent market for brewers to buy locally, if they could afford it. But I have to admit I'm ignorant from a brewer's perspective in the impact soil, water, etc. has on the flavour of the crop.

# ¿ Nov 19, 2015 21:08

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

Albino Squirrel posted:

Meanwhile, the Mennonite Central Committee has been fundraising for months to sponsor Syrian refugees to come to Canada. I can see them asking this guy, 'why are you so much more of an rear end in a top hat than the other Christians we know?'

If anyone listened to Metro Morning in Toronto a month or two ago, Fairlawn United Church that's been trying to get their sponsored family into the country are expecting them by Christmas. :unsmith:

# ¿ Nov 20, 2015 07:05

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

Stretch Marx posted:

Could you not, just once? Not every post needs to be wrapped back to the OLP. It's getting tiresome. We understand they are weasels. Your point has been made. Start a blog or something.

To be fair the last 10 years or so of these threads have been focused on Harper day after day so I think everyone should get to do their thing.

Brannock posted:

Is this prosecutable in any way?

No way. Even if they were entirely on the level you can't accurately predict how economic shifts might affect the government's projected revenue. When the Ontario Liberals first came to power they got the same rude awakening.

# ¿ Nov 20, 2015 18:31

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

sbaldrick posted:

It's legal but most of the people might be asked for to resignation, which is pretty easy in patronage appointments.

Let's look at the article that it's linking to since it provides more context:

quote:

Former Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper�s cabinet quietly stacked government agencies and Crown corporations with dozens of �future appointments,� and early appointment renewals in the dying days of its regime, many of which were only scheduled to go into effect long after the Conservatives were defeated, iPolitics has learned.

While some had been due to come up for renewal in November and December, others were renewed up to a year in advance of when they had been scheduled to expire and made effective the date the appointees� current term was due to end.

For example, Mark O�Neill�s term as director of the Canadian Museum of History wasn�t scheduled to expire until June 2016. Last June, Harper�s cabinet renewed his $212,700 to $250,200 a year job for five years, effective June 2016.

John Badowski�s appointment as chairman of the Transportation Appeal Tribunal was renewed July 28. The renewal takes effect Jan. 1, 2019, and runs until July 29, 2020. The position currently pays between $174,700 and $205,500.

A review by iPolitics of order in council appointments by the Harper government found 49 appointments were made in recent months but scheduled to only take effect after the Oct. 19 election. Of the 49 appointments, 15 went into effect between election day and November 22. Six take effect today.

Another 28 are slated to go into effect between November 26 and January 2019.

Of the 49 future appointments and early renewals, 29 were adopted in a single day � June 18, 2015. The earliest dates to November 2014 when National Farm Products Council member Michael Pickard�s mandate was renewed for three years, effective April 2016.

The move by Harper�s government constrains Liberal Prime Minister Justin Trudeau�s ability to put his government�s stamp on some key agencies like the National Energy Board, which regulates things like the construction of pipelines and the import of crude oil and natural gas.

For example, National Energy Board member Lyne Mercier was due to be renewed in December. Instead, Harper�s government renewed the appointment for seven years last June, effective in December. In July, Keith Chaulk was appointed to the National Energy Board for seven years, effective Nov. 23. Both are scheduled to remain on the board until 2022.

Jacques Gauthier, a temporary member of the National Energy Board, was renewed in April, well before his mandated to expire in December. He is now to sit until 2018. Another temporary member, Michael Richmond, was renewed for three years last April, effective Nov. 1, the day his term was set to expire.

The moves mean that barring the future appointments or early renewals being rescinded, the Trudeau government will not be able to replace any temporary members of the National Energy Board until at least May 2018 and any permanent members of the NEB until January 2020 � which is after the next election.

Many of the future appointments could be hard to undo without risking litigation. Of the 49 early renewals and future appointments, 24 are conditional on �good behaviour,� meaning appointees can only be stripped of their positions for bad conduct.
Another 20 appointments, however, were made �during pleasure� meaning the government can terminate the appointment for little or no reason.

One reappointment, of honourary consul Ricardo Guimaraes, which takes effect in December, can be cancelled by either side on 60 days notice. Four appointments do not spell out the terms of the appointment.

While some governor in council appointments are full time jobs with six figure salaries, others may be part time jobs paid per diems of a few hundred dollars each time they attend a meeting.

Governments appointments in the dying days of an administration has at times been controversial.

In the 1984 election campaign, former Conservative Leader Brian Mulroney politically eviscerated former Liberal Prime Minister John Turner for making dozens of appointments that went into effect just before he called the election. The controversy over the appointments contributed to Mulroney winning the election in a landslide.

Liberal Senator Percy Downe, who handled appointments for three years for former Prime Minister Jean Chr�tien before then becoming his chief of staff, says making appointments that run into the next government�s mandate is �unbelievable� and unprecedented.
�The longstanding tradition has been that a current government can�t bind a future government�.You don�t make appointments that are two years ahead of time on the eve of an election.�

Downe said reappointments would normally only be done two or three months ahead of time and was surprised to learn that some reappointments done by Harper�s cabinet only take effect more than a year later.

�That�s way in advance. That�s unbelievable.�

Downe is particularly concerned by the Harper government�s move to block the Trudeau government from making any appointments to the National Energy Board for several years.

�I have never heard of the like of that ever � that�s amazing, that�s a big story. Particularly with the National Energy Board they were trying to tie the hands of the future government which is not fair game at all.�

Downe said he believes the government can cancel the appointments, if it desires, even the ones that were made subject to good behaviour.

�The bad conduct may simply be the way it was done. It�s unprecedented to do appointments years ahead of time.�

Cory Hann, spokesman for interim Conservative Leader Rona Ambrose, said it will be up to the Liberal government to decide what to do.

�It will be up to the current government to determine if it wishes to overturn any appointments or re-appointments made by the previous government.�

Officials from the prime minister�s office have not yet responded to questions from iPolitics.

The list is at the bottom of the article. And it looks like this has happened in the past -- 30 years ago. Some of these appointments can be overturned, others can't without risking litigation (or proof of bad behaviour).

It includes the head of Via Rail, Canada Post, Human Rights Tribunal, the heads of both Canadian History Museum and Natural History Museum, the National Energy Board as the article mentions, and the Immigration Refugee Board. At a glance most of the appointees to Crown Corporations can be dismissed at will.

Dreylad fucked around with this message at 21:04 on Nov 23, 2015

# ¿ Nov 23, 2015 21:00

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

The RCMP sighed as it dusted off its Fruit Machine.

edit: aw god dammit THC

# ¿ Nov 23, 2015 21:30

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

Sedge and Bee posted:

Seriously though, I would like to echo the sentiment that your analysis is top notch, especially with the post election NDP.

I'm struggling to think of any decent post election analysis of the NDP that was good in the broader Canadian media.

Helsing posted one article, but honestly I thought it had some serious problems.

# ¿ Nov 26, 2015 22:09

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

I see you guys recognized that soil quality has a big impact on agriculture and we can't just build farming bunkers to replace industrial agriculture. Whether we like it or not our food supply depends heavily on huge swathes of corn, soy, and wheat production that we can't replicate below ground or in poor soil.

Anyway:

Helsing posted:

I'll repost that article later and we can hash out your problems with it. Might be a better basis for the discussion than my ramblings.

I got this!

quote:

Untangling the #hashtagfail-lings of the NDP campaign
BY NORA LORETO | OCTOBER 28, 2015

There's been an awful lot written about the NDP's election performance, and the errors were so seemingly obvious, that most of the analysis coalesces around the same narrative: the party has swung too far to the right. That�s true, but it's only part of the story.

The NDP lost almost 30 per cent of the voter share they won in 2015 (almost 1 million votes). Anyone who was inspired to vote for the first time most likely voted Liberal: their vote share increased by 60 per cent, or just over 4 million votes. The Conservatives' vote remained stable and the Bloc vote decreased. Despite this, the Conservatives and the Bloc managed to significantly increase their support in Quebec.

Would a more left-wing NDP have been more successful?

Maybe, but this isn't the right question. In fact, this question is so theoretical that it leads progressive pundits into the territory of fantasy writing. The Left is already dangerously disconnected from average people: we need a better understanding of where the NDP is to be able to know what needs to happen to get the party to be "further left."

The NDP doesn't currently have the capacity to be much more progressive than they were during this election. Many of the folks who analyzed the failures of the NDP hung their theses on the assumption that being progressive is something that can be switched on and off at party HQ.

Progressive politics must be built, not announced. Systems were in motion for too long for the NDP to have been able to change course for this election.

The NDP didn't drift to the centre when it promised to balance the budget, or when it elected Mulcair as leader. As many have pointed out, the NDP's centrism is part of a decades-long slide that has ravished all aspects of the left, not just mainstream political parties.

The Liberals, as one of two governing parties in Ottawa, have the luxury to turn left or right at the whims of central command. They don't need to be in direct contact with their members. They can change their policies with the predictions of the pollsters and they won't be punished. In fact, they'll be lauded, if the gamble pays off.
The principal failure of the NDP was to form a strategy premised on the notion that they had this ability too. But they aren't the Liberals. They probably would have been skewered by the press if they had promised to run a $30 billion deficit.

It was the combination of a failure to communicate a progressive vision that was firm enough to convince Canadians that the NDP could beat Harper, and a failure of organizing between elections that sank the NDP.

Imagine if the NDP had organized its MPs to vocally oppose the Values Charter during the 2014 Quebec election. Imagine if they had allowed more of their MPs to intervene publicly on debates. Imagine if the party worked closer with social movement organizations and labour between 2011 and 2015 to build a relationship to withstand the fragility of poll-based politics.

Imagine if Angry Tom had made an appearance. Indeed, there is currency in a politician who is comfortable in his own skin, something that Mulcair didn't quite project during the 11-week campaign.

Where were the YouTube ad buys, the clever commercials and the risks that were taken in 2011? Why was the Pharmacare promise announced as if it were accidentally leaked by a backroom operative?

When the NDP announced it would run a balanced budget, where was the communications strategy addressing the resistance they should have anticipated? Who thought leading with announcing a balanced budget was a good idea? Was no one in the war room from Quebec who could have said "Um, guys, d�ficit z�ro won't play super well among progressives in that province..."

Why didn't the party assume that the knives would come out for them from the mainstream press the second there was a whiff that the NDP might form government?

The NDP's communications strategy should have anticipated these problems. It should have been bold and creative. It should have taken risks. It should have been sensitive to sentiment on the ground and acted accordingly. Instead, it was as if party operatives figured that they could win the election by hiding under some coats and hope that no one noticed when the laundry was brought into the PMO by an unwitting caretaker.

The #hashtagfail of a communications strategy was a shame for many reasons. It cost the party many talented MPs, especially the young Quebecers who proved that mainstream politics in Canada don't have to be a game limited to old men. It helped the Liberals create the false narrative that their plan outflanked the NDP platform to the left even though it didn't by any measure.

(Of course, collateral damage from the failed ONDP campaign in 2014 helped fuel this narrative, but that could have been managed as well. At the very least, that should have been anticipated and addressed through the national strategy.)

It was also a shame because it failed to communicate that the NDP was offering a platform that was more progressive than their 2011 platform; that Canadians would see new, national programs built (eventually...the two-term requirement was another strategic fail), get help for childcare (unless you're in Quebec...another strategic fail) and have your minimum wage increased (if you worked among the lowest-paid in the federally regulated industries). The promises were by no means bold, but they were better than both the Liberals' promises and the previous election's NDP platform.

While some pundits have incorrectly conflated "the left" with the NDP, this election truly was a win for progressive politics. Average people wanted Harper stopped. Average people wanted change. And, even though the change they chose was represented by the corruption-plagued, neo-Liberal Party of Canada, things are instantly better for millions of Canadians. At the very least, millions of Canadians can breathe easier knowing that the governing party is no longer radically (and in some cases religiously) opposed to their existence.

This is little comfort for the thousands of NDP activists who donated 11 weeks of their lives to this loss, and I think any analysis of the failures of the NDP campaign has to recognize their good work. It's time for the NDP's central command to be re-connected with the campaign doorknockers, the phone bankers, campaign managers and candidates, their families and friends, their co-workers, sports teammates, members of their places of worship and neighbours.

Enough with the insularist politicking. Leave that game to the ones who invented it. If the NDP wants to be the party of the left, it really needs to start acting like one.

Like this article? rabble is reader-supported journalism. Chip in to keep stories like these coming.

Dreylad posted:

I don't know, for some reason the article never seems to quite put its finger on what the Left is and what the NDP Left should be. We all have our own views about what leftist politics and policies should be, and those can range from the more libertarian to the more statist, along with the complexities of identity politics. But the article emphasizes a failure to communicate what the NDP ought to stand for when you've pointed out that the party leadership very consciously set out its platform well in advance. Is the NDP a leftist party with poor communication skills, or is it masquerading as one and needs to be changed within. The answer could be both, but I don't feel the article really reaches that conclusion.

Dreylad fucked around with this message at 17:15 on Nov 29, 2015

# ¿ Nov 29, 2015 17:11

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

PT6A posted:

I just had to deal with the CRA for some small questions about my tax return, and I don't understand why they get such a bad rap. They were exceedingly helpful and pleasant -- far more than the average "businessperson" I have to deal with -- and my issue was resolved quickly with minimal waiting on hold.

Maybe the government actually should run more things...

Every time I call them they always sound really thrilled that I'm actually calling them about HST or a business number. Maybe it's because I'm calling in October or November and not, you know, April 19th.

# ¿ Nov 30, 2015 19:27

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

Anyone else remember when it was discovered that the head of Library Archives Canada spent 4 grand on Spanish lessons 3 or 4 years ago which got him booted from that position (thankfully).

Good times.

# ¿ Dec 1, 2015 17:02

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

And so we were all permabanned after Lowtax got a visit from the RCMP.

# ¿ Dec 1, 2015 19:18

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

Helsing posted:

Apologies for dissapearing midway through a huge discussion I helped to instigate but I've been a bit swamped with work recently. I just wanted to check in and assure people I'll be back and posting long, verbose walls of text any day now.

Don't sweat it, it's not like the NDP's going to be doing much for the next four years :v:

# ¿ Dec 2, 2015 00:49

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

Supposedly the majority of relationships fall apart because of financial issues, so it's not completely crazy to think they weren't completely open with their fiances with one another.

People are bad with money, and any situation where one person controls all the finances can often be pretty disastrous.

# ¿ Dec 6, 2015 22:06

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

It's good some society is at least trying these policies out, even if only to learn that more about the implementation and how humans behave when they benefit from them.

Just like how Sweden's attempt to shift the criminality of buying sex had unintended consequences, sometimes the only way to learn about the outcomes of certain policies is to try them.

# ¿ Dec 7, 2015 05:07

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

Baronjutter posted:

You say this as if countries actually learn from each other's policy successes or failures. "It's different here". Failed policy pushed by politicians here? It will work here, we have a better financial system. Successful policy from another country? No, things are different here, it wouldn't work, we need a home grown solution.

To be fair, back when Obama was elected in 2008 and the debate over healthcare was getting going the New Yorker ran a pretty good article about the origins of public healthcare systems in various countries. The ultimate point was that public healthcare emerges as an institution in response to specific problems in that country and are all different because of that. "It's different here" is certainly an excuse used to not implement policies, but any policy lifted wholesale from another country without considering the particular context it's being brought into is doomed to fail.

Well, I guess it depends on how you define success or failure. In some respects South Africa adapting the reservation system in Canada for the apartheid system was very successful. :smith:

# ¿ Dec 7, 2015 06:34

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

I don't really care what people call themselves, I only care about what policies they support, personally. Political labels have long histories and are constantly being reinvented to suit new sets of political ideologies.

# ¿ Dec 8, 2015 06:29

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

Careful if you went there and did that you might..get slapped with a lawsuit :confused:

# ¿ Dec 8, 2015 21:57

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

It's amazing to me that the US has it worse than us for Internet, but having heard a few of my American friends talk about comcast/verizon it is in fact much worse. Somehow.

# ¿ Dec 9, 2015 16:05

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

Arivia posted:

@Nozh: Don't feel bad. As far as I know, CAMH generally does good work with addiction and most mental health issues. Trans care has just been their terrible dark secret for decades. It's why the Ontario government picked them as the central hub for trans services in the province, and why other health care professionals felt good about making referrals there: they're a quality institution that does great work in mental health across a wide range of specialties, it fits. No one just ever paid attention to them not following the international standards of care, etc etc.

I've donated time and money to CAMH and feel terrible that they've even touched conversion therapy but I'm determined to put whatever pressure I can to make sure they change their ways for the better and provide positive care to trans people.

Anyway, my girlfriend has been knitting like crazy to make touques and little stuffed polar bears for Syrian kids arriving in Toronto. Although the weather's been so mild they may not need them for a while yet.

Dreylad fucked around with this message at 22:46 on Dec 10, 2015

# ¿ Dec 10, 2015 22:40

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

I don't understand how you could read American political history, with its political machines, brokered party conventions, electoral college, and even the modern primary system and think that the American system tolerates political heterodoxy. If Canada's worse about this then it's a matter of degrees, not a wide gulf like he's suggesting.

# ¿ Dec 10, 2015 23:37

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

I am biased towards looking at the broader historical trend, rather than a narrow snapshot of the current political situation, but both the US and Canada have generally shifted towards more inclusive democratic systems when choosing representatives and leaders within political parties throughout the 20th century. The United States's political machines are more complex, but are the mercy of a broader range of interests, as we've seen with the GOP-backed candidates get ousted by Tea Party candidates. And the primary system is certainly better than brokered conventions - although the news today was that the GOP is considering a brokered convention - even though that still leaves candidate choice in the hands of a couple of states. On the other hand the electoral college still exists in the 21st century.

Canadian politics were dominated by nepotism, which rather than being seen as political corruption was how politicians did business and how the country was governed. As hilarious as it is to say when our current prime minister is the son of a former prime minister, things are a lot better, given how most parties are improving the ways local candidates are nominated and how leadership conventions are run. Not perfect by any means - given how at least two of the parties have intervened in the nomination of local candidates - but Canadians have a decent amount of say in who represents them, rather than having it decided for them. That's stymied by our FPTP system, but that's not something unique to Canada.

# ¿ Dec 11, 2015 00:01

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

The Ottawa Experimental Farm has been under threat from development for some time. Now with the new government it's time to see if they're serious about science:

quote:

If Trudeau�s serious about science, he�ll prove it with the Experimental Farm

by Pete Anderson

The debate underway over the future of a field at Ottawa�s Central Experimental Farm promises to shed light on the new Liberal government�s promises for real change, respect for scientists and a return to transparency.

Late last month, the Ottawa Hospital announced that public consultations will take place early next year regarding the design of a new Civic campus planned for experimental plots used in climate change research that feeds into the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. No consultations have been held in the year since John Baird announced that up to 60 acres would be severed from the Experimental Farm. Baird�s gift represents the worst impulses of his government: silencing scientists and eschewing transparency in decision-making.

In line with the Conservative government�s practices, only a small handful of civil servants with the NCC, the Ottawa Hospital and Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada were aware of the transfer before the press conference. Everyone from federal scientists to the provincial and municipal governments, the Friends of the Farm and the Farm�s Advisory Council were left in the dark.

When the Friends initially spoke out against the transfer, the Conservative government quietly threatened to dissolve them.

The scientists who have dedicated their working lives to decades-long international research projects on the composition of soil, tilling practices, and climate change learned they were losing their fields through the press release. When one scientist confronted his manager he was told �they [the NCC and Hospital] didn�t care� about the loss of invaluable research land.

Environment Minister Catherine McKenna � also the MP for Ottawa Centre, which includes the Experimental Farm � Heritage Minister M�lanie Joly and Agriculture Minister Lawrence MacAulay together have a unique opportunity to demonstrate their government�s commitment to science and governmental transparency in how they approach the future of the Experimental Farm.

The Central Experimental Farm is one of the longest continuously operating agricultural research stations in the world. Its soils are a rare and irreplaceable archive of 130 years of research in support of Canadian farmers. Its achievements include the development of Marquis wheat in the early twentieth century. More recently, its scientists have been taking part in an international partnership on the effects of climate change on agricultural practices.

Under the previous government, scientists were not allowed to speak about their research publicly, creating a vacuum around the important work underway on the threatened sixty acres. Any meaningful consultation must include a clear and honest statement of what is being lost.
Retired scientists in Canada and their international counterparts already have written against the severance. It�s time to give Canada�s federal agricultural scientists the opportunity to share their important research before it�s lost.

The Experimental Farm is a National Historic Site of Canada; the severance of 60 acres from the farm shows the weakness and ineffectiveness of federal heritage laws. The federal government can only protect heritage sites that it owns. If the federal government refuses to protect its own heritage sites, it sends a message that no one else should care for theirs, either.

At the core of the debate is transparency in government decision-making. Despite the Experimental Farm�s long-term management plan based on extensive public consultation, there was not even a single public consultation session before the severance was announced. Indeed, the Ottawa Hospital has fought, delayed and cancelled all attempts to hear from the public until now, insisting on no consultations until the land lease was finalized. The consultations planned for the new year are about the design � not the location � of a new campus. Any consultation that leaves the location off the table amounts to window-dressing.

During the election, Trudeau and the Liberals promised to bring real change to Ottawa, to respect government scientists, and to return transparency to the federal government. At the Central Experimental Farm, they have a golden opportunity to show Canadians what change ought to look like.

# ¿ Dec 12, 2015 01:44

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 22, 2024 04:44

Dreylad: Jun 19, 2001

Also for GTA people the Crombie report is out on the Greenbelt..

The committee focused on farmers' concerns that the current Greenbelt Plan's "protected countryside" emphasizes preservation of pastoral scenery, and has been indifferent to the needs of the agri-food sector:

quote:

Healthy Agricultural Economy
A recurring theme during this review was the need for an improved understanding of all the needs of the agricultural sector. As we heard during the consultations, �saving the land won�t save the farmer.� We believe that a complete agricultural system should include not only the agricultural land base, but also other elements of the agri-food sector that are essential to support a healthy agricultural economy over the long term. During the Coordinated Review, we heard about some key issues that could be addressed by such an approach. They include infrastructure, water management, succession planning for older farmers and access to agricultural land for new farmers.

From the executive summary:

quote:

Supporting Agriculture
The GGH [Greater Golden Horseshoe] has high-quality soils and climatic conditions that make it ideally suited for a wide range of crops and livestock, including the specialty crop areas in Niagara Region and Holland Marsh. These same qualities have also made this region a highly desirable place to live, from the original Aboriginal land users to the early settlers from Europe and the more recent immigrants from around the world. Agriculture today is a major contributor to Ontario�s economy, identity and way of life.
During the consultations for this review, many associations and individuals in the farming sector emphasized that farmland is a finite resource and the planning regime in the GGH needs strengthening to stem the ongoing loss of agricultural land to other land uses. We also heard concerns about threats to the viability of agriculture from speculative land investments, land use conflicts in near-urban areas, complex regulations and deficiencies in rural infrastructure.

Recognizing the fundamental importance of agriculture in the GGH, our recommendations focus on:

Promoting the identification, mapping and protection of an agricultural system throughout the region

Implementing stronger criteria to limit the loss and fragmentation of prime agricultural lands, particularly in the outer-ring municipalities beyond the Greenbelt

Supporting productive agriculture

Recognizing the importance of locally sourced food and urban agriculture

Integrating the needs of agriculture throughout the plans, for example when considering settlement area expansion, the rural economy, management of natural resources, infrastructure development, climate change and plan implementation

Applying an agriculture lens to other provincial policies and programs (such as climate change, transportation and infrastructure, financial tools, community improvement plans and education) to address the unique needs of agriculture in the GGH.

To me, the executive summary has a bunch of good recommendations, such as: protection of critical watersheds within the Greenbelt, including climate change considerations into future planning decisions, and addressing dirt dumping concerns - "improving the management of excess soil from development sites" - which has become a big problem in Durham region.

# ¿ Dec 12, 2015 05:56

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > CanPol Megathread: Big Changus

«‹›29 »