SamuelRJankis @ SamuelRJankis @lemmy.world

Posts

60

Comments

260

Joined

2 yr. ago

They didn’t have a majority on the ER committee. So should they have unilaterally ignored the majority report of the other parties and just ram through their own preference for STV?

They had majority in the House. They chose how the committee was constructed.

I'm really amazed how the people with 44 seats is suppose more responsible for something than the people that had 184 seats.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_House_of_Commons_Special_Committee_on_Electoral_Reform#Establishment

The initial proposed structure of the Special Committee was three voting members allocated based on each official party's seats in the House (six Liberal members, three Conservative members, and one New Democratic member), with a member of the Bloc Québécois and Green Party leader Elizabeth May given additional non-voting seats.[6]

The structure of the Special Committee was criticized by the opposition party leaders, as the government would have possessed a majority of the committee seats and could unilaterally recommend alterations to the electoral system without the support of any other party. Interim Conservative leader Rona Ambrose, the Leader of the Official Opposition, denounced the plan as "stacking the deck", while Nathan Cullen, the NDP critic for Democratic Institutions, urged the government to reconsider this plan as well. The Green Party and Bloc Québécois additionally objected to their lack of voting representation on the committee.[7]

On June 2, 2016, Monsef announced that the government would support a motion by Cullen to alter the structure of the committee to have seats allocated based on percentage of the nationwide popular vote in the 2015 election and give the Bloc Québécois and Greens one voting seat each on the committee.[8][9] The Liberal caucus on the committee would have in effect only four voting members, as the chair would not vote unless there was a tie.[10]

 

Further references.

2015 Election results: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Canadian_federal_election

Timeline: https://globalnews.ca/news/3102270/justin-trudeau-liberals-electoral-reform-changing-promises/

Given that the Liberals had majority at that point I think that instance is on them.

Just going to point out the source website is pretty questionable. Also a quick google search doesn't seem to yield much results.

I'm probably voting for NDP whenever they decide to call a election. I don't think Jagmeet is going to be a good PM but if he can deliver voting reform that's a lot more than I'd expect from anyone else.

As someone who looks at a lot of data and charts I don't remember seeing any charts where Canada isn't gotten noticeably worse compared other G7 countries.

I actually find it hard to believe people don't think Trudeau's leadership has been a very significant problem for this country. It's just laughable that anyone thinks Pierre is better.

While I agree with the sentiment I don't think being a public service should exclude them from being scrutinized.

The corporation cites declining revenue from delivery of letter mail and parcels, despite an increase in the volume of packages the company is delivering.

Letter mail has been declining since it peaked in 2006. Canada Post delivered less than 2.2 billion letters in 2023.

The cost of delivering mail and parcels is increasing, the company said. Canada Post has struggled to compete post-pandemic with the rising number of new, privately owned delivery companies that use what it calls a "low-cost labour" business model.

I think it was more controversial in 2014, but at a near 2 decade decline of letter mail volume thinking about reducing door to door letter services with community mailboxes seems pretty reasonable thing to at least discuss.

As far as competing with companies that are known for creating a job environment where their "contractors" have to piss in bottles. I don't think is a Canada Post issue.

I'd put some good money down that this statement isn't true if anyone taking bets for it.

CNL said it's "confident that the non-compliant discharge from the sewage treatment facility does not pose a threat to the environment or the public."

Just a random thing. Isn't it crazy Loblaws doesn't accept Amex.

T&T even accepts Alipay and WeChat pay.

Just skipping the conversation whether he's better than the current Prime Minister I think everyone should be able to agree the Pierre is a idiot.

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/pierre-poilievre-weighs-in-on-bc-ndp-plan-to-recriminalize-public-drug-use-1.6866945

“Even nurses are having to give up on breastfeeding because they’re worried their kids will be contaminated with drugs they breathe in. What the hell they thinking over there?” said Poilievre.

There's somewhat small blurb at the end stating what sectors actually saw change, but overall the article is to clearly to convey BoC should lower rates soon as it's mentioned three times in a rather short article.

For anyone who actually wants to know what changed the data is on Stat Can - https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/t1/tbl1/en/tv.action?pid=3610043402

If anyone is wondering what this is about:

Alberta is seeking powers to veto funding agreements between the federal government and provincial entities, including postsecondary institutions.

Just to pull a number out of my ass I think we're 10 years away having enough people vote for affordability to actually have politicians implement any sincere policies meant to make housing affordable.

There's a Chinese proverb: Winners are kings and losers are bandits.

I'm really not to hung up on the wording of how the money ends up in who's pockets most people think they're the good guy. I just wonder if really have to wait until things get so much worse before we can get a majority on housing affordability.

It's amazing how much money is made every year in real estate and how much the average Canadian is willing to draw from for affordability.

Few of us realize the extent of profit involved in the rising prices, and that’s the last thing Poilievre wants to talk about. Economist Jim Stanford notes that the real estate sector took after-tax net profit of $55.8 billion in 2022 – up 65 per cent from 2019. It remains at a historically high $48.5 billion in 2023. On top of that, construction profits are almost 50 per cent higher than pre-pandemic levels, totalling $31.2 billion in 2023. The amounts are simply staggering.

Credit bureaus are testing the inclusion of rent payments in credit scores, saying it’s a positive move launched by Ottawa.

Translation: The 2 private companies that monopolize peoples credit ratings says they're very happy that the federal government pushed even more business and influence their way.

For anyone wondering. If you wish to make a complaint, contact your provincial or territorial consumer affairs office. The federal government doesn’t regulate credit bureaus.

It's on you, now.

I think you're mistaken.

If the Conservatives win and things get real bad the vast majority will still believe it's better than the Liberals running things another term as it would lead to the literal apocalypse.

The reverse would is also true if the Liberals won. As things get worse people are becoming hyper fixated on the small/short terms things when we need to look at the larger systematic problems.

I wonder how accurate this number will be.

Freeland will hike capital gain taxes paid by the rich and corporations to collect an estimated $19 billion in new revenue.

Much of the tax system that favors using housing as a investment is from the federal level as well as the demand side. You get taxed more for building average dwelling then you would flipping a place.

At no point did I state it was entirely the federal governments fault, they're the ones that said they would do something about it.

Main federal parties all say they'll make housing more affordable. Here's what we know about their plans

I don't think anyone can say the current federal government has done anything but shrugged off responsibly for housing affordability even though they campaigned on it and thrown money at the problem.

In this instance they're just getting Canadian to tie in even more of their future financial well being into their dwellings.

The federal government will allow 30-year amortization periods on insured mortgages for certain first-time homebuyers, Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland announced Thursday.

Freeland also said the government will nearly double to $60,000 the amount first-time home buyers can withdraw from RRSPs to buy a home. That's up from $35,000, to take effect April 16, the day the federal budget is set to be released.

Funny thing. It seems you can be both a public servant and still take in that sweet contracting money. To top it off the guy was a PPC candidate, this government is so incompetent it doesn't even embezzle properly.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/dalian-enterprise-millions-government-contracts-1.7130206