I think you are missing a key point here. The Conservatives have been lying about blind trusts, Carney’s holdings and ethic screens. The general public does not understand the mechanics of these and the Conservatives believe that if they repeat the lies often enough, people will start believing them (or at least believe there is some truth to the false accusations).
What you describe is a good faith response to a bad faith campaign. And this bad faith campaign will be persistent and will eventually win. We see it currently south of the border, you cannot win the public debate using polite good faith efforts when the other side is using bad faith efforts without shame.
Carney’s response must be head-on. Show me where I do not meet the ethics obligations. Threaten to start the defamation lawsuits.
We have no time for opportunistic politicians who put gaming the political system ahead of what will actually move the country forward.
When Pierre Polievre is ready to:
- get his highest level security clearance
- publish a comprehensive, fully budgeted plan with more words than pictures, constituting something to take Canada into a future that moves us past US dependence
-and actually have a seat in parliament...
THEN, I will consider taking seriously anything he has to say.
But until then, he's just another lobbyist, nattering away on the sideline, flogging his agenda by blathering on about his ideology, without regard to what we actually need in a leader.
A thoughtful piece, Evan. Thanks. Is there any danger of an IACA being captured by partisan or ideological interests - imagine Poilievre being PM for 10 years and appointing its members - and then becoming a Ken Starr-like entity waging war against specific political figures past or present? This seems a risk in an era where Maple MAGA is a significant force, but I don’t know much about the IACA and how it operates.
As someone who did not vote for the Liberals, I couldn’t give two shits about what PM Mark Carney owns. In fact, I hope all his investments do well. I’m more concerned that this “conflict of interest” is taking up all the oxygen in the room. There are far more important issues that Canadians need addressed:
- The 2 million people in Canada with expired visas
- The reckless increase in spending to support war in Ukraine and other EU interests that have zero benefit to Canadians
- The rampant drug problem killing off a generation of young people from coast to coast.
- The lack of investment in Canada beyond the federal government.
Some, even just a little traction on these issues would at least give Canadians a chance to tackle affordability, housing, employment, public finances, and Canada’s plummeting status as a world power.
I think you are missing a key point here. The Conservatives have been lying about blind trusts, Carney’s holdings and ethic screens. The general public does not understand the mechanics of these and the Conservatives believe that if they repeat the lies often enough, people will start believing them (or at least believe there is some truth to the false accusations).
What you describe is a good faith response to a bad faith campaign. And this bad faith campaign will be persistent and will eventually win. We see it currently south of the border, you cannot win the public debate using polite good faith efforts when the other side is using bad faith efforts without shame.
Carney’s response must be head-on. Show me where I do not meet the ethics obligations. Threaten to start the defamation lawsuits.
We have no time for opportunistic politicians who put gaming the political system ahead of what will actually move the country forward.
When Pierre Polievre is ready to:
- get his highest level security clearance
- publish a comprehensive, fully budgeted plan with more words than pictures, constituting something to take Canada into a future that moves us past US dependence
-and actually have a seat in parliament...
THEN, I will consider taking seriously anything he has to say.
But until then, he's just another lobbyist, nattering away on the sideline, flogging his agenda by blathering on about his ideology, without regard to what we actually need in a leader.
A thoughtful piece, Evan. Thanks. Is there any danger of an IACA being captured by partisan or ideological interests - imagine Poilievre being PM for 10 years and appointing its members - and then becoming a Ken Starr-like entity waging war against specific political figures past or present? This seems a risk in an era where Maple MAGA is a significant force, but I don’t know much about the IACA and how it operates.
As someone who did not vote for the Liberals, I couldn’t give two shits about what PM Mark Carney owns. In fact, I hope all his investments do well. I’m more concerned that this “conflict of interest” is taking up all the oxygen in the room. There are far more important issues that Canadians need addressed:
- The 2 million people in Canada with expired visas
- The reckless increase in spending to support war in Ukraine and other EU interests that have zero benefit to Canadians
- The rampant drug problem killing off a generation of young people from coast to coast.
- The lack of investment in Canada beyond the federal government.
Some, even just a little traction on these issues would at least give Canadians a chance to tackle affordability, housing, employment, public finances, and Canada’s plummeting status as a world power.