I made this comment in the last thread, but the new Ministers (particularly NES) are only interesting so far as what they do with it over the next couple months. If it’s business-as-usual mouthpieces for PMO decisions it will just sink the new members without any benefit. But NES in particular could use the opportunity to establish an independent policy platform to set up for a post-Trudeau world
I think the Anand's move could be explained by the fact that she is one of the reamining few decent performers and it makes more sense to put her in a position with more visibility like Minister of Transport than TBS President. The President of TBS a more senior position but the person occupied it works more in shawdow and get less exposure expose to the public. Also, Anand is known to have leadership's ambition. So, it is probably making sense for her as well to get more public exposure. I would be curious to seehow Anand and Champagne (who may have leadership's ambition as well) will try to position themselves now that Freeland is probably already starting to build her own leadership campaign. and has a lot of free time now to do so.
I'd trust your opinion over mine but my gut tells me that if Parliament gets prorogued in January and then a new MP/Cabinet tries to run the show until the fixed election date that will not be well received by voters. The well is too poisoned and people are clambering for an election.
That would have worked in early 2024, but I think the ship has sailed. Anyone who takes the mantle of PM in this manner is probably doomed.
This shuffle, or backfilling of open positions is not that exciting. No real surprises or big names, other than NES perhaps.
The bigger item is that the Canada-US relations minister role remains unfilled. The reason that started all the drama this week is still not addressed. In other words, there is more to come.
And it looks not more and more plausible that Trudeau wanted Freeland to take this role and her to remain deputy PM. It was never presented it as a lack of confidence in the finance minister. Freeland however saw it as an opportunity to exit cabinet and position herself for a leadership race. While twisting the knife a few times into the blindsided PM.
To some extent I have respect for this House of Cards (UK version) move by Freeland. It was perfectly executed and timed for maximum damage. At the same time, when you come for the PM, you better not miss. While Trudeau may be wounded, he still has a great deal of support in the party. Freeland will need this support if she wants to be his heir.
EDIT: Christie Clark is looking for something to do. Appoint her to be Canadian-US relations czar. A former premier that can coordinate the various currently freelancing premiers. Small L and small C conservative and the perfect revenge with respect to Freeland.
Having lived in BC during the CC era, I have little faith in her abilities. I will avoid the less charitable thoughts about her. The fact that Vice President Trump went out of his way to denigrate Freeland makes me think she was pretty good at her job.
I also lived in BC when Clark was premier and the main problem with her was that she was a conservative, like the rest of the "B.C. Liberal Party," (telltale early sign of the deluge of right wing subterfuge lying in wait) but was also a particularly noxious variation on that, i.e. perky cheerleader for the guys (what conservatives primarily are.) She excelled at the stereotype of airhead cutie pie.
Agreed about Freeland's competence but with our politics SO dumbed down now that the peanut gallery has descended into the House of Commons, and the likes of Joe Rogan reigns supreme (when the simple fact that he is friends with Alex Jones should immediately disqualify him from any political influence of any kind EVER), the fact of her being both female AND a Rhodes scholar is probably, depressingly, a complete negative. Sigh.
Freeland would be the better choice, but she has taken herself out of consideration. Freeland’s priorities are clear.
CC is a transactional politician and will have some clout with the premiers. She is a much better communicator than Freeland. She is looking to do something useful to do and make her case as a future Liberal leader.
What would you think of Carney in the role. I have no idea if he would take the job, and from what I read suggests that, given this last week, he would rather walk over ground glass rather than be affiliated with the current government. Then again, he might not be palatable to the next federal govt given his small and large L sensibilities. But other than CC, in your mind, does anyone come to mind?
Carney is too academic, analytical for the task at hand. Negotiating with the Trump administration has nothing to do with facts, economics or reality. He would not be a good choice, and clearly he is not keen to get involved at moment (or ever).
Perhaps a retired CEO with a wide network in the US business community?
Yes perhaps. But remember Lighthizer was an academic before his work with Trump. And I see that an acolyte of Lighthizer is the new trade rep. Your idea of someone from the world of business with a US network is a solid one. No-one comes to mind, but those aren't the waters in which I paddle. A former politican w business experience....Morneau? Too Lib?
Trump 2.0 negotiations will not be done by Lighthizer or similar. The demands by Trump are delusional. There is no meaningful problem at the US-Canada border. Trade surpluses are not subsidies. Tariffs are paid by US consumers. We are “negotiating” with somebody who is not connected to reality.
So this will be different. And probably needs a more public and media centric approach.
I made this comment in the last thread, but the new Ministers (particularly NES) are only interesting so far as what they do with it over the next couple months. If it’s business-as-usual mouthpieces for PMO decisions it will just sink the new members without any benefit. But NES in particular could use the opportunity to establish an independent policy platform to set up for a post-Trudeau world
I think the Anand's move could be explained by the fact that she is one of the reamining few decent performers and it makes more sense to put her in a position with more visibility like Minister of Transport than TBS President. The President of TBS a more senior position but the person occupied it works more in shawdow and get less exposure expose to the public. Also, Anand is known to have leadership's ambition. So, it is probably making sense for her as well to get more public exposure. I would be curious to seehow Anand and Champagne (who may have leadership's ambition as well) will try to position themselves now that Freeland is probably already starting to build her own leadership campaign. and has a lot of free time now to do so.
I'd trust your opinion over mine but my gut tells me that if Parliament gets prorogued in January and then a new MP/Cabinet tries to run the show until the fixed election date that will not be well received by voters. The well is too poisoned and people are clambering for an election.
That would have worked in early 2024, but I think the ship has sailed. Anyone who takes the mantle of PM in this manner is probably doomed.
if they prorogue, wouldn't the first chance for non-confidence be the speech from the throne?
I am an absolute moron, yes
This shuffle, or backfilling of open positions is not that exciting. No real surprises or big names, other than NES perhaps.
The bigger item is that the Canada-US relations minister role remains unfilled. The reason that started all the drama this week is still not addressed. In other words, there is more to come.
And it looks not more and more plausible that Trudeau wanted Freeland to take this role and her to remain deputy PM. It was never presented it as a lack of confidence in the finance minister. Freeland however saw it as an opportunity to exit cabinet and position herself for a leadership race. While twisting the knife a few times into the blindsided PM.
To some extent I have respect for this House of Cards (UK version) move by Freeland. It was perfectly executed and timed for maximum damage. At the same time, when you come for the PM, you better not miss. While Trudeau may be wounded, he still has a great deal of support in the party. Freeland will need this support if she wants to be his heir.
EDIT: Christie Clark is looking for something to do. Appoint her to be Canadian-US relations czar. A former premier that can coordinate the various currently freelancing premiers. Small L and small C conservative and the perfect revenge with respect to Freeland.
Having lived in BC during the CC era, I have little faith in her abilities. I will avoid the less charitable thoughts about her. The fact that Vice President Trump went out of his way to denigrate Freeland makes me think she was pretty good at her job.
I also lived in BC when Clark was premier and the main problem with her was that she was a conservative, like the rest of the "B.C. Liberal Party," (telltale early sign of the deluge of right wing subterfuge lying in wait) but was also a particularly noxious variation on that, i.e. perky cheerleader for the guys (what conservatives primarily are.) She excelled at the stereotype of airhead cutie pie.
Agreed about Freeland's competence but with our politics SO dumbed down now that the peanut gallery has descended into the House of Commons, and the likes of Joe Rogan reigns supreme (when the simple fact that he is friends with Alex Jones should immediately disqualify him from any political influence of any kind EVER), the fact of her being both female AND a Rhodes scholar is probably, depressingly, a complete negative. Sigh.
Freeland would be the better choice, but she has taken herself out of consideration. Freeland’s priorities are clear.
CC is a transactional politician and will have some clout with the premiers. She is a much better communicator than Freeland. She is looking to do something useful to do and make her case as a future Liberal leader.
And yes, I was I BC too and remember it well.
What would you think of Carney in the role. I have no idea if he would take the job, and from what I read suggests that, given this last week, he would rather walk over ground glass rather than be affiliated with the current government. Then again, he might not be palatable to the next federal govt given his small and large L sensibilities. But other than CC, in your mind, does anyone come to mind?
Carney is too academic, analytical for the task at hand. Negotiating with the Trump administration has nothing to do with facts, economics or reality. He would not be a good choice, and clearly he is not keen to get involved at moment (or ever).
Perhaps a retired CEO with a wide network in the US business community?
Yes perhaps. But remember Lighthizer was an academic before his work with Trump. And I see that an acolyte of Lighthizer is the new trade rep. Your idea of someone from the world of business with a US network is a solid one. No-one comes to mind, but those aren't the waters in which I paddle. A former politican w business experience....Morneau? Too Lib?
Trump 2.0 negotiations will not be done by Lighthizer or similar. The demands by Trump are delusional. There is no meaningful problem at the US-Canada border. Trade surpluses are not subsidies. Tariffs are paid by US consumers. We are “negotiating” with somebody who is not connected to reality.
So this will be different. And probably needs a more public and media centric approach.
.. you’ve scored your seat in the lifeboat .. well huzzah eh !
Women, Children, First Nations & Elders on deck salute your alacrity !
Have a nice day.. & drop a postcard when you get to th gitten place .. Safely