On immigration, it might be good to point out that Canada has a jurisdictional problem - Provinces wanted immigration and the Federal government turned on the taps. The problems that came up, especially housing, were in provincial jurisdiction and the provinces did not do their job. The boom in international students for post-secondary saved the provinces from properly funding Universities, but the province did not expand student residences.
It might be more accurate to say the Feds accepted blame for provincial failures
The provinces, particularly ones with conservative governments, lead the charge in laying the blame for the downsides of immigration on the Federal Government. They did so while continuing to ask for even higher immigration.
It should have been so easy to reverse the issue and turned it into a provincial problem. When the issue started bubbling and the provinces started complaining, all Trudeau needed to do was announce that he agreed, and that immigration would be limited until Alberta actually built some new schools and hospitals to serve them, and Ontario built housing for them to live in. I would have loved to the provinces try and publicly demand higher immigration while trying to justify their lack of infrastructure investment
But Trudeau didn’t want that fight. So he took the blame the provinces were saddling him with him public, while still doing what they were asking for in private
Right. The play is to promise to help the provinces with planning so the ball does not get fumbled in the future. It is not good enough for the feds to promise to slow down immigration. The feds have to provide the quarterbacking for the provinces because they all face the same problems.
Agree. I know someone well who sounds like a red-hatter most of the time: their key concerns? Immigration quotas, unimployment, and far-left culture, in that order. Why? Because they see those issues, not their own choices, as the reason they are not more successful, with less effort. Yup.
If I had the secret for cracking that mindset, I’d willingly share it!
Immigration is a federal responsibility. It’s not the provinces who tweeted to the world inviting them to migrate to Canada. Roxham Road opened and operated by the federal government and would still be open to 100,000s if it had not been for Quebec premier Francois Legault screaming No more! We can’t handle more refugees. So they bussed them to Ontario. This out of control immigration has caused many serious problems in Canada as a result of the Liberal government mismanaging immigration.
I don't agree. The problems arise because those responsible - who had asked for more immigrants and were happy to take the money from the surge in international students -- did nothing to deal with the increases. Would it. have been hard? Not very. International students would have paid for residences that could have been converted later to seniors' housing, for example. The provinces had lots of land to build on, and now they say they want to. Lack of foresight is not a justification for abdicating on your responsibilities under the constitution. These are the Premiers who have been incredibly touchy about provincial rights and powers.
The fact that you think that Bell should be better or that he has any balls is evidence that you haven’t been exposed to his constant drivel. The man is, to put it succinctly, a lunatic.
Rick Bell is the Lorne Gunter of Richard Martineaus.
You deserved better.
As for issues on the campaign trail, the double self-own by Poilievre at playing live Hot Wheels and inviting Harper to intro him shows a lack of seriousness and focus rarely sern in Canadian elections.
On drugs, one problem is that no one knows what the causes of the problem are -- Family abuse? Poverty? Schools? Lack of jobs? Work injuries?
Until the research is done and the specific channels are addressed, the problems cannot be solved. I would say "This is not one problem, it is ten. We will immediately fund different research programs in each province focusing on the real, specific problems, and use the results to develop strategies and programs to stamp out those problems. Vague talk and knee-jeerk solutions have failed. Panic is not an answer."
Depends on the problem you’re solving, and there’s a few different ones in play. One problem is “how can we help all the drug addicts no longer be addicts”. A second problem is “how can we stop the store windows on this street from being smashed every week”. These are not mutually exclusive problems
That first problem is incredibly difficult and nuanced. If you tell people who are primarily worried about the second problem that you’re not going to solve it unless you can solve the first problem, they’re going to vote for someone who promises to solve the second problem without caring if they solve the first problem or not
I care a lot about solving social issues, but I realize that if progressive voices don’t also prioritize dealing with the symptoms of those social issues no one will give us the opportunity to fix the root causes
Yes. The problem is really to find what makes people into addicts. Poilikevre chooses to focus on encouraging rage and fear instead of understanding and causes.
Could I shift that conversation if I were running? Probably not. It would take a very concerted effort by a party that was very clear about its message.
Only in Alberta would Rick Bell, in all his pompous unintelligence and idiocy, have a platform for so long. His appeal is only to the unthinking UCP voter, looking for justification to still support the likes of traitor Dani or no security clearance PP.
I absolutely agree with your take on policy phrasing, and the debate.
For people who find it easier to be articulate and engaging in writing (including me) than speaking ex tempore, preparation and practice hugely impact your stress level and versatility in a debate situation.
I’m hoping Team Carney is all over this!
PS sorry to hear your writing was “called out” by a cowardly jerk! You write one of the best newsletters I follow!
What would you tell him to say about the CBC report about Brookfield’s interests which apparently infringe on aboriginal rights in various places around the globe. Sure, the assets they bought did the actual initial infringing, but what have they done about it? Is it possible that he didn’t know what his fund managers were up to?
I don’t think this will sink him by any means, but it does worry me.
See? I suggested the other day that Jennie & Co, may read your columns and sho enuf 😂
Pierre is squandering his valid criticisms of the Liberal gov by continuing to use his silly slogans “Liberal lost decade” 🙄 and the lies/name-calling (I think he called Carney a grifter today).
I am not even gonna mention that exchange w reporter Laura Stone? 😫 I wonder if other than Jenny and Anaida he’s ever had a casual convo with a female 😫
I wish he would talk like he’s trying to reach a more intelligent and sophisticated audience - to me, it seems like they know it’s gonna be hard to overcome the polls and he’s happy just pandering to his base but F them!
Ugh and I see Paul Wells is saying that Carney would not be doing as well is it were not for the insane tariffs 🙄
I think at this point the CP is getting ready to keep poisoning the minds of his followers for 4 more years. I don’t think that they will try to come back to the “Center”. I hope I am wrong!
And another thing I’ve been meaning to say, I don’t want the CBC to be defunded ever, but some of its on-air talent during the day/afternoon is just not v good - anyhow!
On immigration, it might be good to point out that Canada has a jurisdictional problem - Provinces wanted immigration and the Federal government turned on the taps. The problems that came up, especially housing, were in provincial jurisdiction and the provinces did not do their job. The boom in international students for post-secondary saved the provinces from properly funding Universities, but the province did not expand student residences.
The Feds got blamed for provincial failures.
“The Feds got blamed for provincial failures”
It might be more accurate to say the Feds accepted blame for provincial failures
The provinces, particularly ones with conservative governments, lead the charge in laying the blame for the downsides of immigration on the Federal Government. They did so while continuing to ask for even higher immigration.
It should have been so easy to reverse the issue and turned it into a provincial problem. When the issue started bubbling and the provinces started complaining, all Trudeau needed to do was announce that he agreed, and that immigration would be limited until Alberta actually built some new schools and hospitals to serve them, and Ontario built housing for them to live in. I would have loved to the provinces try and publicly demand higher immigration while trying to justify their lack of infrastructure investment
But Trudeau didn’t want that fight. So he took the blame the provinces were saddling him with him public, while still doing what they were asking for in private
I agree completely, and have muttered as much to the few who listen to me. I thought the right play was obvious.
Fair comment, but maybe not a great time to blame the provinces when the big plan requires provincial unity and cooperation.
Right. The play is to promise to help the provinces with planning so the ball does not get fumbled in the future. It is not good enough for the feds to promise to slow down immigration. The feds have to provide the quarterbacking for the provinces because they all face the same problems.
Agree. I know someone well who sounds like a red-hatter most of the time: their key concerns? Immigration quotas, unimployment, and far-left culture, in that order. Why? Because they see those issues, not their own choices, as the reason they are not more successful, with less effort. Yup.
If I had the secret for cracking that mindset, I’d willingly share it!
Immigration is a federal responsibility. It’s not the provinces who tweeted to the world inviting them to migrate to Canada. Roxham Road opened and operated by the federal government and would still be open to 100,000s if it had not been for Quebec premier Francois Legault screaming No more! We can’t handle more refugees. So they bussed them to Ontario. This out of control immigration has caused many serious problems in Canada as a result of the Liberal government mismanaging immigration.
I don't agree. The problems arise because those responsible - who had asked for more immigrants and were happy to take the money from the surge in international students -- did nothing to deal with the increases. Would it. have been hard? Not very. International students would have paid for residences that could have been converted later to seniors' housing, for example. The provinces had lots of land to build on, and now they say they want to. Lack of foresight is not a justification for abdicating on your responsibilities under the constitution. These are the Premiers who have been incredibly touchy about provincial rights and powers.
100%
The fact that you think that Bell should be better or that he has any balls is evidence that you haven’t been exposed to his constant drivel. The man is, to put it succinctly, a lunatic.
Rick Bell is the Lorne Gunter of Richard Martineaus.
You deserved better.
As for issues on the campaign trail, the double self-own by Poilievre at playing live Hot Wheels and inviting Harper to intro him shows a lack of seriousness and focus rarely sern in Canadian elections.
Who is Rick Bell and why should I care?
Opinion writer in Alberta I think
On drugs, one problem is that no one knows what the causes of the problem are -- Family abuse? Poverty? Schools? Lack of jobs? Work injuries?
Until the research is done and the specific channels are addressed, the problems cannot be solved. I would say "This is not one problem, it is ten. We will immediately fund different research programs in each province focusing on the real, specific problems, and use the results to develop strategies and programs to stamp out those problems. Vague talk and knee-jeerk solutions have failed. Panic is not an answer."
Maybe some people just like to get high?
Sure. By itself, that is not a problem, though. Why does it become a social problem with some people?
Depends on the problem you’re solving, and there’s a few different ones in play. One problem is “how can we help all the drug addicts no longer be addicts”. A second problem is “how can we stop the store windows on this street from being smashed every week”. These are not mutually exclusive problems
That first problem is incredibly difficult and nuanced. If you tell people who are primarily worried about the second problem that you’re not going to solve it unless you can solve the first problem, they’re going to vote for someone who promises to solve the second problem without caring if they solve the first problem or not
I care a lot about solving social issues, but I realize that if progressive voices don’t also prioritize dealing with the symptoms of those social issues no one will give us the opportunity to fix the root causes
Yes. The problem is really to find what makes people into addicts. Poilikevre chooses to focus on encouraging rage and fear instead of understanding and causes.
Could I shift that conversation if I were running? Probably not. It would take a very concerted effort by a party that was very clear about its message.
Only in Alberta would Rick Bell, in all his pompous unintelligence and idiocy, have a platform for so long. His appeal is only to the unthinking UCP voter, looking for justification to still support the likes of traitor Dani or no security clearance PP.
I absolutely agree with your take on policy phrasing, and the debate.
For people who find it easier to be articulate and engaging in writing (including me) than speaking ex tempore, preparation and practice hugely impact your stress level and versatility in a debate situation.
I’m hoping Team Carney is all over this!
PS sorry to hear your writing was “called out” by a cowardly jerk! You write one of the best newsletters I follow!
Your pen to Carney's/his debate prep's ears!!
You need to be on Carney’s team.
What would you tell him to say about the CBC report about Brookfield’s interests which apparently infringe on aboriginal rights in various places around the globe. Sure, the assets they bought did the actual initial infringing, but what have they done about it? Is it possible that he didn’t know what his fund managers were up to?
I don’t think this will sink him by any means, but it does worry me.
See? I suggested the other day that Jennie & Co, may read your columns and sho enuf 😂
Pierre is squandering his valid criticisms of the Liberal gov by continuing to use his silly slogans “Liberal lost decade” 🙄 and the lies/name-calling (I think he called Carney a grifter today).
I am not even gonna mention that exchange w reporter Laura Stone? 😫 I wonder if other than Jenny and Anaida he’s ever had a casual convo with a female 😫
I wish he would talk like he’s trying to reach a more intelligent and sophisticated audience - to me, it seems like they know it’s gonna be hard to overcome the polls and he’s happy just pandering to his base but F them!
Ugh and I see Paul Wells is saying that Carney would not be doing as well is it were not for the insane tariffs 🙄
I think at this point the CP is getting ready to keep poisoning the minds of his followers for 4 more years. I don’t think that they will try to come back to the “Center”. I hope I am wrong!
And another thing I’ve been meaning to say, I don’t want the CBC to be defunded ever, but some of its on-air talent during the day/afternoon is just not v good - anyhow!
Loved the Bell rant
Underfunded in BC? I am surprised - they get a nice, hefty, ballooning budget in Qc