Justin Trudeau = Harper with a smile

1277 posts / 0 new
Last post
NorthReport

Trudeau in damage control over charity fees scandal

Trudeau has not talked about other controversial speaking fees he collected from school boards, which depend on taxes for their revenue, and labour unions, which depend on members' dues.

http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/sunnews/politics/archives/2013/06/20130616-...

janfromthebruce

SCHNEIDEREIT: Speaking of public cynicism, what's with Justin Trudeau?

First, they’ve been elected to take part in governing this nation, either with the party in power or as an opposition critic. Unless they’re an expert in arcane ancient Mesopotamian flora being paid to dazzle the Mesopotamian Ancient Botany Society with their smarts, I’d bet the subjects featured in virtually all these speaking engagements are issues of current concern in Canada.

Second, as NDP ethics critic Charlie Angus asked last week, “really, straight-up, whatever happened to the notion of public service?”

It’s been really strange to see Trudeau, who has so passionately championed re-engaging a public grown cynical about politicians’ self-serving ways, being so bloodlessly entrepreneurial in cashing in on his popularity.

Last, Trudeau’s longtime argument — that he always kept separate his roles as an MP and a professional speaker — never washed. I don’t mean the accounting, which I’m sure was above-board. Nor the precise details of how he was advertised or whether he referred to specific matters before the House of Commons. Simply put, politics is about almost everything. If you’re a professional politician, what you advocate matters, whether or not you claim your MP’s hat was officially off.

Exactly

As an aside, it’s interesting how much Trudeau seems to resist the notion he’s in demand as a speaker primarily due to his name, not his self-described superior speaking skills. No disrespect to the Papineau MP’s latter ability, but it’s a ridiculous position to take. Former teachers rarely pull in over $1 million in just a few years (which Trudeau did before entering politics), speaking on the importance of education and youth engagement in Canada, if they’re not named Trudeau.

Yes, let's be honest and not play coy

Despite all the criticism, however, Trudeau was having none of it — until last weekend.

Maybe the incongruities in his defence became apparent. Trudeau has said he stopped speaking for cash last spring, when first thinking about the federal Liberal leadership. But the New Brunswick fundraiser that caused the fuss was late last June, and Trudeau did a second paid speech in Ontario around the same time. Perhaps they were already booked when Trudeau eyed the leadership, but why then didn’t he simply waive his fees?

In any case, what Trudeau learns, if anything, from this episode will be interesting to see, both for him and his brand.

This is the problem when one is doing lies of omission (what one doesn't say) and lies of commission (what one did say), someone can check the facts. So in both situations just above, Trudeau was dishonest in trying to paint himself as Mr. Integrity and transparency.

 

janfromthebruce

Liberals offer Canadians chance to win $999 barbecue dinner with Justin Trudeau

oh puke

for 5 bucks you can get in on the Trudo-o BBQ raffle and eat a burger with Justin.

 

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Actually all you have to do is give the Liberals your name and contact info. Great data mining as well as a fundraiser. Its not like it is an original fundraising idea however.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Somebody reminded me of this over at the Huff Post; Tommy Douglas Cats story. I guess Trudeau is the leader of the White Cats, the voters are the mice, and we're the Bolsheviks! Lol!

janfromthebruce

One thing I missed in this vid of Trudeau and outing the Con interns as faking protest, was his drive by smear by painting the NDP with the same brush.

Run the video and see hims say Conservative or NPD - ah wait a minute, the NDP wasn't involved in this crap. He must have meant to say, "lib interns protesting NDP Leaders, like Jack Layton.

Mr. ethics will come to clean up Ottawa, one smear at a time.

Trudeau Protest Was Manned By Tory Interns And Organized By PMO

janfromthebruce

Well deserved shot - showing up and standing up and voting in support is what counts - not just for the photo-op.

If you don't show up you don't get the job.

The truce was short-lived, however, as Mulcair took shots at Trudeau after the ceremony for being absent during a vote on the NDP’s transgender rights bill in March.

Pride week: Premier Kathleen Wynne receives hero’s welcome at Church on Church

Brandy

I just joined Rabble and am late in getting in on the fun. When Justin T. first became Liberal leader, I cheered. I appreciated his father keeping us out of Vietnam and also refusing to hand over American immigrants to the American, Military, Industrial Complex.

I assumed that the son was taught well by his father.

I may have been wrong, no guarantee of that and no guarantee, like father, like son.

We shal see, I guess.

 

janfromthebruce

I don't see Trudeau Jr. like his dad at all. This guy can't be bothered to show up to vote, skips important votes to cash in on vampy speaking gigs, and has one of the worse attendance records. He has taken on nothing since being elected. So it appears Trudeau the young did not learn well from his father.

His father was a well read person who wrote books - Trudeau Jr. nothing.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

janfromthebruce wrote:

His father was a well read person who wrote books - Trudeau Jr. nothing.

Tom hasn't written any books either. Does that make him unsuitable to be PM? I am not sure but I don't think Harper has either.  Does this really mean that the only suitable politician to be PM is the dead Jack Layton?

wage zombie

I think the point is that Trudeau is cashing on his name while not living up to it.

nicky

That's very well put Mr Zombie.

i wish I had said it. In fact, now I probably will.

janfromthebruce

kropotkin1951 wrote:

janfromthebruce wrote:

His father was a well read person who wrote books - Trudeau Jr. nothing.

Tom hasn't written any books either. Does that make him unsuitable to be PM? I am not sure but I don't think Harper has either.  Does this really mean that the only suitable politician to be PM is the dead Jack Layton?

I was commenting on someone suggesting that Trudeau was well schooled by his father and like father like son. I disagreed and was comparing the two Trudeaus, Jr. and Sen.

And I agree with how wage zombie put it. It was exactly what I was getting at. Thanks, and without mallice.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

That is the reason I have in the past referred to him as Trudeau the Lesser.  I personally have never voted for the Liberals. The original Trudeaumania didn't impress me so why should it this time around.  The MSM created Trudeaumania and who knows they may do it again.

I find it interesting that there seems to be much admiration for Trudeau the Dictator amongst the board's resident social democrats. Me I wouldn't want either one of them to be PM.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Trudeau finally came out of the closet and stated that he supports all out marijuana legalization.

Do I expect the Liberals to follow through?..no.

But IF they make it part of their official platform in 2015,that'll be enough for me to vote PLC....Frankly,I don't give a shit if that turns out to be the only progressive move they make.

I'm tired of being labeled a fucking criminal because I prefer cannabis over alcohol....and I'd be more than delighted to spark up and blow my smoke in the Tories hard fascist face.

nakedApe42 nakedApe42's picture

alan smithee wrote:

Trudeau finally came out of the closet and stated that he supports all out marijuana legalization.

Do I expect the Liberals to follow through?..no.

Paul Martin was on the verge of decriminalizing weed back in 2006 because a court ruling struck down the law. Then Harper came to power and decided to wage a war on drugs. (6 month mandatory jail sentence for growing 6 plants...)

Considering some US states have legalized, I think there's a good possibility of this happening.

IMO, Trudeau is taking the righ approach here. Legalization allows the government to regulate the drug and implement harm reduction programs. Decriminalization is worse because it just looks the other way. (Prohibition, of course, is a colossal failure.)

It's certainly better having people buy it at a liquor store than from a drug dealer. 

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

It's absolutely the right approach...The Tories are out to lunch.

Even Republican strategists in the US have conceded that mandatory minimums and marijuana prohibition are dismal failures...

The Harpercons are rabid Social conservatives which is a MUCH bigger cancer than fiscal conservatism (even if I personally hate all conservatism)

It's social conservative policies that have me pulling out my hair...I don't see fiscal conservatism dying anytime soon,regardless of who is in power.

If that's the case,I'll happily welcome the death of the SoCons....I'm even planning a cocktail party for the event.

janfromthebruce

Canada's NDP: Forty Years of Fighting to End the War on Marijuana

The NDP has been all over this since 1971

1971: NDP introduces bill to decriminalize marijuana possession after Liberals ignore the recommendations of the LeDain Commission Report.

snip

2004: NDP calls on Liberals to re-introduce their abandoned marijuana decriminalization bill. Liberals let the bill die.

snip

2009: NDP votes against Conservative bill with mandatory minimum sentences for marijuana. Liberal Party votes to support it.

Paul Martin was going to decriminalize in 2006? Really because the Libs in 2009 supported mandatory mins - hmm, I wonder if Trudeau the lesser bothered to vote or voted in support? May show you how much Trudeau really really cares about all this decriminalizing stuff. Brings back memories of that dreamy national childcare program - not.

snip

2012: NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair reaffirms the party's support for decriminalizing marijuana, and calls for "a national discussion that will focus on a non-punitive, regulatory approach to marijuana use."

Personally I think that regulations and how it is produced and laced with what, and oh age and stuff needs to be hammered out before we go to full legalization.

And when Libs had a chance in the past, over and over again, well they just didn't step up to the plate. And you trust them? I go with the ones who were consistent on the matter in policy and not come lately because remember that dreamy national childcare program, just didn't happen.

pookie

janfromthebruce wrote:

Canada's NDP: Forty Years of Fighting to End the War on Marijuana

The NDP has been all over this since 1971

1971: NDP introduces bill to decriminalize marijuana possession after Liberals ignore the recommendations of the LeDain Commission Report.

snip

2004: NDP calls on Liberals to re-introduce their abandoned marijuana decriminalization bill. Liberals let the bill die.

snip

2009: NDP votes against Conservative bill with mandatory minimum sentences for marijuana. Liberal Party votes to support it.

Paul Martin was going to decriminalize in 2006? Really because the Libs in 2009 supported mandatory mins - hmm, I wonder if Trudeau the lesser bothered to vote or voted in support? May show you how much Trudeau really really cares about all this decriminalizing stuff. Brings back memories of that dreamy national childcare program - not.

snip

2012: NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair reaffirms the party's support for decriminalizing marijuana, and calls for "a national discussion that will focus on a non-punitive, regulatory approach to marijuana use."

Personally I think that regulations and how it is produced and laced with what, and oh age and stuff needs to be hammered out before we go to full legalization.

And when Libs had a chance in the past, over and over again, well they just didn't step up to the plate. And you trust them? I go with the ones who were consistent on the matter in policy and not come lately because remember that dreamy national childcare program, just didn't happen.

A "national discussion" eh?  Coz those always turn out really, really well.  Especially on criminal law policy!!!

Heeeee.

And, sorry, but what exactly does age of use have to with ensuring that pot use no longer lands people in jail or with criminal records?

 

janfromthebruce

It has to do with the legalization of use. Remember, we do have drinking laws in Canada.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

For the record,I don't trust the Liberals...They really blew it when they didn't follow through with decriminalization 10 years ago.

But during their reign in the 1990's I was caught in possession 2 times.

The first time was a couple of joints and the second time was half an ounce.

Both times,police simply confiscated my stash without a court date or criminal record,which is a policy I can live with.

The problem with the NDP is that Mulcair believes the RCMP myth---that marijuana these days is more 'dangerous' than in the past and that it is somehow tied to mental illness..Which is complete and utter bullshit.

Like any policy,you have to start at 100% to ensure atleast 50%...You start at legalization and you work to decriminalization - at minimum....You don't start with decriminalization..That would be watered down to something like what we already have.

One thing about the Liberals that is crystal clear is that they are not SoCons...Hence,they'd be a massive improvement from the dog shit we have now.

I would like it very much if the NDP came out and embraced legalization just like the Liberals have...I'd trust the NDP more with the issue.

But they haven't....and just having a public conversation about it is not enough.

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

janfromthebruce wrote:

Personally I think that regulations and how it is produced and laced with what, and oh age and stuff needs to be hammered out before we go to full legalization.

And when Libs had a chance in the past, over and over again, well they just didn't step up to the plate. And you trust them? I go with the ones who were consistent on the matter in policy and not come lately because remember that dreamy national childcare program, just didn't happen.

Laced with what?  Exactly what are you getting at?  I hear they lace alcohol with opium, is that true? All laws need to be drafted and hammered out before implemented.  The fact that the NDP thinks that somehow we need debate and not immediate action says it all.

The odds of the NDP making it a priority are very low given Mulcair's lack luster support for change.  However one can never trust a Liberal promise.

janfromthebruce

Sometimes pot is cut with stuff that is not good - it's not your homegrown. And yes, it would have to be regulated. Pot does not cause mental illness. And the NDP do have a long history of supporting decriminalization and eventual legalization. And yes, there is much better buy in when there is an actual conversation about a very public subject.

Isn't that what we should do - to get buy in and support?

nakedApe42 nakedApe42's picture

alan smithee wrote:

The Harpercons are rabid Social conservatives which is a MUCH bigger cancer than fiscal conservatism (even if I personally hate all conservatism)

It's social conservative policies that have me pulling out my hair...

Yes, the Conservatives are such hypocrites. They talk about small government and getting government off the backs of people. (Killing the long-form census because they claimed it imposed too much on people.) Then they turn around and try to inflict a fascist social-con nanny-state on the population. 

The hypocrisy stems from neo-cons and theo-cons getting into bed to pool votes. (A marriage made in hell if there was ever one.) These hard-core cons comprise 30% of the population yet on 40% of the vote they won 53% of the seats and 100% of the power.

That makes electoral reform the most important issue. The ranked ballot will stop theo-cons from ever getting absolute corrupt power again. So will PR. Trudeau promises to legislate the ranked ballot to stop absurd election results. It's a small window of opportunity to make Canada a real democracy. 

nakedApe42 nakedApe42's picture

janfromthebruce wrote:

Canada's NDP: Forty Years of Fighting to End the War on Marijuana

The NDP has been all over this since 1971

1971: NDP introduces bill to decriminalize marijuana possession after Liberals ignore the recommendations of the LeDain Commission Report.

snip

2004: NDP calls on Liberals to re-introduce their abandoned marijuana decriminalization bill. Liberals let the bill die.

snip

2009: NDP votes against Conservative bill with mandatory minimum sentences for marijuana. Liberal Party votes to support it.

Paul Martin was going to decriminalize in 2006? Really because the Libs in 2009 supported mandatory mins - hmm, I wonder if Trudeau the lesser bothered to vote or voted in support? May show you how much Trudeau really really cares about all this decriminalizing stuff.

I was mistaken about Paul Martin. It turns out he promised decriminalization during the 2004 election. But then he balked after getting flak from the Americans.

But the Liberals did not vote to support mandatory minimum sentences. Fact is Harper didn't pass those foolish laws until after he got his majority government. He passed 11 rejected crime bills in a single omnibus monstrosity.

janfromthebruce

The Liberals did so vote to support mandatory minimum sentences.

Dana Larsen The NDP has consistently worked to end the war on marijuana for 40 years. One silly comment from a leadership candidate doesn't change the policy. Once he became leader, Mulcair clarified that he supports the party policy of decriminalization. http://www.facebook.com/notes/dana-larsen/thomas-mulcair-statement-on-cannabis-drug-policy/10150955484701068Thomas Mulcair statement on cannabis & drug policy

https://www.facebook.com/notes/dana-larsen/ndp-forty-years-fighting-to-end-the-war-on-marijuana/10151077705336068

May 19, 2012 at 2:27pm

** I was recently forwarded this letter from NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair which clarifies the party's stance on cannabis and drug policy reform.

 

=====

 

Thank you for writing. I appreciate having the benefits of your comments.

 

First, please know that the New Democratic Party of Canada is a truly democratic party and it is the membership at convention who debate and vote on the direction of the Party, including drug policy. For instance, at our June 2011 convention, delegates adopted a resolution supporting the harm-reduction work of Canada's safe injection site, InSite.

 

Specific to this issue, I endorsed a civil society initiative in Montreal to open safe injection sites in the province of Quebec. That service is now under way, following the landmark Supreme Court ruling on InSite.

 

I strongly support our Party's policy on granting access to medical use of marijuana, while maintaining dedicated programs to help those who are dealing with negative health and social consequences of recreational drug use. In fact, at its council meeting in October 2011, the Quebec section of the NDP passed a resolution calling on the federal government to allow provinces to create a more flexible regulatory framework, permitting home grown marijuana for medical purposes.

 

I also support the party's existing policy on further decriminalizing the possession of marijuana for any use with the goal to eliminate the influence of organized crime on the production and distribution of marijuana. In order to make good on those policies, we first need to replace the Harper government with its wrongheaded ideological approach to criminal issues.

 

Contrary to Stephen Harper, I strongly believe that criminalization is not the appropriate answer in any area of social policy. Having a reputation as a principled regulator and an innovator on environmental policy, I support an approach that focuses on harm reduction rather than criminalization.

 

It has been 40 years since the landmark report "LeDain Commission on the Non-Medical use of Drugs". It's time to move forward with a national discussion that will focus on a non-punitive, regulatory approach to marijuana use with an emphasis on prevention, education and health promotion.

 

In a recent interview, NDP Deputy Justice critic Craig Scott reinforced our approach. He said, "If we're going to make good public policy it has to be based on good evidence. We have seen the evidence in Europe over the last 12 years. We've seen that even in the place where there's the greatest violence in Latin America they're saying this isn't working. We've seen the evidence out of the United States of America. All of the public health officers across this country are saying in the interest of health we need to look at decriminalization, regulation, and taxation. In the same way that we do with alcohol and tobacco because alcohol is at the top of the food chain in terms of the health damage it does."

 

Again, thank you for writing. Please know that I, along with my team of New Democrat MPs, will continue to work hard to earn your confidence.

 

Sincerely,

 

Thomas Mulcair, M.P. (Outremont)

Leader of the Official Opposition

New Democratic Party of Canada

I copied it in its entirely in case babblers do not have access to FB.

 

socialdemocrati...

That letter has been my understanding as well. I was baffled by that one comment from Mulcair, but believed the NDP's statement of clarification when it came out. You don't retract something like that unless you really think you slipped up: Mulcair still supports decriminalization, and wants to move cautiously on LEGALIZATION.

Whenever someone focuses on the misstatement and not the clarification, it tells me that they're not evaluating the different parties in good faith, and that they're really just trying to find reasons to attack the NDP. They hardly care if those reasons are true.

In the interest of clarity, I really wish that letter would be published somewhere, if not issued as a verbal statement on youtube or something. Thanks, jan.

nakedApe42 nakedApe42's picture

janfromthebruce wrote:

The Liberals did so vote to support mandatory minimum sentences.

Yes, the Harper Conservatives had the full support of the Liberal party in 2009 to pass mandatory minimum sentences on minor drug crimes. That's why they waited until they had a majority government in 2011 to pass the bill...

Glad to see Mulcair supports decriminalization. But if he wants support from voters on this issue he will have to become more vocal about it.

I think the NDP should consider legalization. Decriminalization means government just looks the other way. Marijuana smokers will still have to buy from drug dealers who have no qualms selling to minors. It would be better to regulate and tax it. Sell it in liquor stores. 

 

CanadaOrangeCat

It is probably not true that smoking pot in and of itself will cause mental illness. The vast majority can occasionally smoke pot with no ill effects. A small number who are already predisposed to mental illness (through biological or environmental factors) can be triggered by marijuana. Someone who 'has' to smoke a half an ounce or an ounce of weed a week is using that drug to cover something else up. Perhaps it is a sense of their own inadequacy as a human being, which was reinforced by authority figures and associates from a young age. Addiction itself is a mental illness, a fact which is recognized by the mental health community. One of their institutions is called the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health.

A long time ago there was a free vote in the House of Commons to legalize marijuana. Had it passed unanimously, it would have been adopted. A single MP, John Gamble, stood against it. He was a Tory. Were they to hold a similar vote today, I am sure most of the Tory caucus would vote against it.

bekayne

CanadaOrangeCat wrote:

A long time ago there was a free vote in the House of Commons to legalize marijuana. Had it passed unanimously, it would have been adopted. A single MP, John Gamble, stood against it. He was a Tory. Were they to hold a similar vote today, I am sure most of the Tory caucus would vote against it.

No, that was a vote to send a message of condolence to Yoko Ono after John Lennon was shot. I cannot see MPs such as Vince Dantzer, Eldon Wooliams or Tom Cossit voting to legalize marijuana.

wage zombie

Decriminalization should mean "let each province decide" (same as alcohol).

CanadaOrangeCat

I suppose I was so stoned at the time I forgot the exact details.

janfromthebruce

nakedApe42 wrote:

janfromthebruce wrote:

The Liberals did so vote to support mandatory minimum sentences.

Yes, the Harper Conservatives had the full support of the Liberal party in 2009 to pass mandatory minimum sentences on minor drug crimes. That's why they waited until they had a majority government in 2011 to pass the bill...

Glad to see Mulcair supports decriminalization. But if he wants support from voters on this issue he will have to become more vocal about it.

I think the NDP should consider legalization. Decriminalization means government just looks the other way. Marijuana smokers will still have to buy from drug dealers who have no qualms selling to minors. It would be better to regulate and tax it. Sell it in liquor stores. 

 

Vote No. 82 40th Parliament, 2nd Session Sitting No. 70 - Monday, June 08, 2009

Sponsor:
Mr. Nicholson (Minister of Justice) Bill:
C-15 - An Act to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act and to make related and consequential amendments to other Acts

 On June 8, 2009 Justin Trudeau voted together with Vic Toews and Stephen Harper vote together to increase cannabis mandatory minimums.

Mr. Justin Trudeau
(Papineau) Liberal Yea

Yes, X marks the spot for Trudeau in support of Mandatory minimums. Like a good unprogressive liberal he went along with the show. Take note, it was both the NDP and Bloc who voted against it.

It's why Trudeau's about face lacks integrity. We all know how this will turn out as the fake left goes.

mark_alfred

Trudeau's statements in favour of marijuana legalization are a point in his favour.  Not enough for me to vote Liberal, given that most of their economic policies echo the Conservatives, but still, it is a point in his favour.

janfromthebruce

Sure and I'm still waiting for my national childcare program promised since my kids were little. Maybe it will happen for when they have children. They are adults now.

Winston

janfromthebruce wrote:

Sure and I'm still waiting for my national childcare program promised since my kids were little. Maybe it will happen for when they have children. They are adults now.

Haven't you been listening to the Liberal talking points, Jan? That there is no national child care plan is all Jack Layton's fault.  If we Canadians would only just deliver a majority to the latest Liberal White Knight, all would be right with the world!!!

:P

janfromthebruce

righto Winston - silly me. I'll just give my head a shake. Kiss

Unionist

We have $7 per day publicly delivered child care in Québec, folks. Didn't get it from the Liberals or the NDP either.

Maybe, instead of waiting for the NDP to conquer Ottawa, you could suggest to some of the NDP provincial governments to try it? Or would that violate some talking points?

 

Aristotleded24

Unionist wrote:
We have $7 per day publicly delivered child care in Québec, folks. Didn't get it from the Liberals or the NDP either.

Maybe, instead of waiting for the NDP to conquer Ottawa, you could suggest to some of the NDP provincial governments to try it?

Manitoba's moving in the right direction. ECEs in Manitoba have pensions.

Unionist

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Manitoba's moving in the right direction. ECEs in Manitoba have pensions.

I remember hearing a few years ago that the government was setting up a DC plan with matching contributions. Much better than nothing. Is it in place?

Other question: Can low-wage workers afford to send their kids to child care?

 

Aristotleded24

Unionist,

As far as I know, the pension plan is in place, and that this is the only jurisdiction outside of Quebec to do so.

There are subsidies available, but that's not the big issue we have. The big issue is capacity, and there are long waiting lists. It's a matter of finding both the physical space and the staff, but that's where improved wages and benefits come into play.

Brachina

Pundits are asking when Justin hasn't said anything else about this, hasn't anwsered questions concerns like the effect this will have on the border with the states, and so on. Even pundits like the star will opposes the drug war on weed are asking.

 The simple answer is Justin doesn't give a shit, this is simply a cynical half assed attempt to get votes, he hasn't thought about any if this because he's not going to go through with it, look at his voting record above.

 If you love pot your better off going with Mulcair, under whom it will only be illegal of big crime. Mulcair's defination of decrimalization lies on the border of legalization. And he's got the record to back it up.

 

wage zombie

I thought Niki Ashton had the best policy on cannabis reform in the leadership campaign.  Her position was decriminalize federally and allow the provinces to regulate as they wish.  I hope this position could be adopted by Mulcair in 2015.

If the Liberals really are going to promise legalization (although I doubt they will, and I'd be wary of them following through), and the Cons are their typical Tough on Crime, then "let the provinces decide" could look pretty appealing.

janfromthebruce

I would hope that the elected would follow what was voted on by party members at convention.

wage zombie

The resolution didn't make it to the floor at convention.

janfromthebruce

So the present NDP policy is decriminationazation. Is that correct WZ?

NorthReport

Just more Liberal pigs at the trough.

You know the prototype: those that feel they are entitled to their entitlements.

Sen. Mac Harb received $55K loan from businessman with ties to feds

Embattled Sen. Mac Harb received a $55,000 loan from an Ottawa lawyer and businessman who has a long history of doing business with the federal government, documents obtained by CTV News show.

Property records show Harb accepted the loan in May from a numbered Ontario company that lists Brian Karam as the sole owner.

It’s against the law for government officials to accept money from someone who deals with the federal government without written permission.

http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/sen-mac-harb-received-55k-loan-from-busin...

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

wage zombie wrote:

I thought Niki Ashton had the best policy on cannabis reform in the leadership campaign.  Her position was decriminalize federally and allow the provinces to regulate as they wish.  I hope this position could be adopted by Mulcair in 2015.

If the Liberals really are going to promise legalization (although I doubt they will, and I'd be wary of them following through), and the Cons are their typical Tough on Crime, then "let the provinces decide" could look pretty appealing.

 

I really like Ms Ashton's idea.

 

I think it makes more sense for the provinces to decide policy...In the US,it's currently the States dictating and changing policy,not the Feds....It's a lesson other countries can learn...The problem in the US is that possession,distribution and production is still a crime on the federal level.

 

Brachina

http://www.nationalpost.com/m/wp/full-comment/blog.html?b=fullcomment.na...

 

 Ivison calls out Trudeau basically on his open nomination hypocracy.

 Seriesly Justin has already broken his promise on this in a very weasally way, and you don't think he'll do the same with weed?

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

As I said,I don't trust the Liberals....But putting out that stance to the public was the right thing to do..It makes the issue a conversation.

And as I said,a conversation is just not enough.

It's inevitable,legalization will happen eventually,decriminalization will be even sooner...With 2 states legalizing it,another couple of states set the vote on it and several states decriminalizing possession,the writing's on the wall.

Portugal did it,Uraguay is taking steps towards it and New Zealand is legalizing and regulating designer drugs...The end is truly near with only the slimy ideological SoCons hanging to it like grim death.

The position is pretty much set---legalization....Atleast starting there we will see decriminalization policy adopted....We can't start off on decriminalization or any more debates (with prohibitionists constantly and epically failing any and every argument,btw)

So Trudeau scored some points in my book for a clear position on the issue in front of cameras...Mulcair?....It'd be nice to hear him say the same thing--to the cameras.

Pages

Topic locked