https://canadianpoliticalevents.createaforum.com/stuff-you-need-to-know/news/?message=50612
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
so... the relentless WE Charity nattering of CPC #PigeonPierre and NDP CharlieLingus has emboldened the CPC to want to bring forward a voting motion to create a special committee, "to probe the government's {presumed} ethical lapses & pandemic response spending"... a committee that CPC leader O'Tool has actually called an "anti-corruption committee".with the government alternatively proposing to strike a special committee with a narrower mandate to review federal COVID-19 program spending, PM Trudeau has declared the proposed CPC motion... a confidence motion with a related election call.it's only coincidental that, today:=> NDP leader Singh formally announces Margaret Trudeau should be off-limits to any considerations of scrutinizing the WE Charity... this after CharlieLingus has spent months demonizing her.=> CharlieLingus announces he's done with twitter=> CPC leader O'Tool asks to have his beer held... and rushes forward to amend the motion stating it has been amended to include language specifying that creating the committee should not be deemed grounds to order an election.
NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh said today that his party will not give Prime Minister Justin Trudeau an "excuse" to send Canadians to the polls in the middle of a global pandemic — an apparent signal that Trudeau's government will survive today's confidence vote.In a news conference just two hours before a crucial confidence vote, Singh declined to say exactly how his MPs would vote or whether they might abstain."We are voting for Canadians. We are voting against an election," he said.
buggar! The waldo's crack research team missed this gem from this morning - a short while ago:
An election to avoid a committee that investigates Liberal government corruption? I don’t see anything wrong with such a committee.
c'mon member squiggy! Try to keep up - the CPC/O'Tool backed off their proposed committee name - removing the word "corruption" from it! Apparently there was a tad push-back from media wags suggesting the CPC had a preconceived position - go figure, hey!member squiggy, how about you? Since you've declared "Liberal government corruption"... give your reference points - what corruption? Name it/them! Sure you can.
member squiggy, how about you? Since you've declared "Liberal government corruption"... give your reference points - what corruption? Name it/them! Sure you can.
Why are you and the Libs afraid of oversight?
It seems to come as a surprise to many people that Canada is a highly decentralized federation, with a constitutionally entrenched division of powers that prevents the federal government from blundering its way into the affairs of the provinces. Sure, there are a few areas of shared jurisdiction that come with some push and pull between different levels of government, and there are places where the federal government plays a role that largely involves the transfer of funds to provinces for specific outcomes, or to ensure equal levels of access from province to province. And yet, listening to politicians at both the federal and provincial levels of government, particularly lately, there seems to be no shortage of confusion as to just how much power and authority the federal government possesses in a myriad of portfolios..Since the onset of the pandemic, jurisdictional confusion seems to have exploded. Everyone has demanded that the federal government do something about rent (when landlord/tenant legislation is provincial), long-term care (again, provincial jurisdiction that the federal government provided military and Canadian Red Cross support with upon the request of the provinces), paid sick leave (about 90 percent provincial jurisdiction – federally regulated sectors include banking, telecom and transportation), and public health measures (which they provided lab capacity and contract tracers to provinces upon demand). And the federal government got creative about how it could leverage its spending power to help provinces, but it wasn’t always successful (the commercial rent subsidy or disability support top-ups) because they don’t have the appropriate levers or databases that can provide that kind of direct support. But that hasn’t stopped either opposition parties or even some provinces from complaining, when those provincial governments haven’t stepped up to solve things that are clearly in their jurisdiction. Some provinces, like Alberta, decided to lay off school workers in their own jurisdiction and put them onto federal support payments, in a bout of spectacularly cynical buck-passing, and got away with it because of this deliberate confusion in the public sphere..Of course, the opposition parties and the premiers know that there are jurisdictional issues, but they have been content to ignore the realities of them for the sake of playing politics. For the opposition, it’s a cynical game of making it look like the federal government is sitting on their hands when they in fact lack the proper levers to take meaningful action – and they know it. For premiers, it’s a kind of learned helplessness, insisting that the federal government needs to provide money or direction, or guidance, or to “take the lead” when it’s something that they can do on their own.If the federal government did assert jurisdiction (likely through emergency powers), they would immediately cry bloody murder, that their constitutional rights were being trampled on, and that the division of powers exists for a reason, but in the meantime, they could take advantage of the fact that all eyes are focused on Ottawa, leaving them to escape accountability for their failures in the pandemic. And what is most frustrating is the fact that media have been complicit in this, abiding by the ethos that nobody cares about jurisdiction in a pandemic – except they should, because the federal government can’t invent levers it doesn’t have, and the premiers need to be held to account for their own failings. Playing into the cynical games of politicians who obfuscate jurisdictional questions leaves that accountability in doubt.
oversight of what?
The public's domain, especially that which exists behind closed doors in-camera. Anything less is a corruption of the oft-stated dedication to transparency that virtually every political party, politician and their lickspittles claim to uphold.I wouldn't btw waste my time putting responsibility for this oversight in the hands of politicians - it needs to be in ours.
yabut... cabinet confidence is a legitimate thing/need.
In any case, my question was more focused on the fact there are existing committees in place to explore many of the wet-dreams of CPC/O'toolites