Derek 2.0

Are these new mailboxes to be put atop the highest mountains, within the deepest forests or in the most frozen of tundras?

Surely they could do the same as rural Canadians have for decades........ What an affront to the rights of some people........

The alleged terrorist's Facebook........has some "interesting" friends.......

Which could be directly related to heightened security measures recently put in place in relation to the media filming departing Canadian Forces members and their families.

.......And home to one of the largest training establishments of the Canadian Forces.

A recent update: And from La Presse Martin Rouleau?

What?!?!?!

....But Canada Post isn't being done away with.........people can still receive their Safeway flyers from union workers at a central box.

As I said, I'm shocked if true...........Not sure of your issue with prioritize.........Of course, the public doesn't know what the Liberals priorities actually are, nor how they plan to pay for: So, do you know if the Trudeau Liberals plan to rollback current tax cuts and/or increase taxes to pay for their priorities?

In the United States: Who still gets mail? Do we really need a Federal force of unionized workers to receive flyers from Safeway brought to our doorsteps?

From this mornings National Post/CP: I guess we'll await clarification from the LPC as to what their tax policy is.........will it include the reversal of current and proposed tax cuts and/or will it include new taxes? I'm shocked, if so, that the Liberals would make such plans known, this far from an election........sans further comment, we all know how this is going to be framed.........

In Canada, there is no such right.......there isn't even a right to property.......none the less, to attempt to answer your question, I'm (like many gun owners) politically active and donate money/time to gun advocacy groups in an attempt to change laws that I/we disagree with..... Now, with the BCTF, if they feel, in such a scenario their rights to smaller class sizes and fewer disabled children in their classrooms have been violated, wouldn't a better course of action be to double down efforts within their union and political action in hopes of helping elect a Government (BC NDP) that might reverse this egregious affront to their human rights?......Of course, they did do this prior to the last election, and we all know the results.....

I have not heard that......was that recently and do you have a link?

Interesting context on polling from David Akin's twitter: Federal vote intention A question for those that might know; on a site like the often linked to threehundredeight, what is the methodology for accounting for the "undecided vote"?

Down Under, its apparently no problem on Government ID: But in BC, a man doing the like lost his driver license:

A Government that would use said clause to prevent a drastic financial burden on BC taxpayers over teachers having to teach a handful of more students merits, in your view, to be overthrown violently? I've heard of militant unions............

Are you suggesting that BC teachers would/could/should utilize violence if the BC Government used the not withstanding clause to overturn a ruling over class size?

As I said, no.....I'm certain said report was representative of potential readiness problems DND could have faced going forward, from the timeline from which the report was written. I'm certain at such a point it will be confirmed that the RCN will no longer face problems associated with operating the now retired ships, coupled with readiness issues that stem from the operation of four older, manpower intensive, vessels.

As noted, not opinion, but fact........or does the Waldo suggest that by retiring said ships, the RCN won't ease the reported burdens associated with not only upkeep of the older ships (now retired), but will still face manpower shortages despite freeing up ~800-1000 personal that manned them? Does the Waldo feel such reported issues, namely the upkeep of said retired ships and entailing crew shortages, will increase or stay the same once the next report is released? Very simple question Waldo

No its not........or do you deny the shift in manpower requirements post retirement of said four ships? What period in time did the report cover and what year is it today? What differences in manpower did the RCN have during the reporting period versus today?

Again, no opinion.........or do you suggest the RCN won't apply said 800-1000 men and women to address shortages, which in turn led to readiness issues as presented in the now dated report? I never questioned its accuracy from the period in which it represented, but your implication that its depicts current levels of readiness within the RCN.

Again, not an opinion but fact........with the bulk of each ships crews already reassigned to other postings across the fleet, training establishments and ashore. The only myopic view is yours, in that you clearly fail to understand that 800-1000 personal made available, right now, several years ahead of envisioned in said report, will improve the deficits in readiness found within said report.

It is not opinion but fact........ships that will never sail again no longer require certain, specific trades, trades that during the reporting period all faced varying levels of shortages among the entire fleet. It is not a current report......as I made clear, the report was valid over the period of time that it was written and offers a snapshot in time of readiness levels in said reporting period......which have changed since its completion.

There is no presumption required........specific naval trades that faced shortages, which in turn raised concerns with readiness in the report, no longer are in short supply with the status of the four ships......hence, the remainder of the fleet receives a drastic improvement in its readiness. The report is no longer an accurate statement in regards to the fleet's readiness.

Very little, if anything. What do you have at issue with "reduced operating status"? As I've been stating since the start, hence the report is longer relevant to the status of the navy. The reduced operating status of the retired ships very much effects the readiness of the RCN.......but not in the manner you suspect.