Legato

Then why is the info you constantly regurgitate always missing any concrete facts.

Lack of Clear Operating Framework: Critics argue that Canadian foreign aid policy lacks a clear operating framework, which leads to largely unsustainable and ineffective efforts in target communities. The economic evaluation of aid effectiveness often limits agencies to short-term solutions rather than long-term systemic progress. Auditing and Tracking Issues: Global Affairs Canada, the department responsible for the majority of foreign spending, has been criticized in audits for not adequately tracking how billions of dollars in aid are spent and what results are achieved. Diffuse Spending: Canada's aid flows have historically been spread across a large number of recipient countries and projects. Review bodies, such as the OECD's Development Assistance Committee (DAC), have recommended that Canada focus its aid on fewer partner countries and specific thematic priorities to maximize impact. Specific Examples of Questioned Spending: Reports and audits have highlighted specific expenses within Global Affairs Canada that have been widely criticized as wasteful or inappropriate, including: Spending thousands of dollars on hospitality events, lavish parties, and various cultural events overseas. Allocating funds for projects with unclear tangible benefits, such as millions for "gender-responsive systems approach to universal healthcare in the Philippines" or specific workshops and musical shows. Aid Conditionality and Shifting Priorities: In the past, foreign aid has sometimes been tied to neoliberal structural adjustment programs, which have drawn criticism. More recently, the focus on a "feminist aid policy" has been challenged by some opposition MPs to provide concrete data demonstrating tangible economic benefits for Canadians or the recipient countries beyond the social goals. Fossil Fuel Subsidies Abroad: Through agencies like Export Development Canada, Canada has been one of the biggest international financiers of fossil fuel projects, which critics argue is counterproductive to climate goals and a form of "inefficient" spending that it committed to phasing out as part of G20 agreements. Do try to get informed.

Nice cherry picking, here's the full quote.... Admittedly, Canadian life expectancy in 2023 of 81.7 years is higher than it was in 1990 at 77.5 years, but, for the past three out of four years, it has declined in absolute terms and is not keeping up with increases in all these other nations. OECD statistics on life expectancy can be found on its website.

Typical attack the presenter, not the facts. Taxpayers federation has more credibility than some nefarious flying baby.

What happed to those facepalm videos from your blow up doll?

That whole video is based on the premise that there were two people clinging to the side of the boat. Where is the evidence, right now that's just hearsay.

I'm just making the point that, like it or not, indigenous groups objections at the end of the day that's all they are, objections. Their veto is in name only.

Correct you don't.

yes, the graph is a joke and does not fit your ill thought out preamble. Thanks for the laugh.

That graph, or the one you wish it was?

just like they stopped the trans mountain...er okay.

Whereas Section 92.10(a) of the Constitution grants the federal government exclusive authority over interprovincial pipelines. Whereas courts and the federal Major Projects Office have confirmed that provinces have no veto over such projects.

or to use a Cockney phrase, "she got bobbins".

His actual words.... “Today’s memorandum does not promise a pipeline will be built. It promises that seven months from now, a pipeline proposal will be referred to a federal office for two further years of study. After that, the Prime Minister will award B.C.’s NDP Premier the power to veto it altogether – a veto that violates the Constitution.

and there's the proof.

Seems like you have an odd way of skirting around any facts that go against obsession with Harry Potter scripts.

Read it again, this time with eyes open.

then show us the acceleration

Yeah just imagine how much more successful it would have been without him.....annnnnd..... his Bank of England tenure was not without effups. But you know all this so why keep on with the regurgitation.