ExFlyer

Federal Parole board members are appointed for up to 5 years terms. So, all governments appoint them. The latest parole board statutory release laws were implemented in 1992...when Mulroney was in power. Provinces and territories may establish their own parole boards for offenders sentenced to a term of incarceration of less than two years.

Turns out Pierre Poilievre’s strategy of gaslighting Canadians—calling us “stupid,” “broken,” “woke,” and painting the country as a blood-soaked, crime-infested hellscape—has backfired spectacularly. His approval rating has dropped from 48% in April to just 44% in July. Mark Carney now leads Poilievre 53% to 23% as preferred Prime Minister. The message is clear: Canadians are tuning him out. It’s time for a new Conservative leader—one who doesn’t hate the country they want to lead.

We are talking about PP being a government welfare case his entire working life...PP was never a teacher or a military pilot...stay on topic fool. LOL

That is the only thing he has ever done... in his entire life......not working for but sucking off the government LOL

Yes, Erin O’Toole did win his own seat in the 2021 federal election. He was re-elected as the Member of Parliament for Durham, a riding in Ontario, with a comfortable margin. So while he lost the federal election as party leader, he did not lose his seat, unlike what happened recently with Pierre Poilievre (as you mentioned in earlier messages about Carleton). a comparison between O’Toole and Poilievre’s leadership paths L Alison

Of course not...he has never had a real job LOL. He has been sucking off the government teat his whole life LOL Who knows where he will be when out of politics...you certainly do not know. And for sure he "has no intimate knowledge of their workings" or any workings other than sucking the government teat LOL

Just some facts "If Pierre Poilievre wants to attack Mark Carney over conflicts tied to 574 companies, then let us apply the same test to him, including past investments. Before the last election, Poilievre held foreign investments through funds like American Century and iShares MSCI, based in the United States, Singapore, and Switzerland. These types of funds typically include 500 to 2,000 companies each. He sold them before the election and now says he brought the money home to Canada. Today he owns two Canadian Vanguard ETFs: VCE, the FTSE Canada Index ETF with 50 large-cap Canadian companies, and VCN, the FTSE Canada All Cap Index ETF with over 100 to 250 Canadian companies. Those include major firms like Royal Bank, Shopify, TD, Enbridge, and Brookfield. He also holds Bitcoin through the Purpose Bitcoin ETF and owns more than eight thousand dollars in Bitcoin personally. He and his wife own rental properties in Calgary and Ottawa. Using his logic that exposure to a company equals conflict, Poilievre has likely been tied to well over a thousand companies across past foreign funds and current domestic ETFs. Yet he has not divested these holdings, and he has not placed them into a truly blind trust, unlike what he demands of Carney. If he truly believes that any financial exposure creates a conflict, then he should sell off his holdings or place them in a blind trust that he cannot see or control. Canadians deserve consistent rules for everyone in public office, not one set for his opponents and another set for Poilievre. If he will not apply his own standard to himself, then his attacks on Carney are nothing but political theatre." J Cotter

If Poilievre was PM & he was implementing similar things Carney is, holding the same meetings, managing the same crisis the same way ..... what would his supporters be saying? I am sick of the comments that are clearly and purely intended to denigrate the man under the guise of critiquing his performance. It's petty, stupid and shallow. Their inability to see past the "party" label & really consider the FACTS is disappointing & frustrating to say the least. G. Cormier

Ya Hooo, then we can have more years of non productive whining and complaining, LOL PP is back...same old same old LOL Ya are aware Trudeau is gone??? Aren't you??

I am not sure how you tie this to Liberals??? Do you somehow think this has only occurred lately? The laws of this country change all the time, regardless of who is on power.

The Prime Minister of Canada...the one Canadians voted in to lead them and this country. You are not over PP losing yet? LOL (rhetorical...no need to respond LOL)

Ahahaha. The LOSER is you!!! LOL LOL One more time in case you missed it.... The LOSER is you oh and...your hero PP

HA HA HA Suck it up LOSER. Clearly the Liberals have done enough to keep get voted in and the conservatives have had 4 l4aders and have lost every election. So, what have the conservatives done in the past 10 years to make Canadians want them as leaders??? LOL. OH wait...NOTHING,, so they vote Liberal LOL Canadians can see thought the phony that PP is LOL

Suck it up LOSER!!!! HA HA HA

So, what do you say to a newly graduated American engineer??? "I will have a big mac, fries and a coke please" LOL

EH CANADA, EH USA: GOOD, BAD, & UGLY! · Emma Thompson-Klotz · optreSnods1128912313h6u0m1tg0uag7c4i0g39h5hmu5c8g82i2219c9lu · …does amnesia come and go?? I don’t want someone in charge who forgets things… On at 4:28pm July 16, 2025 Pierre Poilievre (@PierrePoilievre): “What is government doing for our canola farmers hit with Chinese tariffs? We must fight these tariffs and support the Canadian farm families who are under attack.” REBUTTAL: Poilievre Helped Trigger the Crisis Then Fought the Fixes China blocked Canadian canola in March 2019 after Canada arrested a top Huawei executive. This was retaliation. They banned Richardson and Viterra. Farmers saw it coming. Poilievre supported getting tough with China. He backed Meng Wanzhou’s arrest. He said Canada should “stand up to China no matter the cost.” He demanded Magnitsky sanctions and called for a boycott of Chinese goods. Farmers warned this would risk their markets: he ignored them. The government responded fast. March 2019: $1B in loan support. Filed a trade complaint. Opened new markets like Japan and Europe. By 2022, China reopened some access. In March 2025, China hit Canada again with 100% tariffs on canola oil and meal. Why? Because Canada put tariffs on Chinese EVs and steel in 2024. This is tit-for-tat retaliation again. Poilievre voted against the very trade deals that helped farmers survive. VERY SIMPLE: CETA = trade deal with Europe CPTPP = trade deal with Japan and others Both helped farmers sell canola after China blocked it Poilievre voted against both He cheered the conflict, blocked the trade deals, and now wants credit for complaining. Sources: Canola Council March 2025, WTO case DS589, CBC March 2019, Reuters Sept 2024 and March 8 2025, Global Affairs Canada, Commons Hansard 2019–2021, Parliamentary voting records CETA and CPTPP.

"History is a graveyard of ego-driven authoritarians—men who rose to power on rage, lies, and vanity, only to crumble when faced with reality. From emperors and tyrants to presidents and populists, their legacies fade because they’re built on spectacle, not substance. That’s not politics. That’s physics. That’s science. Because ego is weak, authenticity is strong. And when the two collide, only one survives. It doesn’t matter how loud, angry, or caustic fake leaders become, or how big their lies and self-aggrandizing claims grow. Next to authentic leadership, they CRATER and scream louder to keep you away from finding out who they REALLY are." "Canada Chose the “Authentic” Exit Ramp Poilievre was selling rage. But Carney was offering reassurance. Poilievre promised a fight. Carney promised a plan. Poilievre wanted followers. Carney wanted solutions. And Canadians—quietly, steadily—chose the grown-up. They chose the leader who doesn’t need to lie about golf trophies or tweet memes about “gatekeepers.” They chose the man with global respect, not TikTok rants. That’s the thing about real leadership: you recognize it the second you see it. And when it shows up, the fakes vanish." "Carney is now reshaping Canada’s role in the world with quiet confidence and global credibility, while Pierre Poilievre is seeking a second chance and donations to help him stay alive." Dean Blundell

…how can anyone in their right mind want you anywhere near $$ & politics! PROPAGANDA Poilievre’s Post: “Mark Carney’s spending spree is driving inflation back up, core rates rising to 3.4%. Despite big talk of finding savings, year-over-year spending is 8% higher. No wonder inflation is on the rise. Bring down wasteful spending to lower the deficit and cool inflation.” REBUTTAL: Poilievre Blames Carney for Inflation But the Facts Say Otherwise Core inflation is trending around 3%, not a runaway “Carney spending spree.” June’s headline CPI rose to 1.9% YoY, core inflation remains stubbornly close to 3%: reflecting lingering supply and trade pressures, not federal spending hikes. Global forces are the real driver. Rising auto, clothing and vehicle prices, trade tariffs, and supply disruptions are raising prices in Canada, and they are global trends affecting other G7 countries. Trade uncertainty and tariffs matter more than domestic spending. Bank of Canada notes that U.S. and Canadian tariffs are pushing up cost, this is a supply-side effect, not Carney’s doing. No Carney budget yet, it’s too early to assign responsibility. Carney was sworn in March 2025 and hasn’t tabled a full budget. Inflation is tracing decisions from earlier governments and global pressures, not his fiscal policies. Bank of Canada holds rates steady at 2.75%. They’re monitoring trade disruptions and core inflation, not reacting to domestic deficits. Cutting spending too soon could tip the economy into recession. OECD says Canada’s inflation peak is behind us. The OECD forecasts core inflation will ease back toward 2% in 2026 once tariffs and global supply tighten up, again highlighting external over domestic causes. Bottom line: Inflation trends are driven by global supply pressures, trade and tariff shocks, and pandemic after-effects, not by any new spending from Carney. Blaming him now is misleading and politically timed. Sources: • Reuters: Canada’s inflation rises to 1.9% in June • Reuters: BoC warns inflation could persist due to trade shocks • WSJ: Core inflation keeps BoC cautious, not government spending • OECD Economic Outlook 2025: Canada • Parliamentary Budget Office: Spending projections • Financial Post article Poilievre cited: Editorial commentary, not a neutral news report • Bank of Canada Monetary Policy Report, July 2025 • Reuters: US-Canada tariff disputes fuel inflation.

Our PM has the authenticity while PP the unwanted populist (authoritarian wannabe) carries the weakness! Credited to Dean Blundell "History is a graveyard of ego-driven authoritarians—men who rose to power on rage, lies, and vanity, only to crumble when faced with reality. From emperors and tyrants to presidents and populists, their legacies fade because they’re built on spectacle, not substance. That’s not politics. That’s physics. That’s science. Because ego is weak, authenticity is strong. And when the two collide, only one survives. It doesn’t matter how loud, angry, or caustic fake leaders become, or how big their lies and self-aggrandizing claims grow. Next to authentic leadership, they CRATER and scream louder to keep you away from finding out who they REALLY are." "Canada Chose the “Authentic” Exit Ramp Poilievre was selling rage. But Carney was offering reassurance. Poilievre promised a fight. Carney promised a plan. Poilievre wanted followers. Carney wanted solutions. And Canadians—quietly, steadily—chose the grown-up. They chose the leader who doesn’t need to lie about golf trophies or tweet memes about “gatekeepers.” They chose the man with global respect, not TikTok rants. That’s the thing about real leadership: you recognize it the second you see it. And when it shows up, the fakes vanish." "Carney is now reshaping Canada’s role in the world with quiet confidence and global credibility, while Pierre Poilievre is seeking a second chance and donations to help him stay alive." ~~Dean Blundell

Global news, Jan. 31/25 just after Justice Marie-Josée Hogue released her report on foreign interference, Poilievre’s office revealed he is also refusing to take briefings under CSIS’s “threat reductions measures” (TRM) mandate — which would allow the agency to share some information with the Conservative leader without him first obtaining security clearance. Poilievre has long argued that receiving classified intelligence would prevent him from holding the government to account on foreign interference. But ex-national security officials who spoke to Global News are skeptical of that position. In a statement, Poilievre’s office maintained accepting the briefings would effectively “gag” the Conservative leader. “Officials indicated that should Mr. Poilievre receive the TRM briefing, he would be legally prevented from speaking with anyone other than legal counsel about the briefing and would be able to take action only as expressly authorized by the government, rendering him unable to effectively use any relevant information he received,” Poilievre’s spokesperson, Sebastian Skamski, wrote in a statement. “This is clearly unacceptable, and entirely contrary to the government’s supposed objective of enabling the person briefed to reduce risk.” Skamski added that government officials indicated the briefings concerned foreign interference being “directed at” parliamentarians, not about the “suitability” of sitting parliamentarians or candidates. Richard Fadden, former CSIS director and national security and intelligence advisor to Stephen Harper and Justin Trudeau “One, I think he has a responsibility to the public to ensure that people in his party are worthy of being members of the party and members of the House of Commons, and if there’s a suspicion that they’re not, I’d argue it’s his duty to find out and to do something about it. And I guess secondly, he argues that if he has a clearance and he’s been given a briefing, he can’t argue about it. Well, if he never has a briefing, he’s arguing in a vacuum, so I’m not sure how that helps him in a practical sense.” “But fundamentally, I think any number of people over the years have received this kind of briefing. Other countries do it, other Commonwealth countries provide these kind of briefings to opposition members, and they seem to be able to function.” “It’s accurate in the sense that if he wants to be able to disclose anything not in the House of Commons, then he would still be subject to the (Security of Information Act) … He still has the opportunity, if he so chooses, to hold the government to account based on what he knows on the floor of the House of Commons because of his (legal) immunity from anything he says on the floor of the House of Commons.” “I find his choice interesting because it’s my understanding, for the most part, is that briefings that would be going to him … the information is something that he, because of the threat reduction measure, has to reasonably be believed to take measures to reduce the threat. You can’t just share something as a threat reduction measure because it’s nice to know. The definition of a threat reduction measure is, by sharing this information, we can do something to reduce the threat. So conceivably there is something in his power that he could do to reduce the threat once he has this information.” Ward Elcock, former CSIS director “The whole thing would be a lot simpler if he would just get clearance … What it frankly says to me, listening to Mr. Poilievre’s normal criticism of the government, he likes to make criticisms that are pretty far-reaching without any visible support. I guess I assume he’s afraid that if he gets a briefing, then he will actually know some facts that he can’t criticize on the basis of those facts. It’s hard to criticize when you actually know something. “ Stephanie Carvin, an international relations professor at Carleton University and former CSIS analyst “There’s a clear moving of the goal posts. It went from ‘I should be able to get through this a threat reduction measure,’ finally the government agrees, ‘Okay we’re going to give you a threat reduction measure.’ ‘Oh, okay, now I don’t want to because I can’t talk about the intelligence.’ I don’t know what he would say that hasn’t already been said in the (Hogue) report … I guess my concern is that not taking an intelligence briefing because you can’t turn it into a meme is not the seriousness with which we should be approaching this issue.”

You cannot explain...you are too stupid LOL Only total LOSERS like you keep trying to explain and getting nowhere LOL Gotta go to the beach now and then for a lobster roll. See ya once ya finished your self pity and meltdown

Awww are you actually trying to say something???/ Well, you FAIL again LOSER LOL

Woo Hoo...defending yourself again. Another FAIL from the ultimate LOSER LOL