I am Groot

The CPC never brought up social issues in any of the previous elections. The Liberals brought them up and the media ran with them. I suspect they'll try to do the same this election.

Not even close.

I don't think it is either, but if we lowered their salaries to what doctors are paid in France, which is barely more than half what Canadian GPs are paid, I expect the numbers would increase quite rapidly. And if we didn't, and I assume the salaries of nurses and other healthcare professionals are similarly higher than in France, we would have to put a lot more money into healthcare than France does just to offer up comparable services. You mean their nation. But Canadians are told we have no nation, and are discouraged from having any pride in Canada or its history. And the US isn't across an ocean but just a short drive away.

It's not the claim most on the right make. The claim is that the CBC and other media organs don't report everything, or slant it, or choose to report things, let's call them feature stories, designed to further an ideological leftist belief in social justice and identity politics. And since these beliefs largely mirror the social values of the Liberal/NDP government, they obviously run counter to the beliefs of conservatives. A silly little example from recent days. The Ottawa Citizen is part of that notoriously FAR FAR FAR right Postmedia organization. Ottawa had a multiple shooting incident at a local wedding. The Citizen has tied itself in knots trying desperately NOT to report that the wedding party was made up of Somalis. To this end very little news has been printed about it, and no interviews with participants. That goes for the local news channel, as well, btw. No interviews and no video of participants. And whenever anyone mentions things in comments the Citizen or local CBC deletes them. I had such a comment deleted the other day. The police reported that with 50 shots they thought there might have been more than one shooter. I wrote a comment that if they were only guessing this a few days later this suggests the wedding participants weren't cooperating. Now I didn't mention they were Somalis but the Citizen knows they're Somalis and evidently took this as a slant against the Somali community so deleted it. The few brief stories about this incident have comments where half the comments have been similarly marked as deleted. The Citizen is acting like a censor. For our own good. It doesn't feel like we can be trusted to know this information because it might make some of us think worse of the Somali community. Now if this wedding had been an Irish wedding and there'd been six people shot and two killed I really don't think they would have found any need to hide the participants, but Somalis are a protected group to the social justice crowd. Just one small thing, but so many others. Lots of breathless coverage of climate change, and features about the need for more hard work to combat it. Lots of stories about happy refugees and no stories of unhappy ones, or ones committing crimes (if they can possibly avoid it). Stories on how bad the healthcare system is but rarely any comparisons to the ones in Europe that are different. Tons of sympathetic stories of natives, like the frenzy they had over the residential schools a couple of years ago (which turned out to be a big nothing). A wild enthusiasm for any story of racism or homophobia, but only if the perpetrator is white. Lots of stories about crime but never EVER any suggestion certain segments of society are responsible for a hugely disproportionate amount of it.

It's very fashionable. If you're not trans or gay or at least bi, if you can't claim to be two-spirit or queer, or non-binary, well, you're just boring.

If it's done carefully, as used to be the case, I wouldn't have an issue. It's not. Approval now is automatic. Even questioning the child to try to determine if their belief comes from some other source is considered 'transphobic'. It is indeed a rare condition, but not anymore. Now it's everywhere. Every school has a bunch of 'trans' kids. And we have grown ass adults of thirty, forty and fifty suddenly discovering they're a woman without ever having given the slightest hint of that.

That's a hell of a lot better than here where AFAIK nobody has seriously considered the numbers of students that can be admitted for over 20 years - until last year. The tuition fees for medical education are also absurdly low by our standards, but that could allow for the much lower salaries French doctors get. I mean, as it stands Canadian nurses can apparently make as much as French doctors. I wonder why we don't get more French nurses immigrating to Quebec... We could do the same for tuition, but we'd need to put in place financial disincentives for doctors, nurses, and others to take the basically almost free training and then skip across the border to practice in the US. That seems kind of odd to me. From what a quick google tells me the Canadian average is only 950 while in Quebec it's 685. Yet family doctors often seem rushed and overworked, without sufficient time to really explore background issues with their patients. Quebecers I know have to wait weeks, sometimes months for appointments with their GP. I wonder if ours have a lot more paperwork eating up their time. The Canadian comparison is $265k (US$195k) But then, they need to pay off far higher student loans. And we need to compete with America or we'll lose them all. Free or nearly free tuition combined with a requirement they pay off the real cost if they leave (the real cost being the cost if not subsidized AT ALL by the government, more like what a foreign student would pay). I wonder if we did away with the requirement to get a bachelor degree before going to medical school, as it is done in a number of other countries would help here. Not only would it reduce the cost and time of training but perhaps it would make them inelliglbe for a quick jump across the border to work in the US.

One of the problems Ottawa has with its healthcare is the provincial government allocates resources based on population and doesn't take the population of neighboring west Quebec into account. But healthcare in West Quebec so godawful bad, the delays so long, the ER's so horribly overcrowded that large numbers of Quebecers come to Ottawa to get healthcare. The reason for that sensible court decision was, of course, that the public version of healthcare could not be relied upon for anything. It's just THAT bad.

Even with this all it shows is money is not the cause. Because Canada is significantly lower than France in pretty much every metric. I'm in the nation's capital and here you're not even assured of an ambulance if you have a heart attack or stroke. Every day, sometimes multiple times a day, there are zero ambulances available to respond to emergencies here. I don't have a monkey in the show in terms of what type of system is used. Whether it's 100% public, 100% private, a mixture, or something done through insurance like the countries you name. I just want the one that will work. And ours clearly doesn't. Yet anytime anyone suggests any significant change you can hear the shrill cries of "American style!" echoing through the streets.

I have been aware that France has always been among the top performers in the world for healthcare. I wasn't aware until reading this article that almost all of their system is privately funded and privately delivered. The really interesting part is it's comparing the troubled British NHS system, which is mostly government-funded, with the French system, and that both cost roughly the same yet have wildly different performances. This supports the belief of many, like myself, that the real problem of Canada's healthcare system isn't what is being spent but its organization, the labyrinth of bureaucracy and administration that siphons off so much money from actual healthcare. Not to mention that all decisions, such as whether to build a hospital or how many doctors and nurses to train, are in the hands of the government. Nothing akin to the NHS exists in France. In a country where the state is normally supreme, medical care is almost entirely delivered privately. There are no diversity, equity and inclusion officers. There are no trans flags painted on the sides of hospitals. No bed blockers. No vast legions of administrators counting paper clips. GP surgeries answer the telephone almost immediately. You can get an appointment within a day or two, or immediately if it’s urgent. https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/french-healthcare-makes-the-nhs-look-like-bedlam/

That's all right. It had stopped being a conservative party by the time it died anyway. That's WHY it died.

There was a poll out the other day which basically said only about 15% support the education systems' present policy on aiding transition for minors and keeping it secret from parents. 80% were against it. In other words, this is not a rural west issue. If you think the thick belt of ethnic heavy ridings around Toronto and Vancouver are thrilled with the present enthusiasm schools and the healthcare system have for supporting and encouraging minors in their view that they're in the wrong body you haven't been in them. Plus, according to the poll, those who support this are almost all NDP voters anyway and wouldn't vote Tory to save their lives. So the Tories coming out with a sterner message on trans for minors is going to play well with just about everyone other than those who wouldn't dream of ever voting Tory.

If you've never heard of them you've been deliberately ignoring such stories. Or maybe your news comes solely from the CBC and Toronto Star, who will ignore them for you. And why was the law written the way it was if things are as you say? According to the law a woman is anyone who says they're a woman. No need to actually transition in any way. They can also change back and forth. https://reduxx.info/exclusive-trans-woman-confronted-by-mother-in-swimming-pool-locker-room-is-a-convicted-pedophile/ Because men posing as women create unfair and even dangerous situations for women where the reverse is not true.

It's funny but I was just thinking that last night. I was downstairs on the sofa in front of the big screen and flipping through what was available on Netflix, Prime, Disney, and Crave trying to remember the last time I watched anything from the networks. Do they put out nothing worth watching anymore? I began to lose interest in them when the era of reality TV came upon us and I've seen little since then to interest me. Of course, I rarely even look anymore. If I'm bored for a few minutes, or eating TV in the living room I'll put on stuff from Youtube, not search through the networks.

I don't think they'll get away with that without arousing anti-french sentiment. I certainly believe the English television CBC needs to be reformed. By all means, go through its management with a weed wacker and clear out all the wokeness. I don't believe privatizing it will help anyone. Sounds good to me. They should do the same for dividends. Waste of time anyway. Not going to accomplish anything useful that's worth the cost. The problem is neither of these are pre-funded programs. Unlike CPP, the money has to come out of the budget and the amount grows as the number of seniors grow. Immigrants are also eligible for them. And I don't mean immigrants who come here in their 20s and 30s but those who come here in their 60s as sponsored parents and never work a day. Clash immigration. Slash foreign students. Slash foreign workers. Presto. A million or more apartments come open. Anything else is mostly not going to accomplish much. I want a promise to reach that level as fast as possible. I know you hate money for defense. But it is a dangerous world getting more dangerous. And if every other country can afford it so can we. Maybe we can just stop paying triple or quadruple what others are paying for military equipment to the likes of the Irvings. Oh, okay. Then we should change the laws to say no one who is over 18 can suddenly declare themselves trans. How about that? No more just growing your hair longer, calling yourself a woman, and then wagging your naked dick around at women and girls in changing rooms. Likely because everyone already knows those are in place.

I've lived in Ottawa almost all my life. I know damned well that every government at every level is going to help out its friends and those who donate money to it. Patronage is a fact of life. I only get bothered by it when it starts costing the public money, like when the government directs a fat contract to someone who can't properly do it, or who gives companies contracts for things that are greatly overpriced and could be supplied elsewhere cheaper, or when it hires people to do jobs that don't need doing, or for which they're not qualified. Asf ar as I can tell this didn't cost the public a penny. And it'll get some housing built. Win-win, as far as I'm concerned. Besides, as I've said before, under the Century Initiative, the greenbelts are doomed anyway. If you want to triple or quadruple the population of southern Ontario the greenbelts have to go.

Somehow the last portion of that post got deleted before posting. Don't know how. I've now fixed it. But no, the government never bought the land. It was simply declared part of this 'no development' zone. You can imagine what that did to land values over the years.

He will appeal, of course, hoping to drag this out and have Trump win again so he can get a pardon. https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/07/politics/peter-navarro-contempt-of-congress-january-6-committee-subpoena/index.html

AFAIK none of it was owned by the government. They simply declared the land, owned by farmers, cottages, developers or whomever, to be a part of the 'greenbelt' and that was that. All the land the government declared part of the greenbelt suddenly lost much of its value, and never appreciated over the years as it otherwise should have.

Well, if you're going to make land out and have it developed what makes more sense? Taking land out of the Greenbelt that is owned by farmers or land that was bought by developers with the intention of developing it but frozen in time for twenty years? That bit about making 'billions of dollars' is also kind of disingenuous. It's based on the assumed value if this land were all developed and sold. It does NOT take into account the cost of developing it. You know that includes some developers, right? They had already bought land there with the intention of developing it when the freeze on all development was put in place.

Terrance Corcoran makes some very valid points you won't see elsewhere in the media. Like reminding readers the 'green belt' is not some ancient holy site but was invented by the Dalton McGuinty Liberals and slapped into place with almost no consultation. People who owned the land within it were simply notified that their land could no longer be developed. And if that cost them money, well so what? For months, the people of Ontario have been called to worship the Greenbelt Holy Land, a massive 810,000-hectare (two-million-acre) land mass that entraps the 6.7 million residents of the Greater Toronto Area (GTA), Canada’s largest metropolis. Voters have also been led to believe — by media, activists and political hackers — that the Greenbelt area that sprawls around the GTA is the hallowed product of a sacred text known as the Greenbelt Act to protect what is known as The Golden Horseshoe. The call to worship at this modern-day version of the Golden Calf began when it was revealed that Premier Doug Ford’s Progressive Conservative government planned to breach the commandments of the 2005 Greenbelt Act by allowing 2,995 hectares (about 0.4 per cent of the sacred territory) to be released into the hands of devilish and corrupt real estate developers to build new homes. Oh, the anguish, the shock, the horror and the sorrow. In the months that followed came political hellfire, including an auditor general’s report and an integrity commissioner’s report along with endless moralizing editorials and media commentary. All condemned the Ford government’s sacrilegious plan to allow a marginal encroachment into the Green Holy Land. https://financialpost.com/opinion/dezone-ontario-greenbelt-greentrap-free-toronto?

It should be left to the landlord without regard to the tenant and his wishes. But that's unrealistic in this country. At best, naming a neutral party, perhaps with a couple of appointees from both the government and opposition would take it out of the political arena.

But... but wait! You've been insisting for days now that PMs have absolutely zero power over what happens at 24 Sussex! How silly people must be to think that a PM whose party appoints and reappoints all the directors on the NCC every few years has no power over the NCC.

I understand. It's probably hard on you to keep pretending you know anything about how the government works. It's probably hurting your head.

It looks to me like you're the one with the rose-coloured glasses. Agreed. But we're not talking about the minister's office or even the minister. We're talking about the PM I laughed out loud upon reading this. The first thing that comes to mind was when I was leaning over my boss's shoulder while we tried to figure out a way to justify hiring a tall, cute blonde to be a director's admin (she was a temp) as a direct hire (without competition). We were spitballing specific and difficult to find 'skills' that we could include on the form. You can imagine how some of the suggestions went. We actually did that twice, another time for a DG. Oh, and another cute girl the DG wanted to hire through a competition (English essential, bilingual imperative). The only problem was the position we needed to put her into was bilingual imperative. She thought she was bilingual but failed the bilingual testing. So we hired her for another position temporarily and assigned a couple of bilingual staff members to tutor her for weeks on end. She passed and was hired and transferred to the job where we wanted her Then, in another job, there were all the March purchases we needed to creatively justify to use up some of the surplus in the budget. That included creative descriptions of some items to fit within policy. Let's not even get into the 'team building exercises' we held in pool halls and bars. In several of the positions I was in we had several occasions to be creative about how to fit things into policy. The watchword was 'whatever the DG wants, the DG gets', or in another one "Whatever the assistant commissioner wants, the assistant commissioner gets'. Don't tell me that doesn't apply to the prime minister. Right. You just take everyone who reports to him away and put him on a 'project' by himself, like the senior manager who couldn't stop ogling the younger female staff members and making inappropriate comments. Or the senior director who screwed everything up but couldn't be persuaded to retire. He wound up on a 'project' too. And the best way for a CRA employee to get fired is to get caught nosing around their own tax file, or that of family members. I think you and I are speaking about different things, here. Every large organization implements rules and policy for their staff to follow. It doesn't require legislation. HR rules themselves have only become more complex and arcane over the years. As have purchasing rules. Now a purchasing regulation based on legislation is something like section 34 of the Financial Administration Act. A purchasing policy rule is something like "You can no longer purchase computer equipment on your government credit card but most do so with a purchase order'. That requires no input from politicians nor the enactment of new laws. Okay, back to the topic. The decision about making expensive renovations to 24 Sussex has always been solely up to the prime minister. That's why so many of them refused to okay them out of fear they'd be criticized by the opposition for spending big money on their own 'home'. The NCC has been waiting on a decision from the PM for eight years now and will take no action until it gets that permission.