Keepitsimple

I'm disappointed in your abandonment of what I used to perceive as a somewhat objective mind that just happened to tilt a bit Liberal - and there's nothing wrong with that. But your number one is I'm sorry - arrogant. He is not where he is because he's so very smart - he won because it was time to kick Harper out and because his advisers cleverly stole NDP votes with what has amounted to a lie on resettling refugees (less than 2500 government assisted refugees instead of 25,000 by year end) - and what has so far proven to be a lie about re-calling our jets. Second, expert consultations is the way forward - but within a proper process that involves the Provinces. Your third point is disingenuous. Electoral reform had nothing to do with this last election and was a minor splinter in platforms that very few people paid attention to.

I'm sure you'll find that there are many things that our Fathers of Confederation did not anticipate - changing the historic United Kingdom voting system is likely one of them. A Supreme Court consideration might be: if they did have the foresight to consider it, what would their likely position have been? In the context of strong Provinces and the fact that MPs represent Provincial constituents, it seems obvious that the Provinces would have been party to any decision.

If there was ever an issue worthy of a Constitutional challenge, it would be changing the voting system without getting approval from the provinces and maybe also a referendum. As we've found, there are many things that are not explicitly written into our Constitution - but nonetheless have become part of its fabric. FPTP has been with us since the birth of Canada and it seems fairly obvious that it's an implied part of our Constitution. As Harper did, if there is to be any serious attempt at changing the system, it would be wise to first do a referral to the SCC to see what the ground rules should be for changes.

That would be great - because it would mean he's doing a great job and Canadians are behind him. But you're right - we will see.

You're being awfully naïve Waldo if you think that an advertised event (how else do you get over 700 attendees)with Suzuki as a guest would not be recorded in some manner. As I said - and you continue to ignore - it wasn't only a single sentence - it was a carefully scripted rant - punctuated by that "insane" statement......and for what purpose? Well, that's another story.

The dripping apologist is still at it. The quality was exceptional - very stable, nice slow panning. Must have been a great cell phone and a very professional user! Not a formal setting? Over 700 people.....and you don't think that when Suzuki says something, it won't somehow work it's way into the public domain? Off the cuff remark? He had obviously practiced his whole schtick - with a substantial lead-in before dropping his "terrifying" bombshell - you know - the ridiculous, insane one. Why not just admit it was a very dumb thing to say - because his credibility is eroding faster that the shores of Kiribati.

Is there a supporting link that describes the conflict?

Is that what you "expect" he was trying to say? He certainly did "extend" it - from the absolute worst case scenario of 250 km to the Suzuki blarney of 7500 km (Japan to Canada's West Coast). I guess that gives you top ranking as a Suzuki apologist, hey? .

Nope. His own words do that - he needs no help from me.

My point is that there is an expression that's sometimes used with wealthy people - they "wear their money well". In other words, they are down to earth people and you wouldn't even know they were rich. I guess I look for more modesty and humility in a leader - especially one who has been heavily criticized as being "elitist". I just continue to see too much "look at me" for my liking. Just my opinion. Not sure why you think the $2500US a night is not "reliable information" - regardless of the source......are you doubting it's accuracy?

When you lay down with dogs, you're bound to get fleas. Much has been made of Trudeau's celebrity status - and the Liberal Party has been cashing in on that for some time - so is it really surprising that stories would be featured in - wait for it - celebrity news outlets? As for "bragging" - perhaps there's a better word - like "elitist". We now have a PM who can readily spend at least $25,000 on a vacation - something those middle-class Canadians he so "cares about" can only dream of. Not really the best optics after only a couple of months on the job. Here's a National Post article for you: Link: http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/trudeau-will-reimburse-government-for-some-of-the-costs-of-family-travel-to-exclusive-caribbean-resort

Does your request mean you agree that it would be bad optics to be spending $3500 per night? Well, it was "at least" $2500 US which is indeed $3500 Canadian. Good to hear that he at least paid for his airfare........ Link: http://www.tmz.com/2016/01/09/canadian-prime-minister-justin-trudeau-caribbean-vacation/

You're right - the link is from 2014 but it was in today's National Post as a "related article" to Ontario's $12.8 billion investment in the Darlington refurbishment project. I hadn't noticed the date.

Looks like the old fellow has shot himself in the foot again......the same kind of crap that he spews out on Climate Change. As one of the critics said "When he’s in his own field, he’s usually reasonable." - but that field is Genetics........ Link: http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/david-suzuki-regrets-claim-that-another-fukushima-disaster-would-require-mass-evacuations-in-north-america

......and the media often tout the figure of 1200 missing and murdered without saying that it covers a 30 year period. When you have over 600 nations scattered throughout Canada, many in isolated places stricken with poor living conditions - is it really that surprising that there's 40 of these occurrences each year - an average of one a year for every 15 Nations?

You've no doubt heard the phrase "Liberals campaign from the Left and govern from the Right". In other words - lie through their teeth during the campaign, then take a more pragmatic approach to governing. The problem we may have this time around is that Justin may very well behave like his father - do whatever he wants - and damn the cost to taxpayers and the country. There are reasons why Pierre Trudeau admired Chairman Mao and Fidel Castro - and it shouldn't have been that surprising that Justin let slip his own admiration of how the Chinese could make things happen. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.

Exactly - it happened a lot with Harper and I would expect it to continue......they sensationalize "briefings" and "memos" which are nothing but input to the decision-making process - if indeed one has to be made. Headlines with no context. Which brings up a pet peeve I have - who the heck ever decided that "decisions are taken" as opposed to decisions being made. Where exactly does one "take" decisions.....to the person who makes them? For heavens sake, you make a decision, you don't take one.

Gas plants or not, we're talking about improperly destroying government information. These facts seem pretty clear: 1) Did the hard drives get erased? Yes. 2) Were they erased by the IT department following established procedures? No. 3) Did Laura Miller's fiancee erase the hard drives? Yes. He was paid $10,000. These questions remain: 1) Who gave the order to erase the hard drives? 2) Who was party to the decision and/or it's execution? Everything else is noise: 1) Gas plants scandal, Ornge scandal, eHealth scandal, MARs scandal, Sudbury by-election scandal......it doesn't matter - it's all speculation as to what was on the drives - the fact is that government data was improperly and intentionally destroyed. 2) Even if there is a teeny weeny chance that there might be a plausible explanation for wiping the hard drives, there is NO reason why the drives needed to be erased by a third party, non-government resource in the middle of the night - so any hope of plausibility is down the drain.

Interesting move of the goalposts - going from a "modest" $10 billion deficit promise for two years to what is now a "goal". Now their economical "anchor" is maintaining the net debt to GDP ratio where it is - roughly 35%. In English, what that means is that no matter how much the economy grows (or doesn't), this government feels entitled to go into deficit by an amount equal to 35% of that increase. For example, Canada's GDP is currently about $1785 billion. Growth of 2% would be an additional 35.7 billion. 35% of that would be $12.5 billion......and that would be the "allowable" deficit for the year. Using that as a benchmark, an $18.75 billion deficit would require growth of 3%. Conversely, growth of only 1.5% would restrict the allowable deficit to $9.37 billion. As you can see, the original promise of holding the deficit to $10 billion is imminently doable in terms of a net debt to GDP ratio, even if not prudent......but not achieving 2% growth is a very real danger - as is running deficits in excess of $10 billion. Put them both together and you've got the highway to hell.

OK - you're obviously entitled to your opinion. Another viewpoint might be that they have no choice but to try to eventually get that number up to 25,000 - no matter how long it takes. Do you really think they could admit that their election promise was so outlandish?

From two months to at least 14 months? Seven times as long? Less than 2000 government assisted refugees instead of 25,000 ....you don't find that "misleading"? They only have it "right" now because it was so ridiculously impossible before - and so very designed to pander to the NDP voters.

Then there should have been no need to lie to Canadians and say it would only take two months and $100 million - as opposed to over a year and $1.2 billion over 6 years......and like longer and more.

On December 6th, Foreign Affairs Minister Dion said it would be a matter of weeks - not months before our jets were recalled. On the campaign trail, Trudeau said "immediately". He's certainly broken the spirit of his promise. Is he now on the verge of breaking it completely? What's the delay? After all, if we're only contributing 2% to the effort (the Liberal position), what's the big deal?

Here are those facts Jacee - while the vast majority of these refugees are privately-sponsored and thus will be short stays, government assisted refugees will have to stay longer until adequate housing and support is in place.......personally, I don't care - people have to eat and we have to support them until they are ensconced in the support mechanisms.......but it's not a lie - just a government making it up as it goes along.... Link: http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/government-hotel-bill-for-refugees-expected-to-near-80-million-by-march

Others remain to be seen - but on this issue, it's not bad planning. It should be as clear as the nose on your face that they knew without any doubt that their "promise" was ridiculously impossible. Aiming for 25,000 in two months as opposed to the now "estimate" of 25,000 in 14 months should tell you that. The purpose of what was essentially a lie was to keep the momentum of gaining NDP voters. Another issue that drew NDP voters was the "bring home the jets immediately" promise. They have already broken the spirit of that one - it remains to be seen if they will break the promise outright. Pretty simple - bring them home - or not. Will it prove to be another lie?