Scotty Posted December 2, 2015 Report Share Posted December 2, 2015 I have no problem with the taxpayer paying for any kind of family support for the Prime Minister of Canada and his family. I bet you would have had a problem if the prime minister was named Harper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted December 2, 2015 Report Share Posted December 2, 2015 So only mothers have the right to comment on this issue? What about a man who's raised children and dealt with childcare expenses? or a woman who's never raised a child? The only people that have the right to comment on the hypocrisy of our PM is mothers? People who have cared for children full time. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted December 2, 2015 Report Share Posted December 2, 2015 The precedent was set with Trudeau the first and Mulroney. Why should Justin be any different? Do you have evidence Trudeau the first and Mulroney had taxpayer funded nannies? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted December 2, 2015 Report Share Posted December 2, 2015 Honestly, who cares? This is much ado about nothing. It is more public money going to pay for a millionaire's servants than Mike Duffy took from us, which you seemed to care a very, very, very, very, very, very, very great deal about! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Posted December 2, 2015 Report Share Posted December 2, 2015 http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/topic/25332-trudeau-childrens-nannies-being-paid-for-by-taxpayers/?p=1120883 Brian Mulroney was asked by a television interviewer if taxpayers would pay for ''nannies'' for his three children as they did for Trudeau's father, Pierre Trudeau, when he was prime minister. "No, no," Mulroney replied. The Canadian Press reported again in November of that year that Mulroney's chief of staff, Fred Doucet, denied the family employed a government-paid nanny while Mulroney was opposition leader, saying the woman was actually a maid who "interfaces with the children in a habitual way." So what you are saying is that Justin Trudeau is as dishonest and corrupt and self-serving as Brian Mulroney was? This is your excuse to justify this theft of public money?!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted December 2, 2015 Report Share Posted December 2, 2015 (edited) Mulroney said "No No". His chief of staff said the woman was a maid who "interfaced with the children on a habitual basis". Ie, They had a nanny, but lied about it. Link posted previously. Look it up. I think if we're not going to provide child care, Justin will have to cut down his working hours to be available when his wife's busy, just like most Dads. Or ... if we insist he work longer hours than full time and travel, we'll have to pick up the tab for his child care responsibilities. . Edited December 2, 2015 by jacee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drummindiver Posted December 2, 2015 Report Share Posted December 2, 2015 People who have cared for children full time. . Only mothers have cared for children full time? Ppl who go to work to pay for this ridiculousness have no say? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted December 2, 2015 Report Share Posted December 2, 2015 (edited) Only mothers have cared for children full time? Ppl who go to work to pay for this ridiculousness have no say? I was disparaging the opinions of some men *** who have not cared for children full time.***They don't have a right to an opinion on this topic because they don't know what they're talking about. . Edited December 2, 2015 by jacee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capricorn Posted December 2, 2015 Report Share Posted December 2, 2015 Sheila Martin famously hated her husband’s job at the PMO. For much of her early years at 24 Sussex Drive, Laureen Harper stuck to charity appearances and the occasional cat-themed event. But just four weeks after her husband took office, it is becoming clear Sophie Grégoire-Trudeau will take an unusually active hold on the often staid role of Prime Ministerial spouse. Her high profile has already brought criticism, after she replaced the prime ministerial chef, was featured in unauthorized jewelry marketing, and, it emerged this week, was granted the aid of two taxpayer-funded nannies. Even as the United States equips its First Ladies with a budget, duties and large staff, Canada has treated Prime Ministerial spouses much the same as the spouse of any other MP — and not even as well as the spouse of the Governor-General. “Our model follows the British model and normally the spouse is not assigned specific or official duties,” said Robert Collette, Canada’s former chief of protocol, writing in an email to the National Post. http://www.canada.com/news/national/high+profile+sophie+a9goire+trudeau+taking+unusually+active+role/11558208/story.html It appears the Trudeaus have decided that Sophie Gregoire-Trudeau will have a "First Lady"-like role. This may explain why they need two nannies. So that our glamorous "First Lady" can discharge her duties without worrying about taking care of the kiddies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boges Posted December 2, 2015 Report Share Posted December 2, 2015 (edited) They don't have a right to an opinion on this topic. Well that's just BS. I'd argue this statement is bigoted. Many don't have kids because childcare is quite unaffordable and one income families are increasingly difficult. The new PM and his wife don't have this problem. It's a matter of how taxpayer money is spent and the hypocrisy of this PM and not how hard it is to raise a child. Edited December 2, 2015 by Boges Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted December 2, 2015 Report Share Posted December 2, 2015 If we expect her to have any role at all, without pay, then we should at least pay for her child care. If we expect her husband to work longer than 40 hrs a week and travel on our behalf, then we should pay for his share of child care. Dad's have child care duties too. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boges Posted December 2, 2015 Report Share Posted December 2, 2015 (edited) If we expect her to have any role at all, without pay, then we should at least pay for her child care. If we expect her husband to work longer than 40 hrs a week and travel on our behalf, then we should pay for his share of child care. Dad's have child care duties too. . Who asks her to have any role? I don't believe anyone voted for her. Who have 2 bleeps about Laureen Harper? Was Chretien even married? Couldn't tell you if I ever saw what the women looked like, let alone her name. Again if JT didn't go on about removing childcare tax relief for wealthy people, this type of hypocrisy wouldn't have been an issue. Edited December 2, 2015 by Boges Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted December 2, 2015 Report Share Posted December 2, 2015 I guess he can donate his to the government instead of charity, to offset the nanny cost. What a tempest in a teapot created by some cranky Conservative men who have never cared full time for a child!! Just childish. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribblet Posted December 2, 2015 Report Share Posted December 2, 2015 I bet you would have had a problem if the prime minister was named Harper. Exactly, we know what would be said. I can swallow paying for one nanny, even after he told us rich people like him don't need financial help with the kids, and that's the big issue with it, if he hadn't made that a campaign issue IMO most people wouldn't mind one nanny, but two? As far as the nannies go, they are the same two nannies he paid for before becoming PM, and the salary from the taxpayers will be retroactive to the day he was sworn in. Their salaries are lower because it includes meals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boges Posted December 2, 2015 Report Share Posted December 2, 2015 (edited) What a tempest in a teapot created by some cranky Conservative men who have never cared full time for a child!! Just childish. . Uninformed bigoted statements FTW! http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/justin-trudeau-nannies-hypocritical-1.3345671 Conservative finance critic Lisa Raitt says it is % Edited December 2, 2015 by Boges Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted December 2, 2015 Report Share Posted December 2, 2015 You can't compare the circumstances of normal people to this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted December 2, 2015 Report Share Posted December 2, 2015 (edited) Uninformed bigoted statements FTW! Wouldn't single mothers who CARE FULL TIME FOR A CHILD!!! love the government to take care of their childcare costs. Sometimes they do, depending on income.I guess the Trudeau's should have just lied about the nannies like Mulroney did? Ya ... they're just 'maids ... who habitually interface with the children'. Who the hell leaves their kids with maids untrained in child care?!?!! . Edited December 2, 2015 by jacee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boges Posted December 2, 2015 Report Share Posted December 2, 2015 I guess the Trudeau's should have just lied about the nannies like Mulroney did? No he should have not campaigned on taking child care tax relief away from "WOMEN WHO TAKE CARE OF CHILDREN FULL TIME". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted December 2, 2015 Report Share Posted December 2, 2015 (edited) No he should have not campaigned on taking child care tax relief away from "WOMEN WHO TAKE CARE OF CHILDREN FULL TIME". Rich ones you mean.Certainly Justin's portion of child care duties should be paid for. His duties for us don't exactly leave him time for his half of the child care responsibilities. And Sophie's when her presence is required for the nation's business. Entertaining and being entertained is official business, requires planning and prep time too. If we cover those requirements, and they donate their child care benefit, that takes care of it. Silly tempest in a teapot by cranky Conservative fuddy duddies who'd be reduced to blubbering and slobbering messes if they ever had to take care of children full time. So ... do you think the Trudeau's should have just lied about the taxpayer funded nannies like Mulroney did? . Edited December 2, 2015 by jacee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribblet Posted December 2, 2015 Report Share Posted December 2, 2015 A PM's wife is not required at any time, there are no official duties for a PMs wife, therefore no financial allowances or budgets. As far as lying goes the PMO is lying about the nannies having additional duties, they are the same two nannies he employed prior to becoming PM, people aren't buying into that one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted December 2, 2015 Report Share Posted December 2, 2015 (edited) Uninformed bigoted statements FTW! http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/justin-trudeau-nannies-hypocritical-1.3345671 From your link:Trudeau's successor, Progressive Conservative Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, also had a nanny on staff. Mulroney faced controversy after he pledged to personally pay for the nanny, but later reneged on that promise and had the government foot the bill. . Edited December 2, 2015 by jacee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted December 2, 2015 Report Share Posted December 2, 2015 (edited) A PM's wife is not required at any time, there are no official duties for a PMs wife, therefore no financial allowances or budgets. As far as lying goes the PMO is lying about the nannies having additional duties, they are the same two nannies he employed prior to becoming PM, people aren't buying into that one. They likely had other duties then too. Silly stuff. Silly petty partisan bickering. . Edited December 2, 2015 by jacee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boges Posted December 2, 2015 Report Share Posted December 2, 2015 (edited) So if we elect a single male or female as PM, will they have to hire an escort to fulfill the roles of the PM's spouse? Edited December 2, 2015 by Boges Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drummindiver Posted December 2, 2015 Report Share Posted December 2, 2015 Rich ones you mean. Certainly Justin's portion of child care duties should be paid for. His duties for us don't exactly leave him time for his half of the child care responsibilities. And Sophie's when her presence is required for the nation's business. Entertaining and being entertained is official business, requires planning and prep time too. If we cover those requirements, and they donate their child care benefit, that takes care of it. Silly tempest in a teapot by cranky Conservative fuddy duddies who'd be reduced to blubbering and slobbering messes if they ever had to take care of children full time. So ... do you think the Trudeau's should have just lied about the taxpayer funded nannies like Mulroney did? . He's paid $350k a year and is given free housing, food, etc. Most Canadians get under $89k a year, pay for housing, food and clothing, and have to pay for child care as well. Most Canadians did not run on a platform of "Real change". Wait, Harper didn't rape Canadians at every turn-donating all proceeds from his hockey book to veterans is but one example-so I guess "Real change" is exactly what happened. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drummindiver Posted December 2, 2015 Report Share Posted December 2, 2015 What a tempest in a teapot created by some cranky Conservative men who have never cared full time for a child!! Just childish. . Your misandrist views are showing again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.