De-zone the whole greenbelt

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, ExFlyer said:

The government sold out what to who??? The government did not own the land

Why do you always act like you've never ever heard of corruption?

[ExFlyer]

14 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Why do you always act like you've never ever heard of corruption?

Why do you always act like there is corruption in everything??

Only when you can provide names, numbers and prosecution dates can you actually claim and prove corruption. Till then the only thing that is corrupt is your thought process. Personal perception is not proof.

Rather than answering the question you cry corruption LOL

Edited September 13, 2023 by ExFlyer
ExFlyer

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

Why do you always act like there is corruption in everything??

I don't, and I've made it quite clear I really don't think there's as much as people might imagine. It's just that in the absence of  transparency and deliberate evasiveness a lot can be left to the imagination, misinformation and outright fake news. These and the perception that politicians and governments have lots to hide has piled up over the decades resulting in a deep widespread mistrust that's poisoning society. It's a dangerous unsustainable situation that I think is getting worse.

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

Only when you can provide names, numbers and prosecution dates can you actually claim and prove corruption. Till then the only thing that is corrupt is your thought process. Personal perception is not proof.

Which is precisely why we need a robust system of accountability that involves the public. Process guardians, public volunteers who observe, record and report on the public processes that make our governance.

[CdnFox]

Just now, eyeball said:

Which is precisely why we need a robust system of accountability that involves the public. Process guardians, public volunteers who observe, record and report on the public processes that make our governance.

I can name the dates and times and who was involved for the corrupt aga khan scandal and the snc scandal and even the WE scandal... but you still support the libs.

Transparency is useless if the people won't do anything with it. As long as you still support corrupt people and parties then you have no real validity calling for more transparency.

[ExFlyer]

7 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I don't, and I've made it quite clear I really don't think there's as much as people might imagine. It's just that in the absence of  transparency and deliberate evasiveness a lot can be left to the imagination, misinformation and outright fake news. These and the perception that politicians and governments have lots to hide has piled up over the decades resulting in a deep widespread mistrust that's poisoning society. It's a dangerous unsustainable situation that I think is getting worse.

 

2 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Which is precisely why we need a robust system of accountability that involves the public. Process guardians, public volunteers who observe, record and report on the public processes that make our governance.

I do not recall you ever making any statements other than there is corruption.

Perception is a thing that people that do not know what is going on imagine. Imagination is an open vault, put into it what you think you should, regardless if there is facts or proof.

We do have accountability, it is just now known or seen by your standards.

[eyeball]

Just now, ExFlyer said:

I do not recall you ever making any statements other than there is corruption.

You're relatively new around here. There were a handful of other forums preceding this too so...

[Nationalist]

Any housing is better than no housing.!

[ExFlyer]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

You're relatively new around here. There were a handful of other forums preceding this too so...

So???

What are you implying?

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, ExFlyer said:

So???

What are you implying?

That you might be dismissing an idea prematurely.

[ExFlyer]

3 minutes ago, eyeball said:

That you might be dismissing an idea prematurely.

What idea.

Contrary to what you may think, I cannot read minds, let alone yours.

Please say what you mean.

[eyeball]

22 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

What idea.

Contrary to what you may think, I cannot read minds, let alone yours.

Please say what you mean.

I don't think we have adequate oversight over our governance and that we should address it with human observers i.e. process guardians.

Years of experience at local governance and also as a member of a couple of associations have left me with the strong impression that lobbying, conducted by paid and unpaid lobbyists can present a real challenge to transparency.  I'm certainly not against lobbying I simply think it be should be conducted openly so that everyone understands what is being asked of and given by public officials.

I'm not talking about meetings in over clear national security issues or matters of a personal nature. Just anything that could impact or affect the public's interest and domain.

[ExFlyer]

1 minute ago, eyeball said:

I don't think we have adequate oversight over our governance and that we should address it with human observers i.e. process guardians.

Years of experience at local governance and also as a member of a couple of associations have left me with the strong impression that lobbying, conducted by paid and unpaid lobbyists can present a real challenge to transparency.  I'm certainly not against lobbying I simply think it be should be conducted openly so that everyone understands what is being asked of and given by public officials.

I'm not talking about meetings in over clear national security issues or matters of a personal nature. Just anything that could impact or affect the public's interest and domain.

To me, lobbying has to be one on one. It is not a bid process for a request for proposal (and even those are not made public).

Lobbying is trying to get something and if it was open, then a competitor would be able to poach the idea or benefit. The competitive process would be ruined.

The public's interest should be for the public to know something is being done.

[eyeball]

Just now, ExFlyer said:

The public's interest should be for the public to know something is being done.

How, by what process? How can the public audit, validate and verify what they're being told?

[CdnFox]

34 minutes ago, eyeball said:

How, by what process? How can the public audit, validate and verify what they're being told?

By the results.

But the liberal supports don't take action to fight corruption even when the results AND the negotiatons are known.

You've never been able to explain why more would be better when we don't do anything with what we've got already. Other than to say somehow that's harper's fault.

[ExFlyer]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

How, by what process? How can the public audit, validate and verify what they're being told?

Lobbying is not an auditable or validating or verifying thing;. It is two or more people talking.

I find it funny that you and some others think you have the right to know what happens and goes on day to day.

[Legato]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

I don't think we have adequate oversight over our governance and that we should address it with human observers i.e. process guardians.

 

...and who or what is going to provide oversight of the "process guardians"?

[ExFlyer]

5 minutes ago, Legato said:

...and who or what is going to provide oversight of the "process guardians"?

And to who??? Publish it every week in newspapers??? LOL

[eyeball]

4 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

Lobbying is not an auditable or validating or verifying thing;. It is two or more people talking.

And all that's missing is a public to listen.

3 hours ago, Legato said:

..and who or what is going to provide oversight of the "process guardians"?

The public. They're one and the same thing.

[eyeball]

3 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

And to who??? Publish it every week in newspapers??? LOL

Why not? I'm sure there could also be a website for reports to be posted.

[ExFlyer]

9 hours ago, eyeball said:

And all that's missing is a public to listen.

The public. They're one and the same thing.

 

9 hours ago, eyeball said:

Why not? I'm sure there could also be a website for reports to be posted.

I truly hope you are just a frustrated person and blowing off steam.

Lobbying is not a contract negotiation. Lobbying or advocacy, is the act of lawfully attempting to influence the actions, policies, or decisions of government officials. Lobbying is inevitable in any political system or business. Any time one person or group tries to convince another of something, that is lobbying be it one on one or in a public forum.

[eyeball]

3 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

Lobbying is not a contract negotiation. Lobbying or advocacy, is the act of lawfully attempting to influence the actions, policies, or decisions of government officials. Lobbying is inevitable in any political system or business. Any time one person or group tries to convince another of something, that is lobbying be it one on one or in a public forum.

No argument here.

Quote

I truly hope you are just a frustrated person and blowing off steam.

I truly hope you're not a politician.

[ExFlyer]

2 minutes ago, eyeball said:

No argument here.

I truly hope you're not a politician.

Hell no but, I have been to many business dinners. ?️

Edited September 14, 2023 by ExFlyer

[Zeitgeist]

I don’t think we should hand over the Greenbelt to developers to built more expensive houses for well off people who haven’t arrived to Canada yet.  I suggest issuing permits to people, with a small annual fee for garbage collection, water supply, and electrical connection, to place their own modular/manufactured homes on less environmentally sensitive parts of the Greenbelt.  These would not have basements, would not be permanent dwellings, and the owners would have to arrange for their own septic systems and disposal pick-ups. They’d have to be a minimum distance from each other and they couldn’t dominate the landscape.  They would have to be small and spread out.

Basically set parameters for these dwellings and we could probably supply housing for about 100,000 people quite cheaply overnight.  They would have to be owner-occupied.   It must also be understood that the public can still access the land on which these dwellings stand except perhaps for a very small perimeter around the dwelling.  

[ExFlyer]

15 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

I don’t think we should hand over the Greenbelt to developers to built more expensive houses for well off people who haven’t arrived to Canada yet.  I suggest issuing permits to people, with a small annual fee for garbage collection, water supply, and electrical connection, to place their own modular/manufactured homes on less environmentally sensitive parts of the Greenbelt.  These would not have basements, would not be permanent dwellings, and the owners would have to arrange for their own septic systems and disposal pick-ups. They’d have to be a minimum distance from each other and they couldn’t dominate the landscape.  They would have to be small and spread out.

Basically set parameters for these dwellings and we could probably supply housing for about 100,000 people quite cheaply overnight.  They would have to be owner-occupied.   It must also be understood that the public can still access the land on which these dwellings stand except perhaps for a very small perimeter around the dwelling.  

Who is "handing over" anything? As i have asked numerous times, who owns the greenbelt It is not government. They have not expropriated the land. A developer would have to buy the land form the owners.

Oh, you mean pay property taxers like everyone else??? Houses on the land pays more property taxes to the province, region and municipality than if left greenbelt or farmland so...it would benefit all levels of government. LOL

So, in essence,build smaller homes instead of the 3000 to 5000 sq ft homes which are now being built and sell like hotcakes?? Not sure why they should not be permanent though. Oh and be on acreage instead of smaller lots?? Makes the neighbourhood exclusive does it not??

Quickly built homes and for sale only? No rentals? What about the folks that cannot afford to buy homes? That is the problem.

Lastly, you want it to be OK for folks to be wandering around your homes unhindered???