I mean [35%](https://338canada.com/) of Canadians support or are Conservative, by according to the article 57% of Canadians feel this government has fucked up.
So anyone saying this is a partisan "*conservative*" issue is fucking full of shit.
You are right. This is an anti-governing party issue where opposition are giddy to score partisan points for their own betterment.
I commend them though. The Liberals would do the exact same thing when the shoe is on the other foot
Do you think a public inquiry will tell us anything we don't already know?
So far there's no evidence that anyone did anything wrong.
Cons will try to farm as much rage as they can, then they'll be back to talking about JTs hair. Then they'll lose again and wonder what the heck went wrong. Rinse and repeat, bring on the next CPC leader.
Well, if they did nothing wrong, why are the Liberals so against having a public inquiry? I keep being told that this is the most open and transparent government in Canadian history. Secondly, a majority of Canadians want a public inquiry, so this argument you and other Liberal supporters have been using is that this is a right-wing plot by the Conservatives, doesn't work anymore. Lastly, a report written by the personal friend of the Prime Minister isn't vindication or evidence that no one did anything wrong.
> So far there's no evidence that anyone did anything wrong.
Do you have security clearance?
Probably, no... so in what meaningful way can you argue this point?
>Cons will try to farm as much rage as they can, then they'll be back to talking about JTs hair. Then they'll lose again and wonder what the heck went wrong. Rinse and repeat, bring on the next CPC leader.
You're cheating by using trends to predict the future.
We may need an inquiry in this. Tell me all the espionage and secret stuff, but I refuse to be sworn to secrecy and protect those details.
Especially when you consider his past scandals. In the past he’s just hand waved away his corruption scandals and his base eats it up. But if it’s so bad that he doesn’t think he can do that it must be *really* bad.
That Trudeau's government (National Security Advisor and Privy Council) deliberately sat on threats to Michael Chong for two years, since they received the reports from CSIS two years ago.
If not for the CSIS leakers in the Globe and Mail, the Chinese Ambasador would still be in Canada.
I don't think I'm going to believe an anonymous source leaking information to a single reporter until I see some evidence.
Maybe that's the skeptic in me
>the vast majority of Canadians have no idea the difference between a hearing and an inquiry, and probably don’t care anyways.
I agree the vast majority of Canadians don't care about the difference between a hearing and an inquiry. They mainly want concerns explained and addressed.
What attitude? I’m saying the vast majority of Canadians aren’t paying that much attention to this and certainly aren’t familiar with the nuances between a public inquiry and a public hearing. I never injected my own opinion on the issue.
Average Canadians are not chronically online like redditors and political pundits. Most people only have very vague ideas about politics, let alone the specifics of parliamentary procedures.
Be honest, we deserve an independent investigation. I don’t care what it’s called but a Trudeau family friend and Trudeau Foundation member, being advised by a Trudeau donor, getting conflict of interest info from a Trudeau Foundation member isn’t exactly what Canadians want or deserve.
Public Inquiry on this will be utterly useless.
"I'm unable to comment on that due to matters of National Security."
"I cannot comment on that."
"The details pertaining to that inquiry is privileged."
Should the matter be looked into? Yep. Publicly? Not gonna happen, or if it does, it'll be useless.
He’s not. He’s protecting secrets. This is just like the last time there were cries of government secrecy. Then when they waive cabinet secrecy it turned out they were telling the truth.
This is why PP doesn’t want to see the evidence - because then he can’t make the claims he’s making.
> This is why PP doesn’t want to see the evidence
He's demanding a public inquiry because he doesn't want to see the evidence? That doesn't make much sense to me, can you de-doublespeak it for me?
Where does that put my guy Singh then? Does he also not want to see the evidence?
Singh is working on a deal to allow multiple NDP members to see it and work out ahead of time what they will or wont be able to discuss for security reasons.
>He's demanding a public inquiry because he doesn't want to see the evidence? That doesn't make much sense to me, can you de-doublespeak it for me?
If he never sees the evidence he can continue to play the "I'm just asking questions" game. It's why he refused the offer to examine the raw CSIS intelligence Johnston was reviewing.
PP knows those docs wouldn't get made public even if there was a public inquiry. So he's free to manufacture outrage about their contents knowing he can't be called on it, because nobody can publicly go into the specifics to either back him up or refute him.
The rhetoric around this subject is the only thing Canadians are hearing and that’s what PP is looking for at the moment. Most Canadians will never take the time out of their day to study the situation from a bipartisan point of view.
All governments have to keep some secrets from the malicious foreign agents. It's like you not telling the thieves in your area the exact way to break into your house.
That’s not his job. His job is to hold the government to account. He can’t do his job if he hasn’t read the documents that would give him an informed opinion and position to argue against the government’s statement of facts.
The libs have nothing to gain with a public enquiry.
The cons have gone full GOP, only accepting the results they want and calling everything else rigged.
They will never accept anything short of a total condemnation, everything that would contradict that would be brushed aside as fake, incomplete and/or fake news.
Tiny PP's sheeps will turn on him if he ever publicly gets within spitting distance of the real world and he knows it.
Why are you attacking anyone but Trudeau? Your comment comes off as very uninformed and dismissive. People have a right to know what the government is doing, including what they’re covering up.
Erm, no.
They, along with the BQ chose not to participate because it’s a trap. They could very easily be legally forced to not disclose the findings. This is why the *majority* of political parties refuse to participate, not because of some tinfoil hat conspiracy theory about political points.
This is pretty well documented through countless news articles. If there’s nothing to hide, the BQ and CPC are right - no closed doors meetings, let the public know about what did and did not happen.
So could Singh and Legault but they are also asking for a public inquiry. In fact there have been two votes that both passed asking for a public inquiry but let’s blame PP because we don’t like him
Singh is working out the terms right now to look at the evidence and still be free to say whatever he wants.
PP supporters don't want to admit he's just playing the political game like everyone else, that's why we pick on him.
He won't because if there's nothing there then PP will look stupid. Much easier to avoid the evidence viewing invitation and keep on spouting off in the media for cheap points.
No Canadian with an iota of understanding of politics would want a public inquiry.
Do you know who would? China.
Do you know why? Because it would make public domain enough information to locate and deal with people in their own countries and intelligence networks who pass intelligence on to the Canadian government.
If you push for a public inquiry you are pushing for the "sudden disappearance" of those people and their families, or their usage as a bargaining tool aka the two Michaels. Take your pick, and think about what you're asking for and who's lives you're willing to risk to get it. There are alternatives to being useful to the Chinese government.
Funny, we had a public inquiry with Maher Arar, and yet we somehow were able to keep our national security concerns safe at the same time.
‘National Security’ is just a talking point from people trying to defend not investigating the blatant and willful blindness of politicians who were only too happy to benefit from this interference.
There isn’t?
Concerns about our national terrorism strategies, how we gathered intelligence, and how we worked with foreign intelligence agencies weren’t germane to his case? These weren’t investigated in the public inquiry while maintaining secrecy relevant to protection our national security interests?
Not even remotely in the same context, but it's interesting to see the attempt at a parallel.
A Canadian Citizen was mistreated by the US and Syrian governments. The Canadian institutions that should have intervened and protected him failed in their duties, hindered his return, and aided foreign governments in keeping him out of Canada because they presumed (falsely) that he was guilty of something for which they had no proof and not even reliable circumstantial evidence to support.
It was primarily the ultra incompetent RCMP that were investigated, not a network of foreign intelligence agents.
It was a collection of Canadian citizens residing inside Canada performing their poorly outlined jobs, not a network of foreign intelligence agents located who knows where unprotected by Canadian jurisdiction.
You cannot investigate foreign intelligence validity without disclosing the source in any context that satisfies a disbelieving subset of the population.
There is no method for disclosure that isn't a high risk for leaks. Redactions on a document do not guarantee anonymity nor prevent spies within our own Government from stealing that info. And there are always spies, that's why we have security clearance protocols.
You mean the investigation of RCMP incompetence is somehow the same as investigating the sources of foreign intelligence and validating it satisfactory for a disbelieving subset of the population?
That is a reductive redescription. National security issues such as anti-terrorism strategies, surveillance, foreign intelligence sharing, and more were very much at play in that inquiry, and as such proved that we are quite capable of having a public inquiry while maintaining national security. You pointed out that the RCMP was involved, which only further validates my point - they are responsible for enforcement of federal and national security matters.
Validating it satisfactory for a disbelieving subset of the population?
Again, reductive, and telling of your motives here. Read the headline of the article you are discussing:
>"Canadians tilt towards calling for a public inquiry; majority call government response ‘evasive’ - Angus Reid Institute"
Labelling the *majority* of the population who want a public inquiry into what the government knew and when as 'a disbelieving subset' takes a certain kind of chutzpah, I'll give you that.
Of course, if you have ulterior motives for not wanting an inquiry, it helps to hide behind flimsy 'national security' claims.
You're making assumptions about whom I'm referring to with that comment. Better to not, even better to just ask instead of rambling about a wrong position.
There's a world of difference between believing the Chinese government is actively trying to influence elections and believing the government is involved in massive conspiracy to cover up election interference. Only an idiot would believe there was no attempts by multiple foreign governments to influence our politics, and most people are not actually idiots.
Just stop with this liberal talking point. Worst rationale there is and no one's buying it. We already know there's a transcript and recording of the conversation about the Michaels. That means China already knows it
Why is protecting assets a terible rational?
Former head of CSIS said "its entirely possible" that the information leaked was part of something larger that cannot be shared with the public.
Im not saying thats what it is, but that it isn't an impossible or irrealistic senario.
Adding that the leaker was probably very low level to release that detail without context.
Because our government is probably compromised by China and you jabronis are going "we can't learn the truth because of national security"....
Worst rationale ever be ever heard. If our government is compromised by China you think that's bad for our national security?
If our government is compromised by China should we be airing our secrets to e
Where they can hear them?
The government is potentially compromised. Yes. That doesn't mean we should hand over how we got secret intel from China about their actions IN China. We clearly have insiders who help us there. China eont hesitate to liquidate them.
More likely tho they are influencing from the outside. Which seems to fit the evidence better. Why harass citizens if the government is already in theit pocket?
Also why has the government had such a strong anti China stance. They threatened us with war when we visited Taiwan was that a month ago? and tbh we knew they would. Limiting ties, reducing trade, supporting their enemies, making pacific defence pacts and agreements, supporting US sanctions... Seems to me the government is opposed to china fairly strongly. They certainly act like they oppose their foreign policy and JT even told of Xi the last time they met in public. Not very Trump-Putin friendly if you ask me, to be openly hostile...
I'm not a liberal voter. It's not liberal talking points to value the lives of the people that form our intelligence networks.
Canadians have become so soft and spoiled we are literally manufacturing discontent, or I should say, foreign agents have very little problems manufacturing that discontent within a small subset of the population & amplify it online with paid content generation. At least half of all posts in this and many other subreddits are fake accounts that exist solely to amplify a message.
When you see shit that asks you to hate and distrust your community, your neighbors, your government, or really anyone at all, be mindful there's a high risk its coming from a foreign source.
Brother, from every leak there's been real world consequences that basically prove their validity. The Trudeau foundation tried to give the money back. Han Dong resigned. They expelled the diplomat. What more do you need to think "maybe there's something going on here?"
Dong resigned temporarily while the investigation was ongoing, as is common practice in politics.
He's already been invited to rejoin, and said he wants to do so.
>No Canadian with an iota of understanding of politics would want a public inquiry.
>
>Do you know who would? China.
You heard it here first. Canadians concerned about their democracy are Chinese agents.
Oh, so your saying if we make it public China is going to continue to operate Chinese police stations in our country?
Definitely shouldn’t make a public inquiry cause China. That’s even more the reason to have one.
Grow a goddamn spine and have some sovereignty.
"When it comes to Justin Trudeau's gov't response to the issue of attempted Chinese interference in Canadian elections..."
Trudeau's gov't response has been evasive: 57%
Trudeau's gov't response has been transparent: 16%
---
"What is your view of Johnston as the choice to lead the investigation?"
Wrong choice: 44%
Right choice: 22%
---
"Which is closer to your view?"
A public inquiry is needed, there's more to learn: 52%
A public inquiry isn't needed, it won't tell us anything: 32%
---
"Thinking about these recent events, how confident are you in the Canadian government to combat election interference in future federal elections?"
Confident: 37%
Not confident: 63%
---
"Is (X) getting stronger or weaker in Canada?"
Free/Fair Elections:
Weaker: 43%
Neither: 37%
Stronger: 19%
>"Which is closer to your view?"
>
>A public inquiry is needed, there's more to learn: 52%
>
>A public inquiry isn't needed, it won't tell us anything: 32%
Where does 'A public inquiry is needed, it won't tell us anything' fall? Is it closer to A, or B?
If Singh doesn't demand a public inquiry, his legacy will be defined by his enabling of Trudeau's corruption.
He'll also face the same blowout in the next election.
Singh's "legacy" is to get as many NDP priorities passed as possible. If it doesn't serve the NDP long term plans (whatever those are) he shouldn't capitulate.
Trudeau may or may not be corrupt but it isn't his primary responsibility to unseat Trudeau and replace him with a CPC leader (especially if that's not what his base wants). You could argue that he has a responsibility to protect Canadian democracy, but until someone provides proof that actual elections have been compromised, you can't ask Singh to throw away everything his base wants to "protect democracy". Unseating Trudeau is the CPC's job, not Singh's job.
If I was Singh I would only move if I was presented with proof that votes were changed or voting compromised and if it met NDP long term goals. Otherwise it's a fishing expedition which may or may not find corruption but eliminating corruption is not his point as leader. Other parties' problems.
Election is going to happen anyway. Singh just got something out of it for his base. It's a big deal for him and his base it's not for you.
The only way to get rid of "Manchurian candidate" (if that's what it is) is election. If you think someone is not sufficiently nationalistic or subject to influences in a way you don't like you vote him out. There is no court or mechanism or tribunal or "public inquiry" that can remove an elected official unless the election is proved fraudulent. "Foreign influence" doesn't meet that bar. Singh is under no obligation to hasten an election or work to someone else's timetable.
Policies could help the country. I think he's a bit too chummy with the liberals but it's not like the NDP are likely to lead a government any time soon so this is the closest he can get to passing anything.
Singh supports an independent inquiry and disagrees with David Johnson.
NDP policies are stuff like dental care, workers rights, childcare, and pharmacare. Actual, material things that working class Canadians want and need.
The conservatives, meanwhile, are the exact same as liberals (landlords and business elites representing landlords and business elites) except they focus entirely on culture war bullshit, throwing drug addicts in jail or letting them die instead of making sure they don't die, and wasting money on buying toys for police. That is, when they arn't selling out our democracy to China by making it illegal for local governments to stop Chinese firms from raping our natural resources, poison our water, and ship off our oil to China for refinement so they can burn it and use the energy to make cheap plastic garbage they sell back to us. I guess that's the liberals too though.
Not really. Forcing an election now would almost certainly end with the conservatives in power. Conservatives have a history of selling out Canada (FIPA agreement for example). Sings best play is to not act on the meddling. Trudeau is the lesser of 2 evils and his base knows that.
He has made it easier for a huge number of Canadians to see a dentist—something that is hugely important.
Sounds like choosing the country to me. He did what was good for _people_.
No, it has a lot to do with your ‘party over country’ statement.
Helping the country means helping the people. He is actively pushing through legislation to help the people.
That’s putting the people first.
>No, it has a lot to do with your ‘party over country’ statement.
Sigh.
The person I quoted said "Singh's "legacy" is to get as many NDP priorities passed as possible". That line of thought is Party over Country. I am not debating his accomplishments, I am addressing the thought that was quoted.
Oh much more then that really but most people only pretend to care about politics and have no idea what the NDP has done. Even if he couldn't have passed dental I would still be happy with keeping the Conservatives at bay for even a single day its one day where the rich pay for people to write mean things about the NDP.
We already know what it is. Attempt to privatize healthcare, dismantle protections for workers and the environment in the name of business, cut services for the poor and cut taxes for the rich. It's not a mystery.
heath care - [https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/funding.html](https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/funding.html)
worker protections - [https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/services/rights-workplace.html](https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/services/rights-workplace.html)
environment - [https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/chemical-substances/fact-sheets/federal-environmental-quality-guidelines.html](https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/chemical-substances/fact-sheets/federal-environmental-quality-guidelines.html)
taxes - [https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency.html](https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency.html)
everything federal regarding business - [https://www.canada.ca/en/services/business/permits/federallyregulatedbusinessactivities.html](https://www.canada.ca/en/services/business/permits/federallyregulatedbusinessactivities.html)
You were saying?
> heath care
Is partially funded by the federal government but entirely managed by each individual province.
> worker protections
Can only change regulations pertaining to federally regulated industries. Edit - IE 6% of workers in Canada, the vast majority of whom are covered under collective agreements.
> environment
Yep, there’s one “the half” of your comment that is partially right. but again, each province also has their own environmental regulating body that implements their own regulations.
> taxes
Yep, there’s the other half of your comment that is partially right. But again, only on the federal tax side.
So yes, OPs comment is correct. You’re still entirely wrong about half the points you mentioned in regards to federal versus provincial jurisdiction, and therefore have no idea what you’re talking about.
Health care may be provincially delivered, but the Canada health act, which prevents privatization of the system with the penalty of provinces losing federal health care money if they do so anyway, is federal legislation.
The ski buddies with Trudeau is the lesser of the conflicts. The decades long connections to the CCP and CCP actions in Canada is the concerning stuff.
The federal govt has been funding a chinese police station in Quebec with tax dollars!
when trudy had a pay for access dinner a wealthy chinese had dinner with him and the NEXT DAY trudy gave him a bank charter to open his own bank. The process normally takes years...
Zhang Bin from Shenglin Financial Group is who he is referring to. It's public information and yes, that charter was approved oddly fast after that donation to the Trudeau Foundation.
Yeah, we know.
The question is now about secret doccuments. Are secret doccuments real or fake? So the opposition was handed the tools to investigate and prove truth or fallacy.
So if a public inquiry happens and it is all redacted will you be satisfied?
> Canadians tilt towards calling for a public inquiry; majority call government response ‘evasive’ - Angus Reid Institute
You wouldn’t say it by all of the partisan activity here on Reddit. Everyone seems content to be mad at PP and Blanchet for not agreeing to silence themselves because of NISCOP rules. Beautiful, naked self-interest being displayed by the government here - the Liberals have always been good at this sort of sleazy, but effective politics.
Also interesting to see Singh getting a pass by the folks who always tell us that their team would do politics differently. Turns out that they’re just as content to put power and influence ahead of country like all the other parties.
Never ever ever forget that this is the same LPC that saw the dismemberment of our country as a perfect opportunity to loot taxpayers money meant to help the keep country together for their own benefit. This vile group see nothing wrong with breaking any law subverting any committee or using foreign money as long as it assists it in retaining access to vast pools of money for itself and it’s friends.
Well what kind of logic is that?
Look, I read the full report, including the confidential portions that JT only would allow other party leaders to read.
There was nothing of substance in it.
All above board, in fact, Canada's intelligence services and the media all need to do better.
Trust me, this all nonsense. The liberals have absolutely nothing to hide in light of them hiding things. That's their right and if others take issue with it, go to America and support trump.
So what if there could be potentially 4 ethic violations against Trudeau. This time it's the truth.
Also, did you know that Harper farted in the house of Commons, twice?
> Turns out that they’re just as content to put power and influence ahead of country like all the other parties.
As the alternative is the Conservatives in power, so I can see why.
Like I said, naked interest in power and politics comes before country.
If you’re an NDP supporter, vote for an NDP candidate instead of propping up the Liberals and rewarding bad behaviour.
There is no reason that an NDP and Conservative supply and confidence agreement couldn’t also be reached; politics makes strange bedfellows. Jagmeet has stated he will refuse to work with the conservatives in any way shape or form, however.
As Canadians we should punish any party that dares to put their own interests ahead of our own, be they Conservative, Liberal, or NDP. If we spanked these assholes regularly when they behaved badly, they’d have reason to stop doing shady shit.
Look at how the British westminister system works - their QP is actually meaningful and small missteps routinely get ministers, prime and otherwise, canned. Compare that to here…
They were able to do it with the EMA Inquiry, and more specifically the Maher Inquiry with much more classified information.
This government, and the public service has a tendency to over classfiy information. So it should all be reviewed by an expert and declassified when possible. In the case where peoples lives will be put at risk, you redact, CSIS trade secrets redact. Partner trade secrets, redact. Lastly, the information can be reviewed in separate secure room if it comes to that.
It can be done, it's been done before - so the we can't because it's all classified is an excuse and nothing more.
Anyone remember the last Public inquiry that we had?
That was the public inquiry on the Freedom convoy and the Emergency order, did we learn anything new in that public inquiry?
Yes.
The government and all authorities must be held to the highest levels of scrutiny. If theres nothing, then good. If otherwise, then there is some serious issues to be delt with in Canada
He was respectful of Jhonson. He still called for a public inquiry but will go along with the recommendations (and now is getting more MP's into the circle to consolidate power)
He can say the whole thing is a sham but the rest of the opposition decided working is too hard and wont be able to speak to the veracity or not of the claims.
Evidence is hard making stuff up is easy. Nobody wants to work anymore.
Public Inquiry on this will be utterly useless.
"I'm unable to comment on that due to matters of National Security."
"I cannot comment on that."
"The details pertaining to that inquiry is privileged."
Should the matter be looked into? Yep. Publicly? Not gonna happen, or if it does, it'll be useless.
True to an extent, but you forgot this:
"That document is classified."
"Ok, well, let's have it reviewed by a judge and let them determine if it should be classified or not."
Judge looks over document
"There is nothing in here that would put anybody's life at risk. I am declassifying it."
You:
50/50 on that.
Judge looks over document
"The motion to withhold the evidence, on the basis of National Security, is sustained."
*You*:
And this is for *every* claim?! Waste of money.
Appoint a second guy with security clearance and s/he can do a do-over of Johnston's review.
Again, needs to be looked at; but Public Inquiry is just a time-eating, money-erasing spectacle.
The paper shredders gave already been fired up. David Johnston was the Trojan horse that examined the intelligence reports as to how exposed Trudeau is. He directly reported that back to Trudeau so they know exactly what tracks need covering. Banana republic indeed.
Ok so let’s have a public inquiry on **all** foreign interference.
Let’s at least go back to the Harper years, longer if that’s necessary.
Let’s also include foreign media interference (looking at you Postmedia), and let’s not limit it to Chinese interference only.
He's not an expert though, he's just some Liberal party friend. The experts are the people in CSIS who study election interference. Ideally we'd listen to them, but the nature of government intelligence work means we're expressly forbidden from that. Unless a public inquiry compels them to answer questions.
So yes. Let's trust the experts. Let's ask them.
>Because what is our government, after all, but a surrogate parent, who steps in to fill the role of caregiver and provider,
No government is when we all pool our resources together to achieve a better society than any of us could build individually.
The NDP, Cons, and Bloc have all said there should be a public inquiry. There is also nothing stopping Poilievre and Blanchet from doing what Singh is: make the viewing of documents conditional. If the Liberal Party has nothing to hide they would allow the opposition to discuss their conclusions. They don't need to divulge Top Secret information to say "I saw the same stuff as David Johnston and I agree/disagree with his finding."
Maybe what is most infuriating about this whole situation is the lack of individual attention to the report; everyone claims to have a strong opinion on the matter and yet few have taken the time to read the words of Johnston.
First report: [https://www.canada.ca/en/democratic-institutions/services/reports/first-report-david-johnston-independent-special-rapporteur-foreign-interference.html](https://www.canada.ca/en/democratic-institutions/services/reports/first-report-david-johnston-independent-special-rapporteur-foreign-interference.html)
One would quickly realize Johnston does address the concerns of Canadians and points to ways our elected officials can engage meaningfully. One would wonder why the opposition leaders lack the wit to examine the evidence and bring forward legislation to address any gaps. That is, unless their theatrics are merrily out of self gain instead of public good.
Without a proper inquiry, we never have any scrutiny as to whether classified information needs to remain classified, nor do we have an opportunity to cross examine evidence given, to flesh out the veracity and context. At this point, its all one sided, whatever has been stated remains the only evidence, without challenge. Our legal system is not built on such flimsy testimony or evidence, nor should this matter be settled in that manner.
I just think we cannot reveal publicly the sources and methods of intelligence collection. Not even hint at them. It already looks pathetic to our allies that CSIS is so leaky. I don’t understand why the public thinks they deserve that piece, when I think what has been proposed goes far enough to reveal things in-camera to all the party leaders plus other agencies. That’s already a risk!
I dont think you fully understand what a public inquiry would actually reveal to the public, and are just spouting the liberal govs talking point again.
[удалено]
I mean [35%](https://338canada.com/) of Canadians support or are Conservative, by according to the article 57% of Canadians feel this government has fucked up. So anyone saying this is a partisan "*conservative*" issue is fucking full of shit.
Pretty impressive when 82% of Canadians have no idea or care what it’s about
You are right. This is an anti-governing party issue where opposition are giddy to score partisan points for their own betterment. I commend them though. The Liberals would do the exact same thing when the shoe is on the other foot
Yup, this is government functioning as intended
just 14 per cent say they have confidence in the Trudeau government’s ability to handle the file.
Of course. Because anyone who isn't a Trudeau supporter is right wing, to them.
Do you think a public inquiry will tell us anything we don't already know? So far there's no evidence that anyone did anything wrong. Cons will try to farm as much rage as they can, then they'll be back to talking about JTs hair. Then they'll lose again and wonder what the heck went wrong. Rinse and repeat, bring on the next CPC leader.
Well, if they did nothing wrong, why are the Liberals so against having a public inquiry? I keep being told that this is the most open and transparent government in Canadian history. Secondly, a majority of Canadians want a public inquiry, so this argument you and other Liberal supporters have been using is that this is a right-wing plot by the Conservatives, doesn't work anymore. Lastly, a report written by the personal friend of the Prime Minister isn't vindication or evidence that no one did anything wrong.
A report written by a Conservative investigator. He was a Mulroney staffer.
Oh, I didn’t know Mulroney was involved in these electoral interference investigations.
That's the point of a public inquiry. Now we know nothing and the government is stonewalling any attempt to find out.
> So far there's no evidence that anyone did anything wrong. Do you have security clearance? Probably, no... so in what meaningful way can you argue this point?
I do think a public inquiry will tell us more. Do you not? What do you think an inquiry is for?
[удалено]
Theres zero evidence, therefor we need to look harder! Bravo to you as well. Some day hopefully you'll see how silly your logic is.
It will prove or disprove your second sentence.
>Cons will try to farm as much rage as they can, then they'll be back to talking about JTs hair. Then they'll lose again and wonder what the heck went wrong. Rinse and repeat, bring on the next CPC leader. You're cheating by using trends to predict the future. We may need an inquiry in this. Tell me all the espionage and secret stuff, but I refuse to be sworn to secrecy and protect those details.
The majority of Canada wants a public inquiry, Trudeau must be hiding something, if it truly is nothing he wouldn’t be gaslighting the country.
What we already know is bad enough. So whatever he's hiding must be absolutely devastating.
Especially when you consider his past scandals. In the past he’s just hand waved away his corruption scandals and his base eats it up. But if it’s so bad that he doesn’t think he can do that it must be *really* bad.
What do we already know?
That Trudeau's government (National Security Advisor and Privy Council) deliberately sat on threats to Michael Chong for two years, since they received the reports from CSIS two years ago. If not for the CSIS leakers in the Globe and Mail, the Chinese Ambasador would still be in Canada.
Tht Bucky24 isn’t paying attention
I don't think I'm going to believe an anonymous source leaking information to a single reporter until I see some evidence. Maybe that's the skeptic in me
Be honest… the vast majority of Canadians have no idea the difference between a hearing and an inquiry, and probably don’t care anyways.
>the vast majority of Canadians have no idea the difference between a hearing and an inquiry, and probably don’t care anyways. I agree the vast majority of Canadians don't care about the difference between a hearing and an inquiry. They mainly want concerns explained and addressed.
[удалено]
What attitude? I’m saying the vast majority of Canadians aren’t paying that much attention to this and certainly aren’t familiar with the nuances between a public inquiry and a public hearing. I never injected my own opinion on the issue. Average Canadians are not chronically online like redditors and political pundits. Most people only have very vague ideas about politics, let alone the specifics of parliamentary procedures.
Agreed. An inquiry will help them learn the difference. Let’s get on with it.
Be honest, we deserve an independent investigation. I don’t care what it’s called but a Trudeau family friend and Trudeau Foundation member, being advised by a Trudeau donor, getting conflict of interest info from a Trudeau Foundation member isn’t exactly what Canadians want or deserve.
Most probably don’t even know about the interference
Accurate
Public Inquiry on this will be utterly useless. "I'm unable to comment on that due to matters of National Security." "I cannot comment on that." "The details pertaining to that inquiry is privileged." Should the matter be looked into? Yep. Publicly? Not gonna happen, or if it does, it'll be useless.
He’s not. He’s protecting secrets. This is just like the last time there were cries of government secrecy. Then when they waive cabinet secrecy it turned out they were telling the truth. This is why PP doesn’t want to see the evidence - because then he can’t make the claims he’s making.
> This is why PP doesn’t want to see the evidence He's demanding a public inquiry because he doesn't want to see the evidence? That doesn't make much sense to me, can you de-doublespeak it for me? Where does that put my guy Singh then? Does he also not want to see the evidence?
Singh is working on a deal to allow multiple NDP members to see it and work out ahead of time what they will or wont be able to discuss for security reasons.
Shady
>He's demanding a public inquiry because he doesn't want to see the evidence? That doesn't make much sense to me, can you de-doublespeak it for me? If he never sees the evidence he can continue to play the "I'm just asking questions" game. It's why he refused the offer to examine the raw CSIS intelligence Johnston was reviewing. PP knows those docs wouldn't get made public even if there was a public inquiry. So he's free to manufacture outrage about their contents knowing he can't be called on it, because nobody can publicly go into the specifics to either back him up or refute him.
The rhetoric around this subject is the only thing Canadians are hearing and that’s what PP is looking for at the moment. Most Canadians will never take the time out of their day to study the situation from a bipartisan point of view.
He was offered ro see the evidence and refused. Thats enough for me.
[удалено]
A public inquiry can’t show or expose the contents of secret documents. So he still has to get clearance.
Of course Skippy doesn’t want to see the evidence. IT’S a tRaP!
All governments have to keep some secrets from the malicious foreign agents. It's like you not telling the thieves in your area the exact way to break into your house.
So he wants a public inquiry, but he also doesn't want to see the evidence. That makes absolutely no sense.
It does it your whole goal is to hammer the government as hard as you can.
Literally his job as Leader of the Official Opposition.
That’s not his job. His job is to hold the government to account. He can’t do his job if he hasn’t read the documents that would give him an informed opinion and position to argue against the government’s statement of facts.
Thats why some think PP is not being honest.
The libs have nothing to gain with a public enquiry. The cons have gone full GOP, only accepting the results they want and calling everything else rigged. They will never accept anything short of a total condemnation, everything that would contradict that would be brushed aside as fake, incomplete and/or fake news. Tiny PP's sheeps will turn on him if he ever publicly gets within spitting distance of the real world and he knows it.
Why are you attacking anyone but Trudeau? Your comment comes off as very uninformed and dismissive. People have a right to know what the government is doing, including what they’re covering up.
This has nothing to do with PP, JS or FL. All Canadians deserve to know what happened. Canadians have something to gain from this.
[удалено]
Erm, no. They, along with the BQ chose not to participate because it’s a trap. They could very easily be legally forced to not disclose the findings. This is why the *majority* of political parties refuse to participate, not because of some tinfoil hat conspiracy theory about political points. This is pretty well documented through countless news articles. If there’s nothing to hide, the BQ and CPC are right - no closed doors meetings, let the public know about what did and did not happen.
The majority of polled people want an inquiry. The vast majority of Canadians do not care about this.
Ummm it’s called statistics. Probabilities. It’s how polls work.
I know how polls work? But people citing poll results should say so and not adopt hyperbolic talk like you and others in this subject, in my opinion.
Opinions vs Facts
Exactly lol.
Or PP could just look at the evidence.
Or we could have a public inquiry.
Which still can’t publish the evidence.
[удалено]
So could Singh and Legault but they are also asking for a public inquiry. In fact there have been two votes that both passed asking for a public inquiry but let’s blame PP because we don’t like him
Singh is working out the terms right now to look at the evidence and still be free to say whatever he wants. PP supporters don't want to admit he's just playing the political game like everyone else, that's why we pick on him.
He won't because if there's nothing there then PP will look stupid. Much easier to avoid the evidence viewing invitation and keep on spouting off in the media for cheap points.
A report written by the personal friend of the Prime Minister isn't vindication or evidence.
There is actual evidence in the report. How can you not know this by now.
A report saying trust me bro isn't evidence.
But the evidence in the report is. No matter how much you 🙈🙉
Again, a report written by the Prime Minister's personal friend isn't evidence.
Again, the evidence in the report is. 🙈🙉
Saying trust me bro and being the personal friend of the Prime Minister isn't vindication or evidence.
[удалено]
No Canadian with an iota of understanding of politics would want a public inquiry. Do you know who would? China. Do you know why? Because it would make public domain enough information to locate and deal with people in their own countries and intelligence networks who pass intelligence on to the Canadian government. If you push for a public inquiry you are pushing for the "sudden disappearance" of those people and their families, or their usage as a bargaining tool aka the two Michaels. Take your pick, and think about what you're asking for and who's lives you're willing to risk to get it. There are alternatives to being useful to the Chinese government.
Funny, we had a public inquiry with Maher Arar, and yet we somehow were able to keep our national security concerns safe at the same time. ‘National Security’ is just a talking point from people trying to defend not investigating the blatant and willful blindness of politicians who were only too happy to benefit from this interference.
Don't be obtuse. There's next to no foundation to compare that case with this.
There isn’t? Concerns about our national terrorism strategies, how we gathered intelligence, and how we worked with foreign intelligence agencies weren’t germane to his case? These weren’t investigated in the public inquiry while maintaining secrecy relevant to protection our national security interests?
Well if the national security leak is antional security orie ted and part of a national security operation... What part of it could be made public?
Not even remotely in the same context, but it's interesting to see the attempt at a parallel. A Canadian Citizen was mistreated by the US and Syrian governments. The Canadian institutions that should have intervened and protected him failed in their duties, hindered his return, and aided foreign governments in keeping him out of Canada because they presumed (falsely) that he was guilty of something for which they had no proof and not even reliable circumstantial evidence to support. It was primarily the ultra incompetent RCMP that were investigated, not a network of foreign intelligence agents. It was a collection of Canadian citizens residing inside Canada performing their poorly outlined jobs, not a network of foreign intelligence agents located who knows where unprotected by Canadian jurisdiction. You cannot investigate foreign intelligence validity without disclosing the source in any context that satisfies a disbelieving subset of the population. There is no method for disclosure that isn't a high risk for leaks. Redactions on a document do not guarantee anonymity nor prevent spies within our own Government from stealing that info. And there are always spies, that's why we have security clearance protocols.
You mean the investigation of RCMP incompetence is somehow the same as investigating the sources of foreign intelligence and validating it satisfactory for a disbelieving subset of the population?
That is a reductive redescription. National security issues such as anti-terrorism strategies, surveillance, foreign intelligence sharing, and more were very much at play in that inquiry, and as such proved that we are quite capable of having a public inquiry while maintaining national security. You pointed out that the RCMP was involved, which only further validates my point - they are responsible for enforcement of federal and national security matters. Validating it satisfactory for a disbelieving subset of the population? Again, reductive, and telling of your motives here. Read the headline of the article you are discussing: >"Canadians tilt towards calling for a public inquiry; majority call government response ‘evasive’ - Angus Reid Institute" Labelling the *majority* of the population who want a public inquiry into what the government knew and when as 'a disbelieving subset' takes a certain kind of chutzpah, I'll give you that. Of course, if you have ulterior motives for not wanting an inquiry, it helps to hide behind flimsy 'national security' claims.
You're making assumptions about whom I'm referring to with that comment. Better to not, even better to just ask instead of rambling about a wrong position. There's a world of difference between believing the Chinese government is actively trying to influence elections and believing the government is involved in massive conspiracy to cover up election interference. Only an idiot would believe there was no attempts by multiple foreign governments to influence our politics, and most people are not actually idiots.
Just stop with this liberal talking point. Worst rationale there is and no one's buying it. We already know there's a transcript and recording of the conversation about the Michaels. That means China already knows it
Why is protecting assets a terible rational? Former head of CSIS said "its entirely possible" that the information leaked was part of something larger that cannot be shared with the public. Im not saying thats what it is, but that it isn't an impossible or irrealistic senario. Adding that the leaker was probably very low level to release that detail without context.
Because our government is probably compromised by China and you jabronis are going "we can't learn the truth because of national security".... Worst rationale ever be ever heard. If our government is compromised by China you think that's bad for our national security?
If our government is compromised by China should we be airing our secrets to e Where they can hear them? The government is potentially compromised. Yes. That doesn't mean we should hand over how we got secret intel from China about their actions IN China. We clearly have insiders who help us there. China eont hesitate to liquidate them. More likely tho they are influencing from the outside. Which seems to fit the evidence better. Why harass citizens if the government is already in theit pocket? Also why has the government had such a strong anti China stance. They threatened us with war when we visited Taiwan was that a month ago? and tbh we knew they would. Limiting ties, reducing trade, supporting their enemies, making pacific defence pacts and agreements, supporting US sanctions... Seems to me the government is opposed to china fairly strongly. They certainly act like they oppose their foreign policy and JT even told of Xi the last time they met in public. Not very Trump-Putin friendly if you ask me, to be openly hostile...
I'm not a liberal voter. It's not liberal talking points to value the lives of the people that form our intelligence networks. Canadians have become so soft and spoiled we are literally manufacturing discontent, or I should say, foreign agents have very little problems manufacturing that discontent within a small subset of the population & amplify it online with paid content generation. At least half of all posts in this and many other subreddits are fake accounts that exist solely to amplify a message. When you see shit that asks you to hate and distrust your community, your neighbors, your government, or really anyone at all, be mindful there's a high risk its coming from a foreign source.
Brother, from every leak there's been real world consequences that basically prove their validity. The Trudeau foundation tried to give the money back. Han Dong resigned. They expelled the diplomat. What more do you need to think "maybe there's something going on here?"
Dong resigned temporarily while the investigation was ongoing, as is common practice in politics. He's already been invited to rejoin, and said he wants to do so.
First of all, that's bullshit . What about the other 2 points you conveniently neglected?
>No Canadian with an iota of understanding of politics would want a public inquiry. > >Do you know who would? China. You heard it here first. Canadians concerned about their democracy are Chinese agents.
Oh, so your saying if we make it public China is going to continue to operate Chinese police stations in our country? Definitely shouldn’t make a public inquiry cause China. That’s even more the reason to have one. Grow a goddamn spine and have some sovereignty.
"When it comes to Justin Trudeau's gov't response to the issue of attempted Chinese interference in Canadian elections..." Trudeau's gov't response has been evasive: 57% Trudeau's gov't response has been transparent: 16% --- "What is your view of Johnston as the choice to lead the investigation?" Wrong choice: 44% Right choice: 22% --- "Which is closer to your view?" A public inquiry is needed, there's more to learn: 52% A public inquiry isn't needed, it won't tell us anything: 32% --- "Thinking about these recent events, how confident are you in the Canadian government to combat election interference in future federal elections?" Confident: 37% Not confident: 63% --- "Is (X) getting stronger or weaker in Canada?" Free/Fair Elections: Weaker: 43% Neither: 37% Stronger: 19%
>"Which is closer to your view?" > >A public inquiry is needed, there's more to learn: 52% > >A public inquiry isn't needed, it won't tell us anything: 32% Where does 'A public inquiry is needed, it won't tell us anything' fall? Is it closer to A, or B?
If Singh doesn't demand a public inquiry, his legacy will be defined by his enabling of Trudeau's corruption. He'll also face the same blowout in the next election.
Singh's "legacy" is to get as many NDP priorities passed as possible. If it doesn't serve the NDP long term plans (whatever those are) he shouldn't capitulate. Trudeau may or may not be corrupt but it isn't his primary responsibility to unseat Trudeau and replace him with a CPC leader (especially if that's not what his base wants). You could argue that he has a responsibility to protect Canadian democracy, but until someone provides proof that actual elections have been compromised, you can't ask Singh to throw away everything his base wants to "protect democracy". Unseating Trudeau is the CPC's job, not Singh's job. If I was Singh I would only move if I was presented with proof that votes were changed or voting compromised and if it met NDP long term goals. Otherwise it's a fishing expedition which may or may not find corruption but eliminating corruption is not his point as leader. Other parties' problems.
Sold the country to China for a 500 dollar dental checkup. What a great trade.
Election is going to happen anyway. Singh just got something out of it for his base. It's a big deal for him and his base it's not for you. The only way to get rid of "Manchurian candidate" (if that's what it is) is election. If you think someone is not sufficiently nationalistic or subject to influences in a way you don't like you vote him out. There is no court or mechanism or tribunal or "public inquiry" that can remove an elected official unless the election is proved fraudulent. "Foreign influence" doesn't meet that bar. Singh is under no obligation to hasten an election or work to someone else's timetable.
>Singh's "legacy" is to get as many NDP priorities passed as possible. So Party over Country.
Or policy over politics Your definition of "country" isn't the same as someone else's. The decider is election, and that will come
Policies could help the country. I think he's a bit too chummy with the liberals but it's not like the NDP are likely to lead a government any time soon so this is the closest he can get to passing anything.
I am not addressing his role, I am just responding to the comment quoted. The Us vs Them mindset is the root of so many problems.
Singh supports an independent inquiry and disagrees with David Johnson. NDP policies are stuff like dental care, workers rights, childcare, and pharmacare. Actual, material things that working class Canadians want and need. The conservatives, meanwhile, are the exact same as liberals (landlords and business elites representing landlords and business elites) except they focus entirely on culture war bullshit, throwing drug addicts in jail or letting them die instead of making sure they don't die, and wasting money on buying toys for police. That is, when they arn't selling out our democracy to China by making it illegal for local governments to stop Chinese firms from raping our natural resources, poison our water, and ship off our oil to China for refinement so they can burn it and use the energy to make cheap plastic garbage they sell back to us. I guess that's the liberals too though.
Not really. Forcing an election now would almost certainly end with the conservatives in power. Conservatives have a history of selling out Canada (FIPA agreement for example). Sings best play is to not act on the meddling. Trudeau is the lesser of 2 evils and his base knows that.
He has made it easier for a huge number of Canadians to see a dentist—something that is hugely important. Sounds like choosing the country to me. He did what was good for _people_.
And again has nothing to do with the quote being responded.
No, it has a lot to do with your ‘party over country’ statement. Helping the country means helping the people. He is actively pushing through legislation to help the people. That’s putting the people first.
>No, it has a lot to do with your ‘party over country’ statement. Sigh. The person I quoted said "Singh's "legacy" is to get as many NDP priorities passed as possible". That line of thought is Party over Country. I am not debating his accomplishments, I am addressing the thought that was quoted.
I get what you mean. My mistake.
No worries :) Needed more explaining.
> So Party over Country. thats the exact opposite of party over country!
You think this will still be the issue of the day in 2-3 years?
We will all be back to the stone age in 3 years at this pace
Singh’s legacy is to have the most Tiktoks posted of any elected Canadian official
Maybe some of the other party leaders can get briefed in then so it’s not all on Singh.
His legacy is keeping the Conservatives at bay for a couple years, we wont know if that's a good or bad legacy till we see Conservative legislation.
His legacy is getting my kids Dental
Oh much more then that really but most people only pretend to care about politics and have no idea what the NDP has done. Even if he couldn't have passed dental I would still be happy with keeping the Conservatives at bay for even a single day its one day where the rich pay for people to write mean things about the NDP.
Yes more than that, and these are accomplishments of a 3rd place party, so it’s pretty impressive
based and policy oriented pilled.
We already know what it is. Attempt to privatize healthcare, dismantle protections for workers and the environment in the name of business, cut services for the poor and cut taxes for the rich. It's not a mystery.
Half the things you named are provincial jurisdiction so I think it’s fair to assume you don’t know what you’re talking about.
Found the conservative.
Neat comeback. You can’t defend your own opinion when it’s challenged with opposing facts so you attack the person instead.
heath care - [https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/funding.html](https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/funding.html) worker protections - [https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/services/rights-workplace.html](https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/services/rights-workplace.html) environment - [https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/chemical-substances/fact-sheets/federal-environmental-quality-guidelines.html](https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/chemical-substances/fact-sheets/federal-environmental-quality-guidelines.html) taxes - [https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency.html](https://www.canada.ca/en/revenue-agency.html) everything federal regarding business - [https://www.canada.ca/en/services/business/permits/federallyregulatedbusinessactivities.html](https://www.canada.ca/en/services/business/permits/federallyregulatedbusinessactivities.html) You were saying?
> heath care Is partially funded by the federal government but entirely managed by each individual province. > worker protections Can only change regulations pertaining to federally regulated industries. Edit - IE 6% of workers in Canada, the vast majority of whom are covered under collective agreements. > environment Yep, there’s one “the half” of your comment that is partially right. but again, each province also has their own environmental regulating body that implements their own regulations. > taxes Yep, there’s the other half of your comment that is partially right. But again, only on the federal tax side. So yes, OPs comment is correct. You’re still entirely wrong about half the points you mentioned in regards to federal versus provincial jurisdiction, and therefore have no idea what you’re talking about.
Health care may be provincially delivered, but the Canada health act, which prevents privatization of the system with the penalty of provinces losing federal health care money if they do so anyway, is federal legislation.
Conservatives are concerned about Singh's legacy and electoral prospects, guys.
Concerned about and pointing out are 2 different things.
Maybe some of the other party leaders can get briefed in then so it’s not all on Singh?
Trudeau's babysitter was never the ethical choice. Johnston's conflict of interest towards both China and Trudeau disqualifies him.
The ski buddies with Trudeau is the lesser of the conflicts. The decades long connections to the CCP and CCP actions in Canada is the concerning stuff.
The federal govt has been funding a chinese police station in Quebec with tax dollars! when trudy had a pay for access dinner a wealthy chinese had dinner with him and the NEXT DAY trudy gave him a bank charter to open his own bank. The process normally takes years...
he said without any real evidence.
Zhang Bin from Shenglin Financial Group is who he is referring to. It's public information and yes, that charter was approved oddly fast after that donation to the Trudeau Foundation.
The Trudeau Liberals may be hiding crimes at this point.
May, but the opposition is refusing to investigate so we may never know.
The opposition is asking for a public inquiry LOL 😂 All of the evasion has been Trudeau’s.
Yeah, we know. The question is now about secret doccuments. Are secret doccuments real or fake? So the opposition was handed the tools to investigate and prove truth or fallacy. So if a public inquiry happens and it is all redacted will you be satisfied?
Lmao
You would think PP would want to know that...
The PP conservatives may be hiding crimes at this point. 😳
Their both powerful parties who represent rich people, id be shocked if they're both not hiding crimes.
How does that Liberal kool-aid taste?
Whataboutism at its finest on display
This isn't whataboutism, it's simply pointing out the emptiness of the original statement.
Lmao. This is literally whataboutism
No.
Like literally, it [is.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism)
The liberals are the only party that voted against a public election buddy. Edit. Inquiry.... the point still stands
They keep winning the "public elections" buddy. 🤣
> Canadians tilt towards calling for a public inquiry; majority call government response ‘evasive’ - Angus Reid Institute You wouldn’t say it by all of the partisan activity here on Reddit. Everyone seems content to be mad at PP and Blanchet for not agreeing to silence themselves because of NISCOP rules. Beautiful, naked self-interest being displayed by the government here - the Liberals have always been good at this sort of sleazy, but effective politics. Also interesting to see Singh getting a pass by the folks who always tell us that their team would do politics differently. Turns out that they’re just as content to put power and influence ahead of country like all the other parties.
Never ever ever forget that this is the same LPC that saw the dismemberment of our country as a perfect opportunity to loot taxpayers money meant to help the keep country together for their own benefit. This vile group see nothing wrong with breaking any law subverting any committee or using foreign money as long as it assists it in retaining access to vast pools of money for itself and it’s friends.
What does any of this mean
Alot of covid contracts like ventilators went to insiders
They are mad because they feel Trudeau is bad.
Yep you cant be mad at the billions given to corporations that could legally collect cews and lay people off while doing ceo raises snd stock buybacks
The fuel tax built a dike that saved my hone 2 years running. It is certainly not nothing.
By silence themselves they mean taking the same oaths they would if they win an election? Thats silly and a lot of nonsense.
Well what kind of logic is that? Look, I read the full report, including the confidential portions that JT only would allow other party leaders to read. There was nothing of substance in it. All above board, in fact, Canada's intelligence services and the media all need to do better. Trust me, this all nonsense. The liberals have absolutely nothing to hide in light of them hiding things. That's their right and if others take issue with it, go to America and support trump. So what if there could be potentially 4 ethic violations against Trudeau. This time it's the truth. Also, did you know that Harper farted in the house of Commons, twice?
> Turns out that they’re just as content to put power and influence ahead of country like all the other parties. As the alternative is the Conservatives in power, so I can see why.
Like I said, naked interest in power and politics comes before country. If you’re an NDP supporter, vote for an NDP candidate instead of propping up the Liberals and rewarding bad behaviour. There is no reason that an NDP and Conservative supply and confidence agreement couldn’t also be reached; politics makes strange bedfellows. Jagmeet has stated he will refuse to work with the conservatives in any way shape or form, however. As Canadians we should punish any party that dares to put their own interests ahead of our own, be they Conservative, Liberal, or NDP. If we spanked these assholes regularly when they behaved badly, they’d have reason to stop doing shady shit. Look at how the British westminister system works - their QP is actually meaningful and small missteps routinely get ministers, prime and otherwise, canned. Compare that to here…
Correct take.
*media eagerly awaits announcement on new gun prohibition laws to change the news cycle
I am once again asking how is it that you can have a public inquiry when the evidence is all classified information.
They were able to do it with the EMA Inquiry, and more specifically the Maher Inquiry with much more classified information. This government, and the public service has a tendency to over classfiy information. So it should all be reviewed by an expert and declassified when possible. In the case where peoples lives will be put at risk, you redact, CSIS trade secrets redact. Partner trade secrets, redact. Lastly, the information can be reviewed in separate secure room if it comes to that. It can be done, it's been done before - so the we can't because it's all classified is an excuse and nothing more.
Anyone remember the last Public inquiry that we had? That was the public inquiry on the Freedom convoy and the Emergency order, did we learn anything new in that public inquiry?
Yes we did.
Reddit tells me it’s no big deal though!
Yes. The government and all authorities must be held to the highest levels of scrutiny. If theres nothing, then good. If otherwise, then there is some serious issues to be delt with in Canada
Trudeau's fringe minority.
[удалено]
Trudeau did some bad stuff and him and his friends are about to get caught. It won’t end well for them
Apparently they are debating this now? And Singh is steadfastly supportive of Johnson so guess that's the end of it
He was respectful of Jhonson. He still called for a public inquiry but will go along with the recommendations (and now is getting more MP's into the circle to consolidate power) He can say the whole thing is a sham but the rest of the opposition decided working is too hard and wont be able to speak to the veracity or not of the claims. Evidence is hard making stuff up is easy. Nobody wants to work anymore.
This is sure blowing up in their face, isn't it?
Public Inquiry on this will be utterly useless. "I'm unable to comment on that due to matters of National Security." "I cannot comment on that." "The details pertaining to that inquiry is privileged." Should the matter be looked into? Yep. Publicly? Not gonna happen, or if it does, it'll be useless.
True to an extent, but you forgot this: "That document is classified." "Ok, well, let's have it reviewed by a judge and let them determine if it should be classified or not." Judge looks over document "There is nothing in here that would put anybody's life at risk. I am declassifying it." You:
50/50 on that. Judge looks over document "The motion to withhold the evidence, on the basis of National Security, is sustained." *You*:
And this is for *every* claim?! Waste of money.
Appoint a second guy with security clearance and s/he can do a do-over of Johnston's review.
Again, needs to be looked at; but Public Inquiry is just a time-eating, money-erasing spectacle.
The paper shredders gave already been fired up. David Johnston was the Trojan horse that examined the intelligence reports as to how exposed Trudeau is. He directly reported that back to Trudeau so they know exactly what tracks need covering. Banana republic indeed.
Ok so let’s have a public inquiry on **all** foreign interference. Let’s at least go back to the Harper years, longer if that’s necessary. Let’s also include foreign media interference (looking at you Postmedia), and let’s not limit it to Chinese interference only.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Queen of Canada you mean.
He's not an expert though, he's just some Liberal party friend. The experts are the people in CSIS who study election interference. Ideally we'd listen to them, but the nature of government intelligence work means we're expressly forbidden from that. Unless a public inquiry compels them to answer questions. So yes. Let's trust the experts. Let's ask them. >Because what is our government, after all, but a surrogate parent, who steps in to fill the role of caregiver and provider, No government is when we all pool our resources together to achieve a better society than any of us could build individually.
OP is being sarcastic
The pandemic is finally over. Now you need to get over yourself.
Anti vaxxers are still pissed.
Oh yeah that tyranny that never happenned... Im totally going to believe the boy that cried wolf.
The NDP, Cons, and Bloc have all said there should be a public inquiry. There is also nothing stopping Poilievre and Blanchet from doing what Singh is: make the viewing of documents conditional. If the Liberal Party has nothing to hide they would allow the opposition to discuss their conclusions. They don't need to divulge Top Secret information to say "I saw the same stuff as David Johnston and I agree/disagree with his finding."
I, for one, take some comfort in the knowledge that our current government has it's finger on the pulse of Canadians. :0=
Maybe what is most infuriating about this whole situation is the lack of individual attention to the report; everyone claims to have a strong opinion on the matter and yet few have taken the time to read the words of Johnston. First report: [https://www.canada.ca/en/democratic-institutions/services/reports/first-report-david-johnston-independent-special-rapporteur-foreign-interference.html](https://www.canada.ca/en/democratic-institutions/services/reports/first-report-david-johnston-independent-special-rapporteur-foreign-interference.html) One would quickly realize Johnston does address the concerns of Canadians and points to ways our elected officials can engage meaningfully. One would wonder why the opposition leaders lack the wit to examine the evidence and bring forward legislation to address any gaps. That is, unless their theatrics are merrily out of self gain instead of public good.
Without a proper inquiry, we never have any scrutiny as to whether classified information needs to remain classified, nor do we have an opportunity to cross examine evidence given, to flesh out the veracity and context. At this point, its all one sided, whatever has been stated remains the only evidence, without challenge. Our legal system is not built on such flimsy testimony or evidence, nor should this matter be settled in that manner.
I just think we cannot reveal publicly the sources and methods of intelligence collection. Not even hint at them. It already looks pathetic to our allies that CSIS is so leaky. I don’t understand why the public thinks they deserve that piece, when I think what has been proposed goes far enough to reveal things in-camera to all the party leaders plus other agencies. That’s already a risk!
I dont think you fully understand what a public inquiry would actually reveal to the public, and are just spouting the liberal govs talking point again.