PM Mark Carney's Canada

[PinkLucy]

True, but in communities closer to the GTA (it wouldn't likely apply to where you used to live) where there is no apparent visible minority population, certain not one large enough to support a couple of shifts every day, where are they coming from? They might be brought in from larger centres by the franchisee, but that doesn't do a whole lot for local employment.

In Northern Ontario (this is north of North Bay), it was immigrants who moved up and bought franchises and businesses and often brought extended family to work. I was up there this past summer and went to a number of places I used to frequent and where I knew the owners. Over half of them have retired and sold to immigrants. I think it’s great, because it was a very white bread town, but there is definitely grumbling about it.

On my east coast junket, I stopped in some Tim’s to grab a tea while driving and in PEI, in NS, NB and Quebec, there were workers who I assume were immigrants. Whether they were TFW or had been here for a while, I can’t say.

 

[narduch]

He was at the World Cup draw today in Washington

 

[Northern Light]

The Star's Althea Raj out with a troubling bit of info:

Althia Raj: Mark Carney is quietly giving sweeping new powers to his ministers

Sneaking a change of this magnitude into a 600-page bill that will not get parliamentary scrutiny raises a red flag, Althia Raj writes.

www.thestar.com

From the above:

****

Way too open ended and dangerous!

I'm all for regulatory flexibility, but this is a bridge too far.

 

[T3G]

Exactly the type of corrupt, cronyist nonsense people would've lost their minds about if it was Ford or PP doing it. Hope the same level of criticism and scrutiny is applied when it's the "good guys" that are doing it.

 

[picard102]

It's disappointing for sure. I think a lot of people got caught up in the hope of not having PP or a Conservative PM, and missed the red flags about who Carney would be working for, the wealthy.

 

[afransen]

Exactly the type of corrupt, cronyist nonsense people would've lost their minds about if it was Ford or PP doing it. Hope the same level of criticism and scrutiny is applied when it's the "good guys" that are doing it.

Granting of powers is different than giving developer buddies a $5B windfall gain. It's how they are used that will matter.

On balance, I think Canada has erred too much on the side of doing nothing.

 

[T3G]

It's how they are used that will matter.

Because corporations famously wouldn't take advantage of a perfectly legal opportunity to not have to follow laws?

The fact that the minister is allowed to decide whether it's in the public interest to grant an exemption, and the fact that it will be taxpayers on the hook to deal with the consequences, should be setting off massive alarm bells.

 

[afransen]

It should at least have to be approved by cabinet, I think.

 

[PL1]

Exactly the type of corrupt, cronyist nonsense people would've lost their minds about if it was Ford or PP doing it. Hope the same level of criticism and scrutiny is applied when it's the "good guys" that are doing it.

Even if this is intended as a benign government/cabinet trying to do good for Canada, it will be abused. c.f. "Notwithstanding clause" (which is different in scope, but has had unintended consequences)

 

[EBT]

Exactly the type of corrupt, cronyist nonsense people would've lost their minds about if it was Ford or PP doing it. Hope the same level of criticism and scrutiny is applied when it's the "good guys" that are doing it.

There will not be the "same level of criticism and scrutiny" applied to Carney as there would be if PP were PM.

How long has Carney been PM? Almost going on a year now, and during this time, Carney has done absolutely nothing to push back against Trump's economic war on Canada, and there has been zero pushback against Carney in the mainstream media. Carney's response to Trump has not been normal. You would think some in the media would be asking what is going on? Why is Carney rolling over and letting Trump loot our economy? What explains Carney's inaction? Is he compromised? Is he working for Wall Street? You will not see any of these questions raised in our useless media.

Corruption under Trudeau was rampant and no doubt still is under Carney, but you will never see the corruption exposed in the mainstream media that relies on hundreds of millions in funding from the Liberal government to stay afloat. When was the last time you bought a newspaper? I can't remember the last time I even saw a newspaper for sale in a corner store or street-side box. And it is not just liberal leaning papers like the Toronto Star and Globe & Mail that are bought off; the same is true with the "conservative" National Post and Toronto SUN. They are all bought off. Every single one of them.

 

[picard102]

How long has Carney been PM? Almost going on a year now, and during this time, Carney has done absolutely nothing to push back against Trump's economic war on Canada,

False.

Corruption under Trudeau was rampant and no doubt still is under Carney,

Proof?

 

[kEiThZ]

100% the TFWs are a form of wage suppression. I rarely go to Tim Hortons but definitely don't feel bad about not going knowing they have been lobbying for this. I know all these corporations are doing it though. It's really gives me the ick that they are so desperate to suppress wages that they bring in foreigners to work these crappy jobs that no one wants. Maybe pay better and people will work them? Otherwise your business model sucks and you deserve to go out of business.

Ironically non-franchised chains like Starbucks don't tend to resort to exploiting TFWs.

 

[kEiThZ]

The Star's Althea Raj out with a troubling bit of info:

Althia Raj: Mark Carney is quietly giving sweeping new powers to his ministers

Sneaking a change of this magnitude into a 600-page bill that will not get parliamentary scrutiny raises a red flag, Althia Raj writes.

www.thestar.com

From the above:

View attachment 700919

****

View attachment 700923

Way too open ended and dangerous!

I'm all for regulatory flexibility, but this is a bridge too far.

As usual I'll be the rare voice of dissent. This is exactly why the public elected Carney. To fix what is broken. And one of those things that is broken is the hypercentralization of power and decision-making in the Prime Minister's Office along with a substantial increase in regulatory barriers leading to nothing getting done. There's too options here. Either broadscale deregulation (CPC approach) or case-by-case exemptions (what the LPC is now doing). If you reject the latter, you will eventually get the former.

The ultimate check on political power remains: the ballot box. If and when the election arrives and you believe the government is abusing their power you can vote them out.

 

[picard102]

As usual I'll be the rare voice of dissent. This is exactly why the public elected Carney. To fix what is broken. And one of those things that is broken is the hypercentralization of power and decision-making in the Prime Minister's Office along with a substantial increase in regulatory barriers leading to nothing getting done. There's too options here. Either broadscale deregulation (CPC approach) or case-by-case exemptions (what the LPC is now doing). If you reject the latter, you will eventually get the former.

The ultimate check on political power remains: the ballot box. If and when the election arrives and you believe the government is abusing their power you can vote them out.

No one voted for cabinet ministers to be able to allow corporations to be allowed to violate laws.

 

[Northern Light]

As usual I'll be the rare voice of dissent. This is exactly why the public elected Carney. To fix what is broken. And one of those things that is broken is the hypercentralization of power and decision-making in the Prime Minister's Office along with a substantial increase in regulatory barriers leading to nothing getting done. There's too options here. Either broadscale deregulation (CPC approach) or case-by-case exemptions (what the LPC is now doing). If you reject the latter, you will eventually get the former.

The ultimate check on political power remains: the ballot box. If and when the election arrives and you believe the government is abusing their power you can vote them out.

The way the regulation reads, any minister could exempt any business from election laws that limit donations to parties, they could exempt them from immigration laws, they could exempt them from any worker safety law.

I think that's just too open ended; I'm not suggesting the purpose is to endanger lives, but the regulation expressly allows that.

I'm all for streamlining superfluous regulation; but the way to do that is to have the minister under their existing authorities amend or repeal regulations that are unnecessary or streamline those that are unduly burdensome.

That power already exists.

If the restriction is statutory, the democratic process calls for amending or repealing same through parliament.

This is simply the power to be arbitrary and capricious and to play favourites. which is rather Trumpian.