News   Nov 29, 2021
 1.6K     0 
News   Nov 29, 2021
 1.2K     1 
News   Nov 29, 2021
 1K     1 

PM Justin Trudeau's Canada

Videodrome

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 13, 2014
Messages
7,517
Reaction score
2,465
Location
Scarborough Centre
Last edited:

AlvinofDiaspar

Moderator
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
30,825
Reaction score
22,796
Location
Toronto
Oh I can't wait to hear the complaints from quarters that the Minister for the State for the Status of Women, alongside other MoS will now have to be paid the full Minister salary because of this move.

AoD
 
Last edited:

TOareaFan

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 24, 2008
Messages
11,855
Reaction score
2,441
If you will excuse my jaundiced criticism - there wasn't even the slightest attempt ever, in the history of this country to create a cabinet that is remotely gender equal, MoS or otherwise. To claim that you have been "tricked" and that the whole thing was hyped does disservice to that achievement. It also begs the question why no criticism was leveled against the composition of previous cabinets either, given their lack of even symbolic parity.

If you really want to criticize, it should be directed towards the gendered nature of the portfolio appointment - i.e. no women as Minister of Finance? Defence? It's a bit like blue for boys and pink for girls - we have some ways to go yet. And don't think we as voters are not complicit either - given the sex ratio of the MPs elected, and there is a vast corpus of literature out there on the public expectations of "proper behaviour" from male vs. female politicians - those stereotypical expectations still rear their heads in 2015.

AoD
you are missing the point....I am not criticizing the cabinet...I am not criticizing the women involved and I am recognizing the continuation of movement towards gender equality......

....what I am criticizing is that Mr. Trudeau and his team spent a good part of their first day talking and hyping about the gender equality....even coming up with a catchy answer ("because it is 2015") to the stupid "why" question....a crafted answer that was designed and delivered to sound like an off the cuff response......yet it is not gender equal and they did not even acknowledge this just tried to slip it past everyone.

It was a mis-step for a government that promises hope for a more open method of government....and that this mis-step came on the first operating day is disturbing and hopefully they can be a bit more thoughtful about the messages they deliver in the future.
 

TOareaFan

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 24, 2008
Messages
11,855
Reaction score
2,441
Yeah, I'm also having a hard time seeing as how anyone was "tricked" or that it's a "falsehood". Cabinet has always had a hierarchy. Never heard the Liberals say that it wouldn't. The real issue, in my mind, is not paycheques or other red herrings, but how the cabinet functions and the degree to which its members can assert some authority over their files. And that's something that will play out over time.
Cabinet has always had hierarchy is correct....but this is the first government to hype "gender equality"....and it is not gender equality if all of the MoS are women and if the full slate of full cabinet ministers is in fact 15 men 11 women and 4 female MoS.

The "trick" was that people were sold this concept of gender equality in cabinet....told it was delivered....and it was not.
 

Skeezix

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
4,343
Reaction score
2,677
Location
East of this, west of that
There is gender parity, TOareaFan. You are making a mountain of a molehill (and it turns out the molehill wasn't even the case in the first place) ignoring actual practice and placing way too little emphasis on how the Cabinet actually functions. If you want to consider yourself "tricked", then feel free. There will be real, substantive issues in which to be aggrieved by - this is a sideshow.

ETA: Ha! Adjei and I both used the same cliche (mountain out of a molehill) at almost the same time.
 

TOareaFan

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 24, 2008
Messages
11,855
Reaction score
2,441
There is gender parity, TOareaFan. You are making a mountain of a molehill (and it turns out the molehill wasn't even the case in the first place) ignoring actual practice and placing way too little emphasis on how the Cabinet actually functions. If you want to consider yourself "tricked", then feel free. There will be real, substantive issues in which to be aggrieved by - this is a sideshow.

ETA: Ha! Adjei and I both used the same cliche (mountain out of a molehill) at almost the same time.
it may have been a mountain out of a molehill....but it was the case in the first place...but this sort of "we said one thing, then you pointed out that we were wrong....and we have now fixed it" messaging is precisely what I thought (and hoped) we were getting away from.
 

Skeezix

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
4,343
Reaction score
2,677
Location
East of this, west of that
You have no idea "we said one thing, then you pointed out that we were wrong....and we have now fixed it" is the case. In fact, it's not correct -- there are changes required to the Treasury Board statutes. You are jumping to some pretty wild conclusions about trickery and deception. You're working really hard to be offended.
 

AlvinofDiaspar

Moderator
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
30,825
Reaction score
22,796
Location
Toronto
you are missing the point....I am not criticizing the cabinet...I am not criticizing the women involved and I am recognizing the continuation of movement towards gender equality......

....what I am criticizing is that Mr. Trudeau and his team spent a good part of their first day talking and hyping about the gender equality....even coming up with a catchy answer ("because it is 2015") to the stupid "why" question....a crafted answer that was designed and delivered to sound like an off the cuff response......yet it is not gender equal and they did not even acknowledge this just tried to slip it past everyone.

Unless you want to tell me that the MoS are never considered to be part of cabinet, the sudden interest in separating them and only count the ministers with an actual ministry is bizarre . That's like changing the rules halfway through the game and then insisting the new rules are the way it's always been done.

It was a mis-step for a government that promises hope for a more open method of government....and that this mis-step came on the first operating day is disturbing and hopefully they can be a bit more thoughtful about the messages they deliver in the future.

Isn't that what you really wanted us to come to conclusion on our own in the first place? This whole episode reminds me of attempts by some Con partisans on Twitter sphere to paint their party as more gender equal by saying that they have appointed a greater proportion of their then female MPs to cabinet positions. Like I've said before, if you *really* want to criticize it, go for it on the basis how the female ministers tend to be in positions of lesser importance, instead of this hocus-pocus on numerology.

AoD
 
Last edited:

Videodrome

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 13, 2014
Messages
7,517
Reaction score
2,465
Location
Scarborough Centre
I am just going to leave this right here...
 

Attachments

  • trudeau.jpg
    trudeau.jpg
    97.5 KB · Views: 372

TOareaFan

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 24, 2008
Messages
11,855
Reaction score
2,441
Like I've said before, if you *really* want to criticize it, go for it on the basis how the female ministers tend to be in positions of lesser importance, instead of this hocus-pocus on numerology.

AoD

clearly we see this differently.....but my last comment on the matter is......the "hocus-pocus on numerology" is only in discussion because this government said they would have gender equality in their cabinet. There is no doubt in my mind that they have moved the gender needle in a positive direction.....but it was they who claimed gender equality.....did not deliver it and then, when people pointed that out, fixed it not by changing the mix but by elevating positions.

In the end it is more a mis-step of presentation....and one I am sure they can/will learn from...they are not dumb people.

I do hope, however, the honeymoon period they get is short.......here and in other places, I have seen a great reluctance to even acknowledge this as a mis-step........they are human (likely good humans) but they will make mistakes and if the natural reaction is to deny they made mistakes then it will be a long 4 years ;)
 

AlvinofDiaspar

Moderator
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
30,825
Reaction score
22,796
Location
Toronto
clearly we see this differently.....but my last comment on the matter is......the "hocus-pocus on numerology" is only in discussion because this government said they would have gender equality in their cabinet. There is no doubt in my mind that they have moved the gender needle in a positive direction.....but it was they who claimed gender equality.....did not deliver it and then, when people pointed that out, fixed it not by changing the mix but by elevating positions.

In the end it is more a mis-step of presentation....and one I am sure they can/will learn from...they are not dumb people.

I do hope, however, the honeymoon period they get is short.......here and in other places, I have seen a great reluctance to even acknowledge this as a mis-step........they are human (likely good humans) but they will make mistakes and if the natural reaction is to deny they made mistakes then it will be a long 4 years ;)

They did achieve gender equality in terms of number of cabinet ministers. That is the one dimension that is not really arguable. Whether they are MoS, report to other ministers or otherwise paid less is irrelevant within that context. Unless I am utterly wrong, I don't think there is an expectation among Canadians at large to have "gender equality" dissected at a micro level as to whether it's a Minister or MoS, what their paid grade is and what not. To cast it as otherwise is kind of disingenuous in the first place.

As to denial of mistakes - indeed. We've had the comments re: census from the then Minister of Industry, who candidly admitted to it. The only odd thing of course is that the admission happened after the election, when they are out of power and doesn't/couldn't change a thing ;).

AoD
 
Last edited:

Tuscani01

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
5,422
Reaction score
1,863
clearly we see this differently.....but my last comment on the matter is......the "hocus-pocus on numerology" is only in discussion because this government said they would have gender equality in their cabinet. There is no doubt in my mind that they have moved the gender needle in a positive direction.....but it was they who claimed gender equality.....did not deliver it and then, when people pointed that out, fixed it not by changing the mix but by elevating positions.

In the end it is more a mis-step of presentation....and one I am sure they can/will learn from...they are not dumb people.

I do hope, however, the honeymoon period they get is short.......here and in other places, I have seen a great reluctance to even acknowledge this as a mis-step........they are human (likely good humans) but they will make mistakes and if the natural reaction is to deny they made mistakes then it will be a long 4 years ;)

You really are stretching the truth with your own version of what happened.

Everyone was sworn in as a minister.
Nobody was sworn in as minister of state.

None of these titles existed under the current system, so the paperwork reflects their titles under current legislation. Seeing as the minister of the treasury wasn't sworn in yet, there was no way to make the amendments to the cabinet posts before the swearing in ceremony. One of these women is both a full minister and a minister of state according to the official paperwork. Just goes to show that the system isn't as simple as you seem to think.
 

Top