I don’t think that will get a great deal of traction. However, having finally seen the Barton exchange rather than read the content of it, Carney has a clear vulnerability there. His answer was fine, he has complied with the requirements well within the required time frame and there is no obligation to disclose past investments - but he did not like the question, and it showed. Voters don’t mind when you put someone in their place, but you cannot come off as arrogant. There was enough of the patrician about how he handled himself that he needs some work before it comes up again.
In that vein, I am surprised to see that the Conservatives are ending the long-standing convention of having tour journalists travelling with the campaign. That actually might make it much easier for the Liberals to limit journalist access to Carney, and I would have thought Poilievre is fairly accustomed to handling himself around the press at this point.
I’ve been to China. And even though I have an American passport, I stopped going to China after the two Michaels were detained. I can do business anywhere. I don’t need to do it in China.
Yeah, I think the app was from the pub pov, they had to scan the qr code. Initially you had to have a paper with the qr scan code, later it was a qr code on your phone (The app and phone code was right at the end so wasn’t used much). I’m might still be slightly wrong as I didn’t bother, so not sure if it was really enforced much.
Reports that the election call will be this weekend, voting date either April 28 or May 5. I am guessing May 5, because the Liberals are surprisingly below readiness in terms of having candidates for every riding. Not a great sign for them, because the Conservatives are absolutely ready.
One of the interesting questions is where Carney chooses to run. Poilievre has always stuck to the safest choice (when his riding lines were redrawn he went with the more rural portion), but there is speculation that Carney might run in Edmonton. He has family ties and he grew up there, but I don’t believe he has ever lived there as an adult.
All of a sudden, I think it could be Nepean. Liberal MP has had his nomination papers pulled. There have been loads of suspicion about how closely involved the Indian government is with him, to the point that he was previously refused entry to the leadership campaign. But quite the move days before an election call.
The Conservatives seem very impressed with themselves over this, but I am not sure it going to get the kind of traction they would need. Brookfield had most of those assets long before Carney, and in particular he has not been fond of the coal industry anyway. Meanwhile, the Conservatives don’t really have many answers for Poilievre’s own voting record.
I think it is unlikely they will - that ‘green light’ committee doesn’t have any obligation to do so. But there have been rumours of the same sketchy donation patterns (10+ donations for the maximum, different names, same credit card) that saw Rubi Dhalla shut out of the leadership race. A healthy number of his own constituents think he is an agent of the Modi government.
There are many MPs of Indian origin who don’t face those accusations. Arya is an exceptional case, he has been somewhat flagrant in his orientation toward Modi - which frankly is just very weird, relations with India are generally not a mainstream political question in Canada outside maybe Brampton and a couple of Vancouver ridings. Nepean has a decent size South Asian population, but less than 10% of the population. He has somehow managed to get on the wrong side of a reasonably moderate Sikh community and one Indian community group.
The donation patterns are likely what sunk him, but as I noted above, unlikely those will be made public unless Elections Canada investigates.
Well, exactly. The average Nepean constituent is a younger family, about 60% are white, quite a mix of other communities, middle income. Yet this MP’s attention has been overwhelmingly occupied with issues around India. He also has the worst voting attendance record in the last Parliament, which is woeful considering the country spans six time zones and his constituency is a 20 minute drive from the House of Commons.
For reference, I would guess that perhaps 90%+ of Canadians would not know what you are talking about with the Nijjar incident. I doubt 50% of voters could name Modi.
Carney is now dropping the capital gains tax increase and suspending the GST on the first $1,000,000 value of a house, not to mention all the other economic policies he’s been lifting from the Tories. Carney’s new logo just dropped
I know Mark Wiseman personally. He was fired from Blackrock for personal misconduct. We’ve always had a good relationship with Blackrock except when we dealt with him. We all thought his firing was pretty funny. And his tenure at AIMCo was a disaster as the Alberta government strips away all the nonsense that was going on there.
I don’t know Wiseman, but the nonsense seems to have pre- and post-dated him at AIMCo. I just find it fairly odd that Poilievre is trying to get mileage out of just about anyone being added to the Canada-US Council. Seems fairly oblique, there is no requirement for consensus or endorsement of all of the views of a given member. I don’t agree with the 100M target (which we are actually on course to meet since 2000). I guess this speaks to the weirdness of Poilievre. Instead of a serious conversation around immigration levels and a long-term vision, he tries to turn everything into an attack. In this case, the vote was around a Bloc motion that implied Quebec needed to be uniquely consulted - I don’t think the Conservatives ever introduced an alternative motion. Now it is yet another weird ‘gotcha’.
I thought Poilievre’s announcement around increasing funding for developing the trades was far more effective. Not sure why the Conservatives would take these odd offramps - focus is supposed to Poilievre’s strong suit, and I think that is actually a winning message. Who cares about some suit on an advisory council?
