Value Subtracted
Have you ever considered that the Prime Directive is not only not ethical, but also illogical, and perhaps morally indefensible?
- 124 Posts
- 150 Comments
That’s because the so-called “fixed election date” leglisation only circumvents the 5-year limit laid out in the consitution. The federal and provincial Crown representatives retain the ability to call a general election - I don’t think that can be changed without an amendment to the constitution, which ain’t gonna happen.
It’s always been smoke and mirrors.
It seems that they have problems with the entire process, and want to restart on more equitable terms.
“This resolution speaks to the desired process that we see as path forward to getting the final settlement agreement back on track, to address the flaws identified by regions across the country and to create fairer, more equitable, more open, transparent process,” Khelsilem, council chairperson of the Squamish Nation in B.C., told the assembly.
The resolution directs the AFN executive committee to establish a national Children’s Chiefs Commission with regional representation to provide direction and oversight of the long-term reform agreement negotiations.
It also directs the AFN to postpone any votes on settlement agreements until all First Nations have had at least 90 days to review them.
I guess I’m not sure what you think he should have done differently?
Like, this whole situation is a mess, and there’s a mix of possible “foreign influence” in play, ranging from “unsuccessful attempts” to “this person is an active foreign agent,” and it’s all based on classified CSIS intelligence. And these people are still elected officials, so it’s there more that even could be done beyond perhaps booting them out of caucus?
Surely we can agree that the situation isn’t as straightforward as we’d like it to be.
Poilievre and the Conservatives have been calling on Trudeau to release the names of allegedly compromised parliamentarians. They repeated that demand on Wednesday.
But law enforcement and national security agencies have been clear on this point: sharing any classified information is a crime.
“Anyone who reveals classified information is subject to the law equally and obviously, in this case, those names are classified at this time and to reveal them publicly would be a criminal offence,” RCMP Deputy Commissioner Mark Flynn told MPs on the public accounts committee in June.
When CBC News later asked Flynn whether the names could be released in the House of Commons, where MPs enjoy certain legal protections, he suggested that could be a legal grey area.
“That’s a question that should be asked, due to the complexities of parliamentary privilege, of a legal expert,” Flynn said.
Stephanie Carvin, a former CSIS national security analyst, said there are several reasons why national security agencies wouldn’t want the names made public — starting with the fact that it could compromise ongoing investigations.
“We don’t want foreign governments knowing how we are collecting information. That’s why we protect our sources and methods,” she said.
“Did it advance the cause of national security? Did it advance the interest of the inquiry and the commissioners’ work? I’m not so sure.”
If it leads to Polievre getting his fucking security clearance, I would argue it does.
There would be no “partisan turn” to take if he would meet this basic expectation.
This article does not say threats were made - it says, “according to Chinese Canadian interview subjects, this invoked a widespread fear amongst electors, described as a fear of retributive measures from Chinese authorities should a CPC government be elected.”
That’s bad, to be sure, but if there was no direct threat, you’re going to have a pretty hard time prosecuting the issue.
So…if I were to say online that Donald Trump is an absolute disgrace, and people in the US should vote for his opponent, should I be facing charges in the US? Or maybe my comment should just be nuked?
By no means am I arguing that foreign influence is a good thing, but it’s awfully hard to regulate effectively.
CBC has this to add:
Bell Canada Enterprises (BCE Inc.), which owns 37.5 per cent of MLSE, said in a Wednesday press release that the deal is expected to close in mid-2025.
The company said that it is selling its ownership stake to reduce its debt and “support its ongoing transformation” from a telecommunications firm to a tech company.
What the hell are they doing over there?
When officers approached the car, it quickly drove off. Police said the driver was operating the vehicle erratically; running red lights, weaving through traffic, and hitting speeds around 90 km/h in the downtown core.
The driver was arrested and officers discovered he had a quantity of methamphetamine in his possession.
The investigation also revealed the same vehicle was involved in an erratic driving incident on Pembina Highway a day prior.
Yeah, sounds like a real upstanding citizen.
I’d be quite surprised if this did not later have to be re-litigated.
That’s the state of indigenous relations in Canada in a nutshell. Constant relitigation, with very little progress.
Even when the courts direct specific settlements, the government does everything it can to avoid paying them.
This is a case of Fun With Commas - Sobeys is owned by a different obscene conglomerate, Empire Company.
Metro, Walmart, Giant Tiger, and Empire are the co-conspirators along with the Weston companies.
The article says it was the result of a retroactive salary adjustment coupled with severance pay - unfortunate, but I’m not sure it’s an egregious example of mismanagement (besides him apparently being a bad hire - I wish we knew more about why he was let go).
There’s a lot of argument to be had over the relative value of CEOs across the board, but Shared Health presumably has to offer a salary that’s competitive with the private sector.
I think it’s a fine idea that requires a certain degree of community and camaraderie that I’m not sure exists in the Lemmyverse yet.
As a group, we’re good at sharing articles - often stuff that makes us mad (and there’s plenty of that to go around) - but less good at just…hanging out and shooting the shit.
I don’t know what the solution is aside from, “be the change you want to see.”
Brinley at S&P Global Mobility says the rise of SUVs is a reflection of consumers’ desire to get greater utility out of their vehicles, which means the capacity to move more people and cargo.
Adams said when choosing a vehicle, most SUV buyers don’t make their decision based on something that’s going to satisfy “95 to 99 per cent” of their driving needs, which is commuting and running errands.
“They purchase their vehicle for the one weekend of the year when ‘I tow my boat up to the lake and I want to make sure I can do that,’” he said, noting “it is ironic when they make that purchase and then complain about high gas prices.”
No question, though it seemed like the Bombers sort of lost the plot at halftime. Maybe they enjoyed the Jonas Brothers a little too much.