PMJT: The First 100 Days

[Fishbone Jones]

We might be splitting hairs here, but I think we need to be clear; and this is why I don't see it as such a big deal.

First, refusing to support a motion to officially ackowledge support for a project doesn't necessarily mean that they do no support the project.

Second, they didn't "vote against" Energy East. They simply voted against a Tory motion to publicly throw their support behind it.

The content of the motion doesn't matter. They promised not to whip the caucus, except for certain items.

They just broke that promise and whipped the caucus on an item that wasn't included in their platform.

That's the nuts and bolts of it.

Another election lie.

 

[Remius]

We might be splitting hairs here, but I think we need to be clear; and this is why I don't see it as such a big deal.

First, refusing to support a motion to officially ackowledge support for a project doesn't necessarily mean that they do no support the project.

Second, they didn't "vote against" Energy East. They simply voted against a Tory motion to publicly throw their support behind it.

His detractors and opponents won't see that way. 

 

[PuckChaser]

Second, they didn't "vote against" Energy East. They simply voted against a Tory motion to publicly throw their support behind it.

You're spinning it. They voted against these 2 provisions:

(c) acknowledge the desire for the Energy East pipeline expressed by the provincial governments of Alberta, Saskatchewan, Ontario, and New Brunswick; and (d) express its support for the Energy East pipeline currently under consideration.

Which means they do not acknowledge the desire for the Energy East pipeline and do not express support for the Energy East pipeline under consideration. That's what voting against something means, you do not agree with the provisions. Spinning it any other way is to try to confuse the truth.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

You're spinning it. They voted against these 2 provisions:

Which means they do not acknowledge the desire for the Energy East pipeline and do not express support for the Energy East pipeline under consideration. That's what voting against something means, you do not agree with the provisions. Spinning it any other way is to try to confuse the truth.

As I said above, the content is immaterial. They could have been debating red gummy bears on Thursdays.

THEY WHIPPED THE CAUCUS for the vote and hence the broken promise.

The broken promise is the important part of the discussion, everything else is fluff and folly.

 

[Lumber]

As I said above, the content is immaterial. They could have been debating red gummy bears on Thursdays.

THEY WHIPPED THE CAUCUS for the vote and hence the broken promise.

The broken promise is the important part of the discussion, everything else is fluff and folly.

I wish they had voted in favour of the motion myself. However, the broken promise is not the most important part of the discussion. In my opinion, keeping promises is less important than running an efficient and effective government. Ergo, the content of what happened here is not simply fluff and folly. In this case, they made a shitty decision.

 

[Brad Sallows]

It was only a feel-good motion.  Break it down:

"(a) recognize the importance of the energy sector to the Canadian economy and support its development in an environmentally sustainable way;"

Anything controversial about that?

"(b) agree that pipelines are the safest way to transport oil;"

Anything controversial about that?

"(c) acknowledge the desire for the Energy East pipeline expressed by the provincial governments of Alberta, Saskatchewan, Ontario, and New Brunswick; and"

Anything controversial about that?

"(d) express its support for the Energy East pipeline currently under consideration."

This is the only item which is not pablum, and all it asked for was a show of recognition.

 

[PuckChaser]

Ergo: There was no reason to vote it down. A quick soundbite after clarifies that the Liberals will not interfere with the "new" NEB process, however they would like to see the pipeline built should the NEB decides. Then the motion gets forgotten. Instead, they've now broken another election promise and have not clarified their position on Energy East, despite campaigning to support it.

 

[Kat Stevens]

Let's not kid ourselves here.  The particular content of the motion was irrelevant, the Liberals sent a clear message, by squashing it, that it's their playpen now, setting the tone for the next four years.  It was a softball motion served up on a plate, that would have cost nothing to pass. 

 

[jmt18325]

Let's not kid ourselves here.  The particular content of the motion was irrelevant, the Liberals sent a clear message, by squashing it, that it's their playpen now, setting the tone for the next four years.  It was a softball motion served up on a plate, that would have cost nothing to pass.

It would have gone against their own interim assessment process.  To get pipelines built, we have to mean it when it comes to the environment and aboriginal rights, or they won't happen.

 

[Kat Stevens]

The motion could have said "Let's all agree that rabid wombats are pretty nasty and we should avoid appointing them as school crossing guards" and it would have been crushed.

 

[quadrapiper]

Which means they do not acknowledge the desire for the Energy East pipeline and do not express support for the Energy East pipeline under consideration.

Wonder if the latter one might have been the governance reason (as opposed to the political desire to give the Tories a slap). By not expressing support for (but, equally, not the tabling a measure to oppose) the pipeline, they are able to say they and Parliament are hands-off as far as the NEB's handling of individual applications.

 

[PuckChaser]

That's a stretch, and easily solved with a sound bite during debate or after in the scrum about not interfering in the process. All voting no does is give the opposition ammunition.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

They are caught between their promises and reality. Already I think the First Nations are realizing that most of what they heard was smoke and mirrors, a lot were hoping he would make a statement by suspending the Site C certificate, which they clearly shown they are not interested in revisiting. I suspect that they will muddle along they Sept, then role out Minor changes to CEAA, NEBA and the NPA. At which point they will have their “stamp” on the process and then they will select which projects go ahead. After all the Liberals are about big businesses. Those that switched their vote from NDP to Liberal will howl at how hollow the changes are and that might come back to bite them at election time if those votes go back to NDP.
Sooner or later another westcoast oil pipeline will be proposed, it may follow a different route and have a terminal other than Kitimat. There is actually a fair bit of support for LNG export from the Coastal First Nations, the calculation of risk vs economic reward is very favourable.   

 

[Remius]

That's a stretch, and easily solved with a sound bite during debate or after in the scrum about not interfering in the process. All voting no does is give the opposition ammunition.

It's essentially what they said.  The motion was to support the Energy East pipeline, but they can't do that until the review process is complete as per their platform promise.  Therefore, whipping the vote is consitent with their platform.

Claiming they lied or broke their promise about free votes is grasping at straws.  There seems to be a lot of that from criticising his magazine photoshoot, his vacation, his appearance on a tv show to coincide with Bell's Let's talk week to whatever.  It's no better than what the left did to Stephen Harper about a whole slew of things. 

All of the critisism so far is all about fluff.  And to be fair, it is likely because he hasn't done anything substantial so far. 

That would be my biggest critique so far.  But he still has a few days left before his probation period is up and hard questions will have to be answered.  Patience will be wearing thin on the economy and things like the ISIL mission if we don't get concrete action.

I'd like to jump on the critic bandwagon but so far it he hasn't done anything yet to merit it. 


 

 

[PuckChaser]

I posted their promise, they broke it by whipping against this motion. I'm willing to bet their NB MPs would have voted yes. It's cut and dry, no shades of grey in a no vote.

 

[Eye In The Sky]

he hasn't done anything 

That could be the most accurate, concise statement in this thread! 

Unless one considers the other stuff you mentioned "doing stuff" at a PM level. 

his magazine photoshoot, his vacation, his appearance on a tv show...

;D

 

[dapaterson]

Noted journalists (shurely you jest - ed) at Frank Magazine are reporting that a close personal friend of Gerald Butts is about to be named Canada's High Commissioner to the United Kingdom.

Congratulations, Premier Dad (aka Dalton McGuinty).


:facepalm:


EDIT: Added link: http://frankmag.ca/2016/01/premier-patronage-mcwimpy-to-london/

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Noted journalists (shurely you jest - ed) at Frank Magazine are reporting that a close personal friend of Gerald Butts is about to be named Canada's High Commissioner to the United Kingdom.

Congratulations, Premier Dad (aka Dalton McGuinty).


:facepalm:

Is the PM really that dense that he's going to give this guy a high profile, international position, representing Canada at a time that the trial of his minions is starting to take place.

I wonder how he would handle it in Parliment, if McGuinty ended up with charges, or was seriously implicated, resulting from those charged flipping on him.

 

[Remius]

Noted journalists (shurely you jest - ed) at Frank Magazine are reporting that a close personal friend of Gerald Butts is about to be named Canada's High Commissioner to the United Kingdom.

Congratulations, Premier Dad (aka Dalton McGuinty).


:facepalm:

I really hope this isn't true.

 

[cavalryman]

Noted journalists (shurely you jest - ed) at Frank Magazine are reporting that a close personal friend of Gerald Butts is about to be named Canada's High Commissioner to the United Kingdom.

Congratulations, Premier Dad (aka Dalton McGuinty).


:facepalm:


EDIT: Added link: http://frankmag.ca/2016/01/premier-patronage-mcwimpy-to-london/

A pay-off for having the McWynnty machinery throw its full weight behind the LPC during the election?  :