Politics in 2018

[jollyjacktar]

I am at a loss as to what your point is :dunno:

It's called  :sarcasm:  l got it...

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Or just plain old frustration at the present idiocy of our current PM maybe?

 

[FJAG]

Okay. Here's another one to shake your head at or enter into debate about.

Justin Trudeau To Exonerate First Nations War Chiefs Hanged In 1864
He is expected to absolve the Tsilhqot'in of guilt on Monday.

. . . On Monday, Trudeau will absolve the Tsilhqot'in of guilt "in any way, shape or form" related to the killing of 14 construction workers in 1864, said Chief Joe Alphonse in a video posted on the Tsilhqot'in National Government's Facebook page.

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2018/03/24/justin-trudeau-to-exonerate-first-nations-war-chiefs-hanged-in-1864_a_23394365/?utm_hp_ref=ca-homepage

This is quite interesting as in 1864, BC was not in Confederation and the BC Government in 1999, after an Inquiry conducted in 1993, pardon the six.

I've taken a bit of a read of the circumstances. There's a really good website with numerous source documents here:

http://www.canadianmysteries.ca/sites/klatsassin/home/howtousesite/indexen.html

and the 1993 Report on the Cariboo-Chilcotin Justice Inquiry here. Note that the Inquiry dealt with much broader issues than just the six chiefs. For the Inquiry's recommendations see item "E" at pages 30-31 (which deal more with the issue of whether the six surrendered and gave inculpatory statements on an inducement that they would be granted immunity than whether or not they were guilty of murder):

http://www.llbc.leg.bc.ca/public/pubdocs/bcdocs/149599/cariboochilcotinjustice.pdf

From my read of the events, there may have been some grounds for discontent by the bands (the possible attempt to reintroduce smallpox into the communities by two white men being the primary one) but no justifiable reason to ambush and massacre an essentially unarmed/lightly armed road work party that had nothing to do with that issue.

Whether you count it as a war crime or an all out murder, a crime had been committed by the six. The pardon issued by the BC government seems appropriate based on the findings of the inquiry and it's recommendation. An all out absolution of guilt by the Federal Government seems entirely excessive but typical for the current Prime Minister's penchant for wrapping himself in a hair-shirt.

:cheers:

 

[jollyjacktar]

He really is the Kim Kardashian of politicians.  Desparate to get attention while at the same time accomplishing SFA.  I do wonder how many folks from within his party are gnashing their teeth at this plummet towards irrelevancy at accomplishing much of substance.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Sorry, this is a Brit problem, not Canadian. We weren't even a nation in 1864. Just more bullshit virtue signaling from the most disingenuous
PM ever.

I think there is something, maybe even bigger than taking a Sikh terrorist to India that he's trying really, really hard to take attention from. Just a hincky feeling.

 

[Jarnhamar]

Indigious People struggling to heat their homes, don't even have clean or working  water and battling corrupt band councils will give a collective fuck yes when this happens.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Indigious People struggling to heat their homes, don't even have clean or working  water and battling corrupt band councils will give a collective frig yes when this happens.

I dunno they seem to eat this stuff up.  Its a shame because its all a distraction.

 

[PPCLI Guy]

I think there is something, maybe even bigger than taking a Sikh terrorist to India that he's trying really, really hard to take attention from. Just a hincky feeling.

Notwithstanding the fact that I abhor the thought of the convicted attempted murder being invited to an official function, and also think that the India trip was a shambolic embarrassment, it is worth noting that the PM didn't "take a Sikh terrorist to India".  The individual travelled by himself, on a visa issued by the Indian government.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Notwithstanding the fact that I abhor the thought of the convicted attempted murder being invited to an official function, and also think that the India trip was a shambolic embarrassment, it is worth noting that the PM didn't "take a Sikh terrorist to India".  The individual travelled by himself, on a visa issued by the Indian government.

Cheers You're right. I didn't know how he got there.

 

[Good2Golf]

Indigious People struggling to heat their homes, don't even have clean or working  water and battling corrupt band councils will give a collective fuck yes when this happens.

Indeed.

Perhaps the PM and the Government can bring forth a Bill that fully and completely removes gender discrimination from the status of the Canadian Indian Act? 

Ironically, it was the Conservatives who made moderate improvements to the status of First Nations women in 1985 (Bill C-31) and 2010 (Bill C-3), but First Nation women still have some restrictions placed on the status of their children, depending on their own aboriginal and personal status (ex. married to non-status man with no children, not eligible for her own status).

Words and fancy dancing on a stage during a national birthday celebration are one thing, true action to remove all gender discrimination is another -- Deeds Speak! :tsktsk:

Perhaps PMJT could actually achieve positive change where his father couldn't/didn't?  ???


Regards
G2G

 

[Colin Parkinson]

That would expose the current leaderships of many of the bands for what they are and so they will do their best to block any changes.

 

[Jed]

That would expose the current leaderships of many of the bands for what they are and so they will do their best to block any changes.

It would also introduce accountability and put a serious crimp in the gravy train funding to the in place fiefdoms that now exist. We must not be effective and efficient with funding as that would remove the money to grease the machinery of bureaucracy.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

I would actually be in favour of getting rid of most of INAC and give all of the money directly to First Nations every April 1. I would remove all strings on how it is spent (surplus funds can be saved for future years), except one:

1). All federal money is fully audited every year. Spend it on "band council retreats to Vegas", if you like- but everyone is going to know.

Then the "Blame Canada" game can stop.

 

[Rifleman62]

Good idea. Problem is, they will never, never ever, be enough money to satisfy the "First Nations". No matter how much they guilt the government of the day, it is not enough.

If we could give every one of the First Nations $10M plus another $10M for the next two generations to just go away it would not be enough. The "First Nations" would still protest, after all it's their land and whitey stole it from them.

Personally, I am sick of it.

 

[Altair]

'The court wouldn't even hear it': B.C. loses Trans Mountain appeal in federal court in 'definitive' victory: http://nationalpost.com/investing/the-court-wouldnt-even-hear-it-b-c-loses-trans-mountain-appeal-in-federal-court/wcm/ee913fcb-7e16-4796-9218-ed20b3fb41ff

Alberta Premier Rachel Notley cheered a court victory for the $7.4-billion Trans Mountain pipeline expansion Monday, which upholds the project’s ability to sidestep local permitting processes in cities opposed to the pipeline.

The Federal Court of Appeal declined late on Friday to hear an appeal by the government of B.C. and a handful of opposed municipalities of a ruling by the National Energy Board, which allowed Kinder Morgan Canada to seek construction permits for the pipeline directly from Canada’s pipeline regulator.

  go figure.

 

[CBH99]

So a large oil company gets to expand a project, while sidestepping both provincial & municipal government permitting processes.  And the court won't even hear the arguments?

Sounds like a pretty slanted & unfair ruling.  How can a court rule in favor of one side, without even hearing the arguments from the other? 

 

[JesseWZ]

So a large oil company gets to expand a project, while sidestepping both provincial & municipal government permitting processes.  And the court won't even hear the arguments?

Sounds like a pretty slanted & unfair ruling.  How can a court rule in favor of one side, without even hearing the arguments from the other?

That's a bit out of context. It's the Court of Appeal that declined to hear the ruling. The case had already been decided by a lower court. (or in this case, the National Energy Board). Courts of Appeal have stringent rules in place for what cases can be heard or not. In order for a Court of Appeal to rule, there must be an unsettled question of law, or an error the appellant has identified (and can substantiate) they see the Court of Appeal correcting. You can't use an appeal court to re-litigate if there isn't an area where the appellant can demonstrate the judge(s) erred in fact or law.

Appeal courts will be hesitant to interfere with trial (lower) courts decisions if the aforementioned threshold isn't met.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

So a large oil company gets to expand a project, while sidestepping both provincial & municipal government permitting processes.  And the court won't even hear the arguments?

Sounds like a pretty slanted & unfair ruling.  How can a court rule in favor of one side, without even hearing the arguments from the other?

Kinder Morgan did not "side step" anything.

Various Municipalities and the BC Govt are trying to assert authority where, constitutionally, they have none.

All because they don't want another, modern pipeline. Right beside the 50 year old pipeline.

You would think, by listening to some of the overheated rhetoric in BC that Alberta was proposing piping human babies to the coast instead of oil and refined petroleum products.

Vancouverites must some how enjoy paying the highest gas prices in North America...

 

[jollyjacktar]

Nah, just Dinosaur babies and ancient trees.  It's no wonder that Elizabeth May is looking for someone to chain herself to.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

The Federal Court of Appeals, in this case, only has jurisdiction over what is known in administrative law as judicial review of the lower court (NEB) decision. Since the NEB has a pretty stringent protective clause in its act, the only course opened for  review was a demonstration that the decision was unreasonable. That's a pretty high burden to pass and obviously, the Court felt that on its face, the application did not meet it.

If the issue raised by the municipality is that the law authorizing the NEB to issue permits instead of municipalities was an unconstitutional law, then the process is not to go for judicial review before the Court of Appeals, but to seize any Superior court in the country with the issue of unconstitutionality of the NEB Act. BC wouldn't do that here, I believe, because they probably had been advised that it would not play out in their favour.

Thus, I am not surprised that the Court of Appeals dismissed it at this preliminary stage.