Prime Minister questioned about expenses

[Brad Sallows]

When obsessing over expenditures, try to separate things (mostly) for the use of the family (playground eqpt, saunas, etc) and things for the general use of the public who might come to view the residence (seasonal decorations).

 

[brihard]

When obsessing over expenditures, try to separate things (mostly) for the use of the family (playground eqpt, saunas, etc) and things for the general use of the public who might come to view the residence (seasonal decorations).

Harrington Lake is not accessible to the public. Private property protected by RCMP. The more relevant point of interest would be 'visible to visiting dignitaries/diplomats'. Occasionally they will get some. But it is primarily a family residence.

 

[trooper142]

Fair enough, Harrington Lake isn't an official residence, my mistake; but my point remains valid imo.

The PM, whatever political stripe, has been known to host dignitaries at that residence, and 24 Sussex has been used as well. It should be maintained, and past Prime Ministers have added to the property for their personal touch. Trudeau is no different in this regard and in my view why should he be? Yes 7500$ is a lot of money for a lot of people, I concur with that; there are a lot of families struggling right now, but we have a lot of issues going on in our country, focusing on such trivial things is ridiculous when you compare it to the 1B lawsuit announced against the RCMP, the pipeline issues out west, the imending legalization of cannabis, trade issues with our biggest trading partner and so on. Surely we can focus on bigger issues.


I personally feel embarassed that the official opposition of this country chose to spend the last day of question period in the spring session devoted to saunas and swing sets and grommed ski trails. Is it a big much? Probably, I'd say I agree, but is it a valuable use of the property to allow the PM and his family a bit of down time, maybe they'd be inclined to have a staycation as opposed to taking a family vacation elsewhere , getting everyone up in arms over the hundreds of thousands of dollars spent flying him around for vacation  :rofl:

Seriously though, to finish my point, I  agree with above comments mentioning that all of this stems from the systematic centralization and control of the flow of information(this certainly isn't a phenomenon of this government and has  been going on through each new government of the day for well over a decade, I reckon before the Chretien days )these things would have barely made headlines had they come out ahead of it and announced the motifications in advance; much the same with the renovations to 24 Sussex!

Overall good discussion, I'm glad to see many varying view points on the matter; makes for lively debate thats for sure.

 

[Halifax Tar]

HT, i removed a comment that was uncalled for.

I missed it.  It must have been a zinger.  Look I am a tight-head prop and I am Snr NCM, if I shied away from a passionate discussion online how effective can I be in my job or on the pitch right ?  No need to edit bud.  Let me have it.  We can throw punches and still have a beer together

I suspect we aren’t that far off on the out of touch view of the PM.

Agreed, we may be getting caught up on details.

I agree with Chantal Hebert here who echos my exact thought on this.

People are wondering why the PM avoided answering in question period but really why did Scheer was his last questions of the session on that given everything else going on?

Anyways I’ll leave Ms. Hebert’s thoughts here if anyone wishes to read it.

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/star-columnists/2018/06/25/the-conservatives-are-happy-to-double-down-on-the-approach-that-has-served-donald-trump-so-well.html

I think Canadians will identify with the (ultimately incorrect)  $7500 figure swingset a lot more than say they will $750 million going to India. I wouldn't under estimate the small things.

Modern teaching methods include a method called Culturally Relevant Pedagogy.  Generally it theorizes that it's difficult to teach people things they cant relate too.  For instance my wife teaches at a very socially and economically challenged inner city school in Halifax.  When teaching mathematics they have found if the keep the integers low and use examples of something the student can relate too they have much more success, vice using integers and subject matter that is not relevant to their immediate lives.

So, what I find interesting is I think that may be similar what you said there Jarnhamar.  I will use myself as an example.  I can not relate to $750 Million, that number is almost beyond my comprehension, but $7500 now that's infuriating.  I know $750 Million is a big number, but $7500 I have spent myself and I can relate to that level of expenditure, if someone gave me $7500 I could do allot with that.

Anyways perhaps I am rambling. 

 

[Colin Parkinson]

I like Chantal Hebert, even if I do not always agree with her politics, she is not afraid to call a spade a spade and I think the Conservatives should take her article as a warning about not getting to dirty. I don't think much of JT, but swing sets are not important.

 

[Furniture]

Modern teaching methods include a method call Culturally Relevant Pedagogy.  Generally I theorizes that its difficult to teach people things they cant relate too.  For instance my wife teaches at a very socially and economically challenged inner city school in Halifax.  When teaching mathematics they have found if the keep the integers low and use examples of something the student can relate too they have much more success, vice using integers and subject matter that is not relevant.

So, what I find interesting is I think that may be similar what you said there Jarnhamar.  I will use myself as an example.  I cant relate to $750 Million, that number is almost beyond my comprehension, but $7500 now that's infuriating.  I know $750 Million is a big number, but $7500 I have spent myself and I can relate to that level of expenditure, if someone gave me $7500 I could do allot with that.

Anyways perhaps I am rambling.

This makes good sense to me, most of us will never earn $750 Million in our entire lives, or over the span several lifetimes for that matter. Even a sum like $7500 is enough money to make a large dent in the debt of many Canadians, according to Equifax Canada(2015 data) the average Canadian has around $21,000 of non-mortgage debt.

I think focusing on the PM as a personal money water is an intentional play heading into the summer BBQ season. The Conservatives will be out in their ridings stirring up support, talking to average people about how personally wasteful of tax money the PM is, and how out of touch he is with average Canadians. After the India trip they saw how he lost popularity, and are likely hoping to keep his personal popularity low.

Going after major international issues(trade, Mali, etc..) would leave more wiggle room for the government to claim they are the victims of powers outside their influence. They saw how fast people rallied to the PM when Trump attacked him personally and likely don't want to keep Canadian's looking at the PM as a "Captain Canada" sticking it to the big mean Americans... Canadians love few things more than feeling smug and superior to the USA.

 

[Altair]

This makes good sense to me, most of us will never earn $750 Million in our entire lives, or over the span several lifetimes for that matter. Even a sum like $7500 is enough money to make a large dent in the debt of many Canadians, according to Equifax Canada(2015 data) the average Canadian has around $21,000 of non-mortgage debt.

I think focusing on the PM as a personal money water is an intentional play heading into the summer BBQ season. The Conservatives will be out in their ridings stirring up support, talking to average people about how personally wasteful of tax money the PM is, and how out of touch he is with average Canadians. After the India trip they saw how he lost popularity, and are likely hoping to keep his personal popularity low.

Going after major international issues(trade, Mali, etc..) would leave more wiggle room for the government to claim they are the victims of powers outside their influence. They saw how fast people rallied to the PM when Trump attacked him personally and likely don't want to keep Canadian's looking at the PM as a "Captain Canada" sticking it to the big mean Americans... Canadians love few things more than feeling smug and superior to the USA.

Good,  but dirty,  politics.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Good,  but dirty,  politics.

Is there such a thing as clean politics anymore ?

 

[Cloud Cover]

This makes good sense to me, most of us will never earn $750 Million in our entire lives, or over the span several lifetimes for that matter. Even a sum like $7500 is enough money to make a large dent in the debt of many Canadians, according to Equifax Canada(2015 data) the average Canadian has around $21,000 of non-mortgage debt.

I think focusing on the PM as a personal money water is an intentional play heading into the summer BBQ season. The Conservatives will be out in their ridings stirring up support, talking to average people about how personally wasteful of tax money the PM is, and how out of touch he is with average Canadians. After the India trip they saw how he lost popularity, and are likely hoping to keep his personal popularity low.

Going after major international issues(trade, Mali, etc..) would leave more wiggle room for the government to claim they are the victims of powers outside their influence. They saw how fast people rallied to the PM when Trump attacked him personally and likely don't want to keep Canadian's looking at the PM as a "Captain Canada" sticking it to the big mean Americans... Canadians love few things more than feeling smug and superior to the USA.

This is a very keen observation. When it comes to the swing set and the rest, facts about who paid for what apparently do not matter and yes the public opinion is probably not so great for Trudeau and the Libs. on this one. But, it will pass....

While I'm disappointed that Scheer personally went that way, (it could have been the shadow minster for the relevant government department), this was probably a better choice than addressing anything of a truly serious nature to the public or the country, like the economy, like the debt, like defence, like immigration, like etc... All of these things Canadians either don't give a flying frig about, or they support the government, or  for various reasons they have some understanding or belief that the Libs are doing their best (such as in the trade wars).

But swings sets and decks, and saunas and patio umbrellas reinforce the conservative message that this is a recreational, pot promoting Prime Minister who is more interested in himself than anything else.  Even if he paid for some or all of it himself, those facts will not matter and many of the public will view these as privileged indulgences.

 

[Altair]

Is there such a thing as clean politics anymore ?

No.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

Is there such a thing as clean politics anymore ?

What do you mean anymore? There was a reason why places selling alcohol had to close on election day, to prevent politicians from buying votes with beer.

 

[a_majoor]

This is a very keen observation. When it comes to the swing set and the rest, facts about who paid for what apparently do not matter and yes the public opinion is probably not so great for Trudeau and the Libs. on this one. But, it will pass....

While I'm disappointed that Scheer personally went that way, (it could have been the shadow minster for the relevant government department), this was probably a better choice than addressing anything of a truly serious nature to the public or the country, like the economy, like the debt, like defence, like immigration, like etc... All of these things Canadians either don't give a flying frig about, or they support the government, or  for various reasons they have some understanding or belief that the Libs are doing their best (such as in the trade wars).

But swings sets and decks, and saunas and patio umbrellas reinforce the conservative message that this is a recreational, pot promoting Prime Minister who is more interested in himself than anything else.  Even if he paid for some or all of it himself, those facts will not matter and many of the public will view these as privileged indulgences.

Sadly, the upcoming 2019 elections will be the Liberals running against President Trump and with no message other than "Trump's a big meanie", which will speak to the mass of voters described in the first two paragraphs. If the Conservatives were adroit, they could play the last paragraph pretty hard, saying  that the PM or his party unable to do anything about President Trump because they are more interested in indulging themselves at the expense of the taxpayer.

Colour me not very optimistic that the Conservatives or the NDP will take on that message or deploy it very effectively.

 

[Loachman]

Colour me not very optimistic that the Conservatives or the NDP will take on that message or deploy it very effectively.

Why wouldn't they?

Defining Trudeau's two predecessors well in advance worked well for the Conservatives in the past. They can even resurrect the not-so-successful attempt at defining him - "See? We told you so..." superimposed on a bunch of the photographs and video clips that he has spawned. There is no shortage of ammunition. And it's growing.

Gropegate  has even been picked up by CBC now: https://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/trudeau-zero-tolerance-1.4723664

"Trudeau has said as much in various interviews about his approach to tackling sexual harassment. "We have no tolerance for this - we will not brush things under the rug, but we will take action on it immediately," he told The Canadian Press earlier this year. In a CBC Radio interview around the same time, the prime minister said he should be held to high standards of conduct, adding: "I've been very, very careful all my life to be thoughtful, to be respectful of people's space and people's headspace as well."

"In his many interviews on the topic, he has not included an appeal for allowances for youthfulness or genuine remorse, or simply the acknowledgement that people sometimes do bad things. This is not to suggest that any combination of these factors should necessarily exonerate the aforementioned men. I only mean to point out that the excuses that some have already used to defend the prime minister against this one accusation (This was almost 20 years ago!) haven't actually crossed his lips.

"Trudeau has essentially boxed himself in with his own zero-tolerance policy. He has made clear, over and over again, that there is no time limit on defending women's rights or for standing up for what is right. This is the climate that Trudeau helped create. He can't forget that now."

One of the comments (which are generally not in his favour, even on CBC): "'boxed himself in' in this situation, as well as the pipeline situation, as well as... just not ready". People are seeing patterns in his behaviour and connecting dots, and seem to be less and less impressed.

He has a year to either continue to reinforce this perception, or correct it.

Which is the most likely?

 

[Cloud Cover]

Better for him it all comes out now instead of after the writ is dropped.

 

[Altair]

The next election is a fight between those who don't want a carbon tax and those who don't want the CPC to touch legal pot.

Going to be fun.

 

[PuckChaser]

The next election is a fight between those who don't want a carbon tax and those who don't want the CPC to touch legal pot.

Going to be fun.

If that's what you see as the 2 major issues in the 2019 Election, then I've given you far more credit for your grasp on Canadian Federal politics than you deserve. You also give recreational drug users too much credit to show up to vote to stop a repeal. The legalization is even being condemned by pot advocates, so I wouldn't count on a major pot lobby surge to carry Trudeau through his current poor polling numbers (https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poll-tracker-federal-poll-averages-and-seat-projections-1.4171977). The NDP pledge to legalize all illict drugs isn't helping their numbers.

 

[Jarnhamar]

[quote author=Halifax Tar]
So, what I find interesting is I think that may be similar what you said there Jarnhamar.  I will use myself as an example.  I can not relate to $750 Million, that number is almost beyond my comprehension, but $7500 now that's infuriating.  I know $750 Million is a big number, but $7500 I have spent myself and I can relate to that level of expenditure, if someone gave me $7500 I could do allot with that.

Anyways perhaps I am rambling.
[/quote]

I'm trying to not let Journeyman down  ;D

But ya 750mil is a big number.  Just like in Ontario and the Liberals wasting 1 billion dollars on gas plant. I don't even know how many zeros are in a billion. But that estimated $5000 extra out of my pocket is kids hockey, swimming, soccer, clothes, a bike. 

I see the media pushing this narrative about how dumb of a move it was by Scheer to talk about a swing set and those other items. I still don't think it was that dumb. I bet people relate to that more than various millions and millions that gets wasted.

 

[Altair]

If that's what you see as the 2 major issues in the 2019 Election, then I've given you far more credit for your grasp on Canadian Federal politics than you deserve. You also give recreational drug users too much credit to show up to vote to stop a repeal. The legalization is even being condemned by pot advocates, so I wouldn't count on a major pot lobby surge to carry Trudeau through his current poor polling numbers (https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poll-tracker-federal-poll-averages-and-seat-projections-1.4171977). The NDP pledge to legalize all illict drugs isn't helping their numbers.

Okay, I'll flip this to you then.

What do you think are going to be the major issues for those on the left under 35?

Remembering it was the young, left vote that abandoned the NDP, flocked to the liberals, and came out in numbers not seen in decades that propelled the Liberals into power, and assuming they remain just as engaged for 2019, what issues are going to be at the top of their list?

 

[PuckChaser]

Depends if they have a job or not. Or if they recently lost their job in the "trade war" over NAFTA. The "under 35" demographic is massive, going from 19 activist university students who will never vote for anything that's even close to the center side of the socialist spectrum, or early 30s young professionals on Bay Street who are likely not to vote Liberal after seeing investment leave Canada in droves because of "progressive" policies that leave business's trying to figure out if this is a sane country to do business in.

 

[Altair]

Depends if they have a job or not. Or if they recently lost their job in the "trade war" over NAFTA. The "under 35" demographic is massive, going from 19 activist university students who will never vote for anything that's even close to the center side of the socialist spectrum, or early 30s young professionals on Bay Street who are likely not to vote Liberal after seeing investment leave Canada in droves because of "progressive" policies that leave business's trying to figure out if this is a sane country to do business in.

That's what we call a sidestep.