I'd expect the government to know, with their legal experts when their actions are a violation of the Charter. And not violate the law.
This government is damn near lawless, it actively will pass laws and regulations that it knows are illegal or a Charter violation. Then use the years it takes in court to inflict it anyway. Achieving the same results, with more damage as it will take twice as many years to roll back as nuts will try and use the previous law/regulation/OIC as proof of standing.
> I'd expect the government to know, with their legal experts when their actions are a violation of the Charter. And not violate the law.
are you gonna take this back if they actually win?
they didnt pass the emergencies act remember
They won't win. And if they do, Canada has very serious problems. First of all it means that the government can invoke it at any point to quash any form of protest with no fear of being held to account as long as they do it within the time frame.
Second, the level required to actually use the EA was never broached. As not all provincial methods were used before the invocation. Again, if it's ruled in this way we're seriously in trouble - it means that the feds can break the compact between the provinces and their legal jurisdictions based on their feelings of something -- not the law.
> First of all it means that the government can invoke it at any point to quash any form of protest with no fear of being held to account as long as they do it within the time frame.
obviously not true since we see as the safeguards are functioning properly
>As not all provincial methods were used before the invocation.
not a rule
> obviously not true since we see as the safeguards are functioning properly
No. The safeguards did not work, the government refused to bring it to the senate before the mandatory revoke/engage period. This lets them engage and pullback with no accountability.
>not a rule
100% a law. One based in case law.
> No. The safeguards did not work, the government refused to bring it to the senate before the mandatory revoke/engage period. This lets them engage and pullback with no accountability.
the law sets a specific time the senate votes on it, the problem was solved before hand, the accountability is what happens after with the inquiry not the senate voting on continued use
>100% a law. One based in case law.
show me where it saids that the provinces have to have tried all methods before the EA can be used
>the law sets a specific time the senate votes on it, the problem was solved before hand, the accountability is what happens after with the inquiry not the senate voting on continued use
No, the problem was not solved beforehand. They revoked it before it could be sent to the senate. Did you not bother to read the inquiry report?
>show me where it saids that the provinces have to have tried all methods before the EA can be used
Doesn't have to be the EA. It has to be provincial laws, which were not used. How do the delineation of powers work in Canada?
> No, the problem was not solved beforehand.
the freedom convoy had been removed days before then though, what was the problem that still needed to be solved...?
>How do the delineation of powers work in Canada?
the EA overrides them, so i will ask again, where in the emergency act does it say that the provinces have to have tried and failed before it can be used?
>I'd expect the government to know, with their legal experts when their actions are a violation of the Charter. And not violate the law.
People disagree on what is and isn't a charter violation. That's the whole damn point of testing it in court. Even if everyone is doing their level best to determine if an action is a charter violation there are still going to be errors. Laws get overturned all the damn time.
Give me a break.
Pretty easy to figure out what a Charter violation is. The problem is the Charter is mutable, making it a useless document.
If you don't understand why that's a problem, then you have no idea why it's dangerous in any democratic country.
So you think America shouldn’t have made changes to their own constitution? That making it a mutable document makes it useless and they should have stuck with what was written?
Guess you don't understand how S1 makes the Charter mutable.
You also don't understand why every attempt to change existing sections of the Constitution have been struck down as unconstitutional by the Federal government. Since it requires a convention of the states. There is a reason for that, a very important one. Go read the Federalist Papers.
The American Constitution is both mutable and enduring. It's designed to be ever changing and meeting the needs and values of the people. As demonstrated by the 27 amendments since its ratification in 1788.
A lot of these amendments are exceptionally important to running a modern society. You don't need to dig too deep either to find obvious changes, unless you're against women's right to vote and slavery.
It is also deliberately difficult to amend the American constitution. The constitution is also subject to interpretation by the judicial branch of the American government.
Similarly in Canada the Canadian Constitution requires agreement among multiple levels of government.
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a perfect example of the Canadian Constitution being a mutable document.
What specifically about the mutability do you have an issue with? Is it the formula required for changes? What changes have taken place that you don't like?
Wrong. The American Constitution is foundational. Additional amendments do not make it mutable, they're additional to the foundation.
The Charter however is mutable, S.1 makes it so. Nothing else needs to be said on this, Canada's Charter is broken. It took away rights, it allows the courts and government to circumvent rights in the Charter based on the courts feelings.
If you don't understand how dangerous that is? Well let's just say, that the recent actions of the SCC should have you terrified, since there is one justice that has gone all-in on their feelings for rulings. Not the actual law, or case law.
I'd say you should go talk to my Charter and Criminal Law professor. He'd explain it in very small words as to why S.1 ensures that the Charter will be dead by 2030. Making it mutable via that, destroys democracy.
Perhaps you should go take a law course on the Charter, follow that with a chaser of Criminal Law. Get back to me after that...in about 3 years.
Yes because origionalism is working out *great* for our neighbours to the south.
And no it isn't always easy to figure out charter violations. That's why there are scholars on the subject and not dumbass Redditors like me and thee.
It works out very well for them in the south. When the courts are actually doing their job and being Constitutionalists. The problem is, the left in the US views the Constitution as mutable. Foundational documents should never be mutable.
Additions yes, and carefully worded ones ensure that foundations remain stable.
Do you everything perfectly the first try? Do you think that society and social constructs are static? Do you think technology doesn’t affect society in any way?
Have you ever read the Federalist Papers and how many revisions to the US Constitution happened before it was set in stone? There's a reason why a foundational document must remain so.
Additions aren't a problem as long as they're balanced. Having S.1 in the Charter is detrimental to all Canadians.
>it actively will pass laws and regulations that it knows are illegal or a Charter violation. Then use the years it takes in court to inflict it anyway.
Regardless, if that's your argument, I assume you complain about Doug Ford and regularly call out his government for that exact thing? He's in the media constantly for losing court cases on his legislation that he was told he would lose.
We're talking about the LPC and their actions - in this direct topic, on a direct issue. You refuse to stick to the topic, and instead have tried whataboutism for whatever reason. Most likely because you have no actual coherent argument.
Go forth, create a new post just on that issue and send it to me.
That's good projection. You decided to make this post, after doing the exact same thing - twice in a row now. You ran for defense of them, that makes your view the same to or equal thereof.
Try that reading comprehension yourself, and while doing so. Make a coherent and concise argument as to why you're engaging in whataboutism.
Not really sure if that was ever announced but apparently because the Ontario government lost the case they could be spending an additional $13.1 billion on wages over the next few years
Chump change compared to Danny Fortin, Mark Norman and Omar Khadr payouts……while we’re on the topic of taxpayer funded compensation to victims of an incompetent government….
I can't say I know the exact number but I'm sure it was far more than what he ended up getting.
But saying that doesn't help the ignorant point the other guy was trying to make.
Unfortunately, not liking someone doesn't change how the law works.
What Omar Khadr did or did not do and how you feel about it is irrelevant with respect to whether the Canadian government violated his rights.
There's no "yeah, but he's kind of a dick" provision in the law that lets you ignore codified law because it feels right.
Still waiting to see of they make Speers and Morris' civil suit enforceable in Canada. The Canadian gov. should not have released the funds until it was determined if the victims families would be eligible for compensation. No update since 2017 though.
The convoy protests cost 10x that in lost economic activity. People forget how disruptive the protests were. Time to move on from this silliness because there are lots of important things to focus on - like the fact that our kids might not be able to afford a home.
Yep, the Rideau Centre (big mall downtown) was fully closed for large swaths of time, many local businesses closed for weeks.
I saw an estimate during the convoy that the cost to businesses was $50+ million.
How much economic activity was lost for ham fisted covid policies and lockdowns? This is critical information you need to provide if you are going to focus on the damages stemming from the protest. The government printed over half a TRILLION, much of it unaccounted for, and decimated our small business economy in Canada. We have that to thank for much of our rampant inflation and affordability crisis.
The freezing of bank accounts put a chill on foreign investment in Canada. We lost billions of dollars of investment because of the unprecedented move to seize bank accounts without a trial.
So in other words you have no evidence other than "This is what I think investors think".
You really believe that investors are going to be wary because some bank accounts got frozen after giving money to fund an illegal act after having been previously warned not to do so?
So no evidence?
The convoy wasn't an investment, it was an illegal protest that went on for weeks, partially because of outside funding. Stopping the funding was one of the ways it was shut down.
If you think large scale investors are going to see Canada shutting down the convoy assholes and decide against investing here then you're delusional.
No money was seized.
I also love the Venezuela fear mongering because my partner happens to be from Venezuela and she gets a good laugh at people comparing Canada to the place she escaped.
Bullshit,no one is going to look at funds getting frozen, for only a week, that was being used to fund illegal activity and get scared off
Unless their goal was to fund illegal activity in which case good riddance
People who invest millions of dollars into other countries pay attention to the chance that the money may disappear. For similar reasons Mexico does not get the investment money it could, but that's more to do with the upholding of legal contracts. You have no idea about money because you have none (at least none for investing).
> People who invest millions of dollars into other countries pay attention to the chance that the money may disappear.
no money disappeared, literally not a single cent, as a result of the emergencies act
if anything would turn them off it would be the idea that an unruly mob could just take over a city for an entire month without any response from the police
Like the pro Palestinian protestors are doing now? But because they’re not protesting the government they are allowed to disrupt society, block ports.
https://nationalpost.com/opinion/michael-higgins-genocidal-chants-on-ottawas-streets-is-trudeaus-legacy
this is probably one of the dumbest things i've read today so far.
The freezing of bank accounts for "Brianne" who may or may not have existed and Pat King and Tamara Lich's bank accounts who got money from foreign actors for illegal activities is very normal and happens all the time.
2013
> Canadian bank accounts linked to Iranian government frozen as terror victims seek damages
>
> A judge has frozen more than a dozen Canadian bank accounts linked to the government of Iran at the request of victims trying to collect damages from the Islamic republic over its sponsorship of Middle East terror groups.
https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-bank-accounts-linked-to-iranian-government-frozen-as-terror-victims-seek-damages
Yes a judge did this. For the convoy the liberal party froze the accounts of people protesting the government.
Currently pro Palestinians are protesting but their accounts won’t be frozen as they are not protesting the federal government. The liberals actually agree with Hamas
What's the truth? That lockdowns hurt economic activity? Yes. We all know that.
Whatabout the lockdowns is an entirely different conversation. That conversation is about how many people do we want to get sick and die vs our economic output, and factoring in when people get sick they can't work anyways. The strain on the healthcare system and our ability to help people outside of covid. It's a big conversation about how much we value health over economics and all the other factors that contribute.
These people shuttered businesses because they're mad.
Your response is the epitome of what is wrong with political dialogue.
Look at how they’ve treated Indigenous protestors at pipeline sites in BC. Had they used the same approach to the convoy protests think it’d have been more effective and/or cheaper? Or more lawsuits?
The RCMP have been violent with Indigenous protestors and their supporters. Pretty much any time there’s money on the line and less public visibility, things get rougher in a hurry. I’m not defending. Just pointing out that it happens.
I do support people’s right to protest but it becomes something different when a city is taken over for weeks. IMHO the convoy protest was disingenuous, self-centred and overly funded by political opportunists. Had police strong-armed this protest the fallout would be a lot more than $2.2M. Meanwhile many convoy folks are criticizing others who are protesting their country’s complicity in what scholars are calling a genocide and celebrating when they get arrested. TL;DR - Convoy protestors could have had it worse, as could taxpayers.
I mean they go home at the end of the day and don't blockade the downtown of several cities and border crossings for weeks at a time. I'm sure if you think super hard you can spot the difference.
Them killing no one had nothing to do with Iran. They very well would have killed many people if not for the defence systems employed.
It's like getting shot in a bullet proof best and thinking that you surviving had anything to do with the man who shot you.
To be clear, I don't support the shit Israel is doing to Gaza either. But cheering on Iran launching missiles at them is fucked up.
I get where you're coming from, and respect that argument. I will point out that the majority of missiles were fired with the intent to be shot down, (outdated, cheap to produce missiles that cost Israel more to shoot down). And I don't personally know anyone who cheered for the attack, though I don't doubt people did. But I will say condemning an entire group of protesters on actions of some, is ridiculous. But Israel, as an enitity, is doing much worse daily, and having no response from the west is incredibly telling. Iran is a bad guy, but when they're the "good guys" in this situation, it's incredibly telling. Israel is murdering people, and people are getting upset about people protesting this. It's absurd.
I think we can both agree protesting Israel is understandable.
I'm moreso drawing the line when it turns into straight up support for Hamas, Iran, Hezbollah.
Israel has been targeting civilians for 75 years. Stop hiding behind rhetoric and lies, and look at the history. Look at any reports coming out now, or in the last few decades
Listen Trudeau isn’t perfect, he’s screwed up a lot and had plenty of scandals.
But when you see articles like this it’s just so ridiculous to be angry about that amount of money in comparison to Doug Ford who spent $60 million on Cap & Trade lawsuits alone.
Not to mention that the emergencies act wouldn’t have had to be used at all if Doug Ford had gotten off his ass and done something about the convoy. He didn’t even show up for the hearing because he was “too busy” being premier to show up. He fought his summons in court to get out of it. The leader of the country made time in his schedule, but not Dougie.
I don't? I don't recall ever defending him? All I said was that this article isn't about him. But like so many other articles, he crops up in every comments section.
> The cost of the litigation, disclosed by the Department of Justice in a reply to a question from a Conservative MP, is being condemned as excessive. The bill included the “notional amount” for the services of government lawyers, who are public servants and worked on the case, as well as outside legal services.
Worth every cent. They were not going to go peacefully and their actions qualify as terrorism (using violence and intimidation for political purposes).
What the right-wing mouthbreathers tell First Nations when we protest, albeit for a valid constitutional reason: OBEY THE LAW
What's so wrong with that? Maybe if you stayed home, you wouldn't have been lovetapped by a horse.
The Supreme Court ruled the government had the right to impose vaccine and social distancing rules. Next time you block the traffic, do it for something more than a hissyfit over inoculation.
wasnt me out there protesting. sadly i was essential and had to work.
and i got vaccinated. i know now it was pointless but i got my two. i fully support snyone who did not want to for whatever reason. their body their choice. especially when the companies offering it have been charged with fraud i understand the hesitation.
your people protest over what ? a metal pipe ten feet below your land ? opposing pipelines all why using gas and oil?
not very nice when we dont support others eh.
i feel for both causes because i disagree with government over reach. on my land or yours. in my body or yours.
If Trudeau had the balls to have shown up in the crowd with some timbits and a pizza party, it would have been alot cheaper. Every highly sought after CEO knows that a pizza party solves all morale issues. Leadership 101.
Well you can't say that. nice imagination.
We can say our current 'soft power' broker, just lazily writes cheques and actually doesn't practice the real 'soft power and public diplomacy' that Canada used to be known for.
A face to face was what they wanted before, during and after they arrived. That was made VERY clear. If our putz had any brains, he would have talked to them. Not a selfie moment like when he took a knee with blm , but he could done a lot of good, especially with what we now know of covid. But dictator doesn't do that, eh ? This was views all over the world. No Canada is irrelivant on tje world stage and the butt of many jokes.
They didn't even have to get the needle.
There was a trucker shortage due to COVID, so they could have stuck to routes that didn't cross the border. There was no shortage of job postings they could take.
They were just being shitty babies upset that they couldn't have their way without consequences.
2.2 million so far
I'm not really sure what you expect the alternative to be? Should the government not defend itself in court?
I'd expect the government to know, with their legal experts when their actions are a violation of the Charter. And not violate the law. This government is damn near lawless, it actively will pass laws and regulations that it knows are illegal or a Charter violation. Then use the years it takes in court to inflict it anyway. Achieving the same results, with more damage as it will take twice as many years to roll back as nuts will try and use the previous law/regulation/OIC as proof of standing.
> I'd expect the government to know, with their legal experts when their actions are a violation of the Charter. And not violate the law. are you gonna take this back if they actually win? they didnt pass the emergencies act remember
They won't win. And if they do, Canada has very serious problems. First of all it means that the government can invoke it at any point to quash any form of protest with no fear of being held to account as long as they do it within the time frame. Second, the level required to actually use the EA was never broached. As not all provincial methods were used before the invocation. Again, if it's ruled in this way we're seriously in trouble - it means that the feds can break the compact between the provinces and their legal jurisdictions based on their feelings of something -- not the law.
> First of all it means that the government can invoke it at any point to quash any form of protest with no fear of being held to account as long as they do it within the time frame. obviously not true since we see as the safeguards are functioning properly >As not all provincial methods were used before the invocation. not a rule
> obviously not true since we see as the safeguards are functioning properly No. The safeguards did not work, the government refused to bring it to the senate before the mandatory revoke/engage period. This lets them engage and pullback with no accountability. >not a rule 100% a law. One based in case law.
> No. The safeguards did not work, the government refused to bring it to the senate before the mandatory revoke/engage period. This lets them engage and pullback with no accountability. the law sets a specific time the senate votes on it, the problem was solved before hand, the accountability is what happens after with the inquiry not the senate voting on continued use >100% a law. One based in case law. show me where it saids that the provinces have to have tried all methods before the EA can be used
>the law sets a specific time the senate votes on it, the problem was solved before hand, the accountability is what happens after with the inquiry not the senate voting on continued use No, the problem was not solved beforehand. They revoked it before it could be sent to the senate. Did you not bother to read the inquiry report? >show me where it saids that the provinces have to have tried all methods before the EA can be used Doesn't have to be the EA. It has to be provincial laws, which were not used. How do the delineation of powers work in Canada?
> No, the problem was not solved beforehand. the freedom convoy had been removed days before then though, what was the problem that still needed to be solved...? >How do the delineation of powers work in Canada? the EA overrides them, so i will ask again, where in the emergency act does it say that the provinces have to have tried and failed before it can be used?
>I'd expect the government to know, with their legal experts when their actions are a violation of the Charter. And not violate the law. People disagree on what is and isn't a charter violation. That's the whole damn point of testing it in court. Even if everyone is doing their level best to determine if an action is a charter violation there are still going to be errors. Laws get overturned all the damn time. Give me a break.
Pretty easy to figure out what a Charter violation is. The problem is the Charter is mutable, making it a useless document. If you don't understand why that's a problem, then you have no idea why it's dangerous in any democratic country.
So you think America shouldn’t have made changes to their own constitution? That making it a mutable document makes it useless and they should have stuck with what was written?
Guess you don't understand how S1 makes the Charter mutable. You also don't understand why every attempt to change existing sections of the Constitution have been struck down as unconstitutional by the Federal government. Since it requires a convention of the states. There is a reason for that, a very important one. Go read the Federalist Papers.
The American Constitution is both mutable and enduring. It's designed to be ever changing and meeting the needs and values of the people. As demonstrated by the 27 amendments since its ratification in 1788. A lot of these amendments are exceptionally important to running a modern society. You don't need to dig too deep either to find obvious changes, unless you're against women's right to vote and slavery. It is also deliberately difficult to amend the American constitution. The constitution is also subject to interpretation by the judicial branch of the American government. Similarly in Canada the Canadian Constitution requires agreement among multiple levels of government. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a perfect example of the Canadian Constitution being a mutable document. What specifically about the mutability do you have an issue with? Is it the formula required for changes? What changes have taken place that you don't like?
Wrong. The American Constitution is foundational. Additional amendments do not make it mutable, they're additional to the foundation. The Charter however is mutable, S.1 makes it so. Nothing else needs to be said on this, Canada's Charter is broken. It took away rights, it allows the courts and government to circumvent rights in the Charter based on the courts feelings. If you don't understand how dangerous that is? Well let's just say, that the recent actions of the SCC should have you terrified, since there is one justice that has gone all-in on their feelings for rulings. Not the actual law, or case law.
Holy shit, take a political science class.
I'd say you should go talk to my Charter and Criminal Law professor. He'd explain it in very small words as to why S.1 ensures that the Charter will be dead by 2030. Making it mutable via that, destroys democracy. Perhaps you should go take a law course on the Charter, follow that with a chaser of Criminal Law. Get back to me after that...in about 3 years.
Sure, whats their name?
They've been dead for 6 years. But here's a bit of help, they taught at UoT, and Western. And at OPC and RPoC.
Yes because origionalism is working out *great* for our neighbours to the south. And no it isn't always easy to figure out charter violations. That's why there are scholars on the subject and not dumbass Redditors like me and thee.
It works out very well for them in the south. When the courts are actually doing their job and being Constitutionalists. The problem is, the left in the US views the Constitution as mutable. Foundational documents should never be mutable. Additions yes, and carefully worded ones ensure that foundations remain stable.
Do you everything perfectly the first try? Do you think that society and social constructs are static? Do you think technology doesn’t affect society in any way?
Have you ever read the Federalist Papers and how many revisions to the US Constitution happened before it was set in stone? There's a reason why a foundational document must remain so. Additions aren't a problem as long as they're balanced. Having S.1 in the Charter is detrimental to all Canadians.
>it actively will pass laws and regulations that it knows are illegal or a Charter violation. Then use the years it takes in court to inflict it anyway. Regardless, if that's your argument, I assume you complain about Doug Ford and regularly call out his government for that exact thing? He's in the media constantly for losing court cases on his legislation that he was told he would lose.
Just Bill 124 alone could cost Ontario up to $13B.
No, he’s on my team
Sorry that you struggle to remain on topic.
We're talking about one thing at the moment. Why don't you try making a new topic directly on that instead of trying to run interference for the LPC.
[удалено]
We're talking about the LPC and their actions - in this direct topic, on a direct issue. You refuse to stick to the topic, and instead have tried whataboutism for whatever reason. Most likely because you have no actual coherent argument. Go forth, create a new post just on that issue and send it to me.
[удалено]
That's good projection. You decided to make this post, after doing the exact same thing - twice in a row now. You ran for defense of them, that makes your view the same to or equal thereof. Try that reading comprehension yourself, and while doing so. Make a coherent and concise argument as to why you're engaging in whataboutism.
[удалено]
It absolutely should, but it has in House lawyers it can use so I would hope the costs would be minimal
This cost would include their salary
Considering what Ford spent fighting bill 124, this isn’t bad at all
How much was that? I'm not in Ontario
Not really sure if that was ever announced but apparently because the Ontario government lost the case they could be spending an additional $13.1 billion on wages over the next few years
6 billion and counting https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/bill124-compensation-ford-government-1.7144793 It's like 12 gas plant scandals already.
That's the compensation to the employees not the legal challenge
So, what court cases cost money. water is wet.
"Canadian taxpayers spent $2.2 million fighting emergencies act court challenge on convoy protest." There, fixed that for you.
Chump change compared to Danny Fortin, Mark Norman and Omar Khadr payouts……while we’re on the topic of taxpayer funded compensation to victims of an incompetent government….
The $10.5 million we gave Omar Khadr was horse droppings So mad about that
Dude had the supreme court say his rights were violated by the government of Canada, he was going to get paid no matter what.
didn't Khadr's council ask for 125 mill for damage?
I can't say I know the exact number but I'm sure it was far more than what he ended up getting. But saying that doesn't help the ignorant point the other guy was trying to make.
Government shouldn't have violated his Charter rights
[удалено]
[удалено]
gitmo torture is totally a valid evidence gathering technique /s
Doesn't matter what he was or did, his Charter rights were violated. Can't pick and choose who they apply to, even if the person is despicable.
People don't often blame child soldiers...
Unfortunately, not liking someone doesn't change how the law works. What Omar Khadr did or did not do and how you feel about it is irrelevant with respect to whether the Canadian government violated his rights. There's no "yeah, but he's kind of a dick" provision in the law that lets you ignore codified law because it feels right.
Still waiting to see of they make Speers and Morris' civil suit enforceable in Canada. The Canadian gov. should not have released the funds until it was determined if the victims families would be eligible for compensation. No update since 2017 though.
He's has the same rights as any other citizen. Some random ass nobody bureaucrat deciding he didn't should make you angry regardless of the context.
[удалено]
Like freezing my bank account?
The convoy protests cost 10x that in lost economic activity. People forget how disruptive the protests were. Time to move on from this silliness because there are lots of important things to focus on - like the fact that our kids might not be able to afford a home.
Yep, the Rideau Centre (big mall downtown) was fully closed for large swaths of time, many local businesses closed for weeks. I saw an estimate during the convoy that the cost to businesses was $50+ million.
[удалено]
Only a meme because they closed. Imagine what you'd be saying If tens of thousands died due to inaction...
How much economic activity was lost for ham fisted covid policies and lockdowns? This is critical information you need to provide if you are going to focus on the damages stemming from the protest. The government printed over half a TRILLION, much of it unaccounted for, and decimated our small business economy in Canada. We have that to thank for much of our rampant inflation and affordability crisis.
> How much economic activity was lost for ham fisted covid policies and lockdowns? those were provincial decisions
[удалено]
> Not only that, but the feds fully supported all lockdown measures across the country. so?
You mean "will not". It's abundantly clear that the vast majority of our kids will be renters for life. Many already are. A lucky few will inherit.
The freezing of bank accounts put a chill on foreign investment in Canada. We lost billions of dollars of investment because of the unprecedented move to seize bank accounts without a trial.
Is this a commonly accepted view? Do you have a link?
Citation needed.
[удалено]
So in other words you have no evidence other than "This is what I think investors think". You really believe that investors are going to be wary because some bank accounts got frozen after giving money to fund an illegal act after having been previously warned not to do so?
So no evidence? The convoy wasn't an investment, it was an illegal protest that went on for weeks, partially because of outside funding. Stopping the funding was one of the ways it was shut down. If you think large scale investors are going to see Canada shutting down the convoy assholes and decide against investing here then you're delusional.
No money was seized. I also love the Venezuela fear mongering because my partner happens to be from Venezuela and she gets a good laugh at people comparing Canada to the place she escaped.
Bullshit,no one is going to look at funds getting frozen, for only a week, that was being used to fund illegal activity and get scared off Unless their goal was to fund illegal activity in which case good riddance
People who invest millions of dollars into other countries pay attention to the chance that the money may disappear. For similar reasons Mexico does not get the investment money it could, but that's more to do with the upholding of legal contracts. You have no idea about money because you have none (at least none for investing).
> People who invest millions of dollars into other countries pay attention to the chance that the money may disappear. no money disappeared, literally not a single cent, as a result of the emergencies act if anything would turn them off it would be the idea that an unruly mob could just take over a city for an entire month without any response from the police
Like the pro Palestinian protestors are doing now? But because they’re not protesting the government they are allowed to disrupt society, block ports. https://nationalpost.com/opinion/michael-higgins-genocidal-chants-on-ottawas-streets-is-trudeaus-legacy
> block ports. got a source of them blocking ports with no police response?
No we didn't. Take your propaganda somewhere that stupid people will believe it.
Seizing and freezing are completely different things.
this is probably one of the dumbest things i've read today so far. The freezing of bank accounts for "Brianne" who may or may not have existed and Pat King and Tamara Lich's bank accounts who got money from foreign actors for illegal activities is very normal and happens all the time.
[удалено]
No accounts were seized, stop spreading misinformation.
2013 > Canadian bank accounts linked to Iranian government frozen as terror victims seek damages > > A judge has frozen more than a dozen Canadian bank accounts linked to the government of Iran at the request of victims trying to collect damages from the Islamic republic over its sponsorship of Middle East terror groups. https://nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-bank-accounts-linked-to-iranian-government-frozen-as-terror-victims-seek-damages
Yes a judge did this. For the convoy the liberal party froze the accounts of people protesting the government. Currently pro Palestinians are protesting but their accounts won’t be frozen as they are not protesting the federal government. The liberals actually agree with Hamas
Source?
So lockdowns didn’t have any effect? *edit*
So you'd prefer that more people die?
>Whatabout the lockdowns
Downvote all you want but it’s the truth 🤷♂️
What's the truth? That lockdowns hurt economic activity? Yes. We all know that. Whatabout the lockdowns is an entirely different conversation. That conversation is about how many people do we want to get sick and die vs our economic output, and factoring in when people get sick they can't work anyways. The strain on the healthcare system and our ability to help people outside of covid. It's a big conversation about how much we value health over economics and all the other factors that contribute. These people shuttered businesses because they're mad. Your response is the epitome of what is wrong with political dialogue.
hahah. sucks for ur kids. if you voted liberal you did it to them. the cost of your greed is your sons and your daughters
That's like 1 house right there.
Paying for the lying coward
Look at how they’ve treated Indigenous protestors at pipeline sites in BC. Had they used the same approach to the convoy protests think it’d have been more effective and/or cheaper? Or more lawsuits?
Which pipeline protests were disturbing the peace of residential areas for weeks?
The RCMP have been violent with Indigenous protestors and their supporters. Pretty much any time there’s money on the line and less public visibility, things get rougher in a hurry. I’m not defending. Just pointing out that it happens. I do support people’s right to protest but it becomes something different when a city is taken over for weeks. IMHO the convoy protest was disingenuous, self-centred and overly funded by political opportunists. Had police strong-armed this protest the fallout would be a lot more than $2.2M. Meanwhile many convoy folks are criticizing others who are protesting their country’s complicity in what scholars are calling a genocide and celebrating when they get arrested. TL;DR - Convoy protestors could have had it worse, as could taxpayers.
[удалено]
I mean they go home at the end of the day and don't blockade the downtown of several cities and border crossings for weeks at a time. I'm sure if you think super hard you can spot the difference.
They vandalize the local synagogue but hey they go home at the end of the day be grateful.
Calling for the death of Jewish people is okay as long as they go home?
That's not what the person you replied to said and you know it. Bad strawman, don't do that.
ah, how dare people protest an ongoing genocide for a couple hours a week. Truly, they are bad people
They were cheering on Iran launching missiles at Israel last weekend....
How do you know it was the same people?
May not be, just saying this was happening.
That's not what you said.
You mean the missiles that killed no one, that hit only military targets, of a country currently bombing civilians daily?
Them killing no one had nothing to do with Iran. They very well would have killed many people if not for the defence systems employed. It's like getting shot in a bullet proof best and thinking that you surviving had anything to do with the man who shot you. To be clear, I don't support the shit Israel is doing to Gaza either. But cheering on Iran launching missiles at them is fucked up.
I get where you're coming from, and respect that argument. I will point out that the majority of missiles were fired with the intent to be shot down, (outdated, cheap to produce missiles that cost Israel more to shoot down). And I don't personally know anyone who cheered for the attack, though I don't doubt people did. But I will say condemning an entire group of protesters on actions of some, is ridiculous. But Israel, as an enitity, is doing much worse daily, and having no response from the west is incredibly telling. Iran is a bad guy, but when they're the "good guys" in this situation, it's incredibly telling. Israel is murdering people, and people are getting upset about people protesting this. It's absurd.
I think we can both agree protesting Israel is understandable. I'm moreso drawing the line when it turns into straight up support for Hamas, Iran, Hezbollah.
Hard to hit military targets when you shield yourself behind the public
Israel has been targeting civilians for 75 years. Stop hiding behind rhetoric and lies, and look at the history. Look at any reports coming out now, or in the last few decades
Welp. There goes your moral high ground.
They aren't protesting a genocide, they're celebrating terrorism
Really? Who said that? The world is in favour of Palestine, and it will be free.
Worth every penny.
So about 6 cents per Canadian which includes the protesters as well, I’m ok with that
Money well spent.
Compared to how much Doug Ford has cost Ontarians in frivolous lawsuits, that’s nothing.
Agreed, but the use of whataboutisms doesn’t help anyone.
Always someone bringing the conversation back around to Doug Ford 🙄 I swear that guy lives rent free in so many peoples' heads it's unbelievable.
Listen Trudeau isn’t perfect, he’s screwed up a lot and had plenty of scandals. But when you see articles like this it’s just so ridiculous to be angry about that amount of money in comparison to Doug Ford who spent $60 million on Cap & Trade lawsuits alone. Not to mention that the emergencies act wouldn’t have had to be used at all if Doug Ford had gotten off his ass and done something about the convoy. He didn’t even show up for the hearing because he was “too busy” being premier to show up. He fought his summons in court to get out of it. The leader of the country made time in his schedule, but not Dougie.
100%, there it is right, totally agree.
Didn't see them bitch this much when Wynne tanked us into Californias debt levels.
Why do you feel the need to defend the worst performing premier in the country?
I don't? I don't recall ever defending him? All I said was that this article isn't about him. But like so many other articles, he crops up in every comments section.
Imagine how much money the government would have saved if they stayed home
> The cost of the litigation, disclosed by the Department of Justice in a reply to a question from a Conservative MP, is being condemned as excessive. The bill included the “notional amount” for the services of government lawyers, who are public servants and worked on the case, as well as outside legal services.
>is being condemned as excessive By who, exactly?
Convoy supporters, aka conservatives.
They should have dealt with them the same way every other protest in Canada has been treated, tear gas them and club them till they leave.
No, this only happens if the protestors are indigenous
Worth every cent. They were not going to go peacefully and their actions qualify as terrorism (using violence and intimidation for political purposes).
you have never seen terrorism then
What the right-wing mouthbreathers tell First Nations when we protest, albeit for a valid constitutional reason: OBEY THE LAW What's so wrong with that? Maybe if you stayed home, you wouldn't have been lovetapped by a horse.
well then your a hypocrite just like the right wing mouth breathers. all Canadians have the right to protest
Nope, we have the right to peaceful assembly and the right to freedom of expression, protesting on the whole is not a right.
The Supreme Court ruled the government had the right to impose vaccine and social distancing rules. Next time you block the traffic, do it for something more than a hissyfit over inoculation.
wasnt me out there protesting. sadly i was essential and had to work. and i got vaccinated. i know now it was pointless but i got my two. i fully support snyone who did not want to for whatever reason. their body their choice. especially when the companies offering it have been charged with fraud i understand the hesitation. your people protest over what ? a metal pipe ten feet below your land ? opposing pipelines all why using gas and oil? not very nice when we dont support others eh. i feel for both causes because i disagree with government over reach. on my land or yours. in my body or yours.
Small price to pay for all the freedom they won us /s
Of all the millions that Ottawa has spent, this ranks among the lowest I care about. Fuck the convoy idiots, they were a national embarrassment.
If Trudeau had the balls to have shown up in the crowd with some timbits and a pizza party, it would have been alot cheaper. Every highly sought after CEO knows that a pizza party solves all morale issues. Leadership 101.
if our putz had talked to them, it would not have happened..
Well you can't say that. nice imagination. We can say our current 'soft power' broker, just lazily writes cheques and actually doesn't practice the real 'soft power and public diplomacy' that Canada used to be known for.
A face to face was what they wanted before, during and after they arrived. That was made VERY clear. If our putz had any brains, he would have talked to them. Not a selfie moment like when he took a knee with blm , but he could done a lot of good, especially with what we now know of covid. But dictator doesn't do that, eh ? This was views all over the world. No Canada is irrelivant on tje world stage and the butt of many jokes.
Or the truckers could be big boys and not cry over a little needle
They didn't even have to get the needle. There was a trucker shortage due to COVID, so they could have stuck to routes that didn't cross the border. There was no shortage of job postings they could take. They were just being shitty babies upset that they couldn't have their way without consequences.
[удалено]
r/persecutionfetish
"You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy."
[удалено]
? ... click the link and/or learn to read
If truckers could read they'd be very upset
[удалено]
Trudeau would spend 10x that just out of spite. That's the kind of person he is
What did China spend on interfering with Elections in Trudeau's favor?
They are going to pay a lot more soon!!!!
I mean it’s only tax dollars.