News   Jun 21, 2024
 3.9K     6 
News   Jun 21, 2024
 1.5K     3 
News   Jun 21, 2024
 1.7K     1 

PM Justin Trudeau's Canada

Breaking a half century long consensus on diverse immigration is quite the achievement for Trudeau.
Except, we did hit and exceed the 1M; while cabinet approved the lower mainstream immigration total ( still a record high), its clear the system was gamed to have foreign students and TFWs make up the difference between the original target and the approved one.
[...]
So, in the end, we took in more people than the high end option in the cabinet docs; but with none of the resources the cabinet docs said would be needed if that option were picked.

Electing a government based on a shared national faith in a fair, reasonable immigration system does not give them carte blanche to change it instead to infinity immigration no matter how much corporations/special interests whine and mope- in doing so, that faith has been violated.

Breaking/neglecting and then intentionally overloading what should have been a model immigration system should be considered nigh-, if not actually treasonous.

One should not mince words about the magnitude of what has happened, nor the sheer scale of the tasks needed to actually resolve it. These events and second- and third- level consequences will cast a long shadow on Canada for many years to come.
 
Last edited:
“I think about quitting every day. It’s a crazy job I’m doing, making the personal sacrifices,” said Trudeau, who split with his wife since taking office in 2015. “Of course, it’s super tough.”.

But Trudeau said significant domestic and international challenges nevertheless motivate him to remain in the post and face the next federal election scheduled for next year.

Women’s rights, LGBTQ rights and progress fighting climate change are among the issues Trudeau claimed are currently at stake in Canada, and he pointed to global attacks on democracies by what he called extreme populism.


I get that these are important issues. But these kinds of answers in the midst of a housing crisis, a time when we have tent cities and mentally ill riding subways, and a crime wave of stolen cars, etc is going to get these guys creamed next election. The public does not share his priorities at all.
 

I get that these are important issues. But these kinds of answers in the midst of a housing crisis, a time when we have tent cities and mentally ill riding subways, and a crime wave of stolen cars, etc is going to get these guys creamed next election. The public does not share his priorities at all.
I agree with your assessment of the public's attention span, but if we don't address climate change issues and ramifications head on, there won't be much of a world left to worry about for we humans.
 
The carbon tax is hurting the Liberals. Most people get back more money in rebates, however it is visible at the gas pumps.
 
I agree with your assessment of the public's attention span, but if we don't address climate change issues and ramifications head on, there won't be much of a world left to worry about for we humans.

The carbon tax is hurting the Liberals. Most people get back more money in rebates, however it is visible at the gas pumps.

There carbon tax is an economically sound idea. It's too bad that the Liberals lost the messaging war around the carbon tax. And this is important. Want to make a difference on climate change? You gotta actually stay in power long enough to have your policies make a difference.

Unfortunately, the surge in cost of living and deterioration in quality of life has fewer people concerned about the environment.

Honestly, the pitch for climate policy, would have worked better with climate friendly policies that offered direct and real tangible benefits. For example, if they had been working on high speed rail in the Corridor or building any passenger rail between Calgary and Edmonton. Or if they had substantially more generous subsidies for EVs. I think subsidizing cars is poor policy. But it's politically very effective. Compare the popularity of the Biden Administration subsidy shotgun vs the carbon tax here. I suspect the Inflation Reduction Act will be more durable in the US than the carbon tax will be in Canada.
 
The carbon tax is hurting the Liberals. Most people get back more money in rebates, however it is visible at the gas pumps.
I would argue more so on home energy (heating fuel) bills where, at least in Enbridges' case, is a seperate line item on the bill. Gas (automobile) prices are not too dissimilar prepandemic.

Perhaps more of a failure of communication and perception that the carbon charges are fueling unaffordability - is an easy target, but also the timing is just poor (not insinuating it should have been launched at a different time with current hindsight).

Frankly I haven't seen any discussion around alternatives other than the 'tax must go' (I believe using the word tax is intentional to dissuade support).

As you point out, most (~80 percent?) residents see money back or break even.

The GST implementation days sound familiar... I believe there was also a communication/perception issue.
 
Last edited:
There carbon tax is an economically sound idea. It's too bad that the Liberals lost the messaging war around the carbon tax. And this is important. Want to make a difference on climate change? You gotta actually stay in power long enough to have your policies make a difference.

Unfortunately, the surge in cost of living and deterioration in quality of life has fewer people concerned about the environment.

Honestly, the pitch for climate policy, would have worked better with climate friendly policies that offered direct and real tangible benefits. For example, if they had been working on high speed rail in the Corridor or building any passenger rail between Calgary and Edmonton. Or if they had substantially more generous subsidies for EVs. I think subsidizing cars is poor policy. But it's politically very effective. Compare the popularity of the Biden Administration subsidy shotgun vs the carbon tax here. I suspect the Inflation Reduction Act will be more durable in the US than the carbon tax will be in Canada.
You make a great point. I will add that not one of the Liberals five investment tax credits, has passed into law. That is Chrystia Freeland's file.
 
Also, it's hard to argue the Liberals are entirely principled on this after they took the carbon tax off home heating oil. That proved that consumer climate policy is quite flexible and responsive to retail politics. Now there's others asking why they aren't getting a break either. And to top it all of, we had the dummy MP who literally said whiners would get a break if they elected more Liberals. Turns out voters will try to get the break they want by tossing out more Liberals.
 
It's unfortunate that the carbon tax implementation was followed by an almost entirely unrelated spike in inflation. The policy might have survived if inflation hadn't risen to a generational high. It is pretty easy to see how inflation has very little to do with the carbon tax, given that inflation is high in many jurisdictions that are not impacted by it, including Quebec and BC that did not have a federal carbon tax imposed.
 
Doug Ford is the reason Ontario has a carbon tax in the first place.

I get the rhetoric. But cap-and-trade or carbon tax after just different systems of pricing emissions. As far as the public is concerned (and the opposition loves to remind them), that's still a cost they pay.
 
Perhaps more of a failure of communication

Something I never understood was why they didn't make the rebates monthly and why they never called it Canada Carbon Rebate right from the beginning. For a government that is often concerned with signaling, this seemed particularly incompetent. Even now, they are still using quarterly payments, even after the name change. Wherever staffer was responsible for branding this should be fired.
 
It's unfortunate that the carbon tax implementation was followed by an almost entirely unrelated spike in inflation.

The response should have been to pause the increases and keep the tax at $50/tonne because energy prices were providing the necessary price signals to reduce consumption anyway. Instead they thought they'd be really clever and design a break, only for a fuel that a good chunk of their swing voters might use.
 
The response should have been to pause the increases and keep the tax at $50/tonne because energy prices were providing the necessary price signals to reduce consumption anyway. Instead they thought they'd be really clever and design a break, only for a fuel that a good chunk of their swing voters might use.
They were being slaves to the hardliners in the caucus and cabinet, including Steven Guilbeault, who threatened to quit if the Liberals waffled on the carbon tax. Instead, the Liberals will lose power and the whole policy will be abandoned and discredited. You have to be willing to put some water in your wine in politics, and you cannot cater to the hardliners.
 

Back
Top