Canadian Politics

[Dresderstan]

Green Party council voting on process that could eject Annamie Paul from leadership

The Green Party federal council could vote tonight to kickstart a process that could remove Annamie Paul from the party leadership.

According to party members with knowledge of the issue, the party's federal council will hold a vote on whether to trigger a complex 30-day process under the party's constitution.

If the council votes tonight to launch that process, it will meet again on July 15. If 75 per cent of council members agree at that meeting to let a leadership vote go forward, party members could then vote to remove Paul from office through a motion at an annual general meeting.

One source said the Greens are overdue for such a meeting.

CBC News has reached out to Paul's office for comment.

She hasn't even been leader for a year....and all of this over just how much support Palestine should have and what places Zionism and Anti-Zionism have in the Party. That's why Atwin crossed the floor and became more supportive of Israel at least existing in some form. Couldn't they just wait until after the byelection later this year and actually give Paul a chance to campaign? I know it's a lost cause considering Haldimand-Norfolk's safely blue and Lewis is standing for it, but at least give Paul a chance to make an effort before kicking her to the curb.

And the byelection probably won't be held until November-February next year... unless Trudeau decides to finally call an election and try to take the chances at getting a 3rd mandate this time with a majority.

[Shrillland]

She hasn't even been leader for a year....and all of this over just how much support Palestine should have and what places Zionism and Anti-Zionism have in the Party. That's why Atwin crossed the floor and became more supportive of Israel at least existing in some form. Couldn't they just wait until after the byelection later this year and actually give Paul a chance to campaign? I know it's a lost cause considering Haldimand-Norfolk's safely blue and Lewis is standing for it, but at least give Paul a chance to make an effort before kicking her to the curb.

And the byelection probably won't be held until November-February next year... unless Trudeau decides to finally call an election and try to take the chances at getting a 3rd mandate this time with a majority.

November 11 at the latest since Finley resigned on May 11. Six months max is the law unless Trudeau's election is called...and given that the electoral schedule's full with Alberta's Senate "Elections" and the Equalisation vote in October, and Nunavut's vote the same month, we won't see a federal vote until sometime in December at this rate.

[Nilokeras]

Green Party council voting on process that could eject Annamie Paul from leadership

The Green Party federal council could vote tonight to kickstart a process that could remove Annamie Paul from the party leadership.

According to party members with knowledge of the issue, the party's federal council will hold a vote on whether to trigger a complex 30-day process under the party's constitution.

If the council votes tonight to launch that process, it will meet again on July 15. If 75 per cent of council members agree at that meeting to let a leadership vote go forward, party members could then vote to remove Paul from office through a motion at an annual general meeting.

One source said the Greens are overdue for such a meeting.

CBC News has reached out to Paul's office for comment.

She hasn't even been leader for a year....and all of this over just how much support Palestine should have and what places Zionism and Anti-Zionism have in the Party. That's why Atwin crossed the floor and became more supportive of Israel at least existing in some form. Couldn't they just wait until after the byelection later this year and actually give Paul a chance to campaign? I know it's a lost cause considering Haldimand-Norfolk's safely blue and Lewis is standing for it, but at least give Paul a chance to make an effort before kicking her to the curb.

I think it's the opposite - Atwin, Manly and possibly May are far more sympathetic to the Palestinian rights than the leader's office under Paul. Manly as well, it should be noted, originally planned to run under the banner of the NDP but was barred from seeking the nomination by the executive because of his criticism of the party for not standing up for his father, who was arrested by the Israeli military while aboard an aid ship bound for Gaza. Atwin's exit to the Liberals too is probably not so much a matter of any change of opinion than a reflection of the fact that the NDP does not allow people to cross the aisle to them. If you want to be an NDP MP you have to get nominated by your riding association and then run. (Which tbh is exactly the sort of bizarrely self-defeating principled stance that I expect from the perpetual losers at the NDP headquarters) So in the face of a hostile party executive and the marginalness of her seat, listening to those Liberal feelers and switching sides was probably the smartest move on her part. She gets automatic incumbency and a safe seat, and continues to be a voice for Palestinian rights. At least until the Liberals decide to censure her, of course.

[Vikanias]

As a Canadian. Holy hell this is weird

[Shrillland]

She hasn't even been leader for a year....and all of this over just how much support Palestine should have and what places Zionism and Anti-Zionism have in the Party. That's why Atwin crossed the floor and became more supportive of Israel at least existing in some form. Couldn't they just wait until after the byelection later this year and actually give Paul a chance to campaign? I know it's a lost cause considering Haldimand-Norfolk's safely blue and Lewis is standing for it, but at least give Paul a chance to make an effort before kicking her to the curb.

I think it's the opposite - Atwin, Manly and possibly May are far more sympathetic to the Palestinian rights than the leader's office under Paul. Manly as well, it should be noted, originally planned to run under the banner of the NDP but was barred from seeking the nomination by the executive because of his criticism of the party for not standing up for his father, who was arrested by the Israeli military while aboard an aid ship bound for Gaza. Atwin's exit to the Liberals too is probably not so much a matter of any change of opinion than a reflection of the fact that the NDP does not allow people to cross the aisle to them. If you want to be an NDP MP you have to get nominated by your riding association and then run. (Which tbh is exactly the sort of bizarrely self-defeating principled stance that I expect from the perpetual losers at the NDP headquarters) So in the face of a hostile party executive and the marginalness of her seat, listening to those Liberal feelers and switching sides was probably the smartest move on her part. She gets automatic incumbency and a safe seat, and continues to be a voice for Palestinian rights. At least until the Liberals decide to censure her, of course.

That....is monumentally stupid. God forbid MPs be allowed to change their minds or find new political homes. Granted, electorates look down on their representatives growing and thinking on their own in most countries, but the parties themselves don't have to take part in it.

[Nilokeras]

I think it's the opposite - Atwin, Manly and possibly May are far more sympathetic to the Palestinian rights than the leader's office under Paul. Manly as well, it should be noted, originally planned to run under the banner of the NDP but was barred from seeking the nomination by the executive because of his criticism of the party for not standing up for his father, who was arrested by the Israeli military while aboard an aid ship bound for Gaza. Atwin's exit to the Liberals too is probably not so much a matter of any change of opinion than a reflection of the fact that the NDP does not allow people to cross the aisle to them. If you want to be an NDP MP you have to get nominated by your riding association and then run. (Which tbh is exactly the sort of bizarrely self-defeating principled stance that I expect from the perpetual losers at the NDP headquarters) So in the face of a hostile party executive and the marginalness of her seat, listening to those Liberal feelers and switching sides was probably the smartest move on her part. She gets automatic incumbency and a safe seat, and continues to be a voice for Palestinian rights. At least until the Liberals decide to censure her, of course.

That....is monumentally stupid. God forbid MPs be allowed to change their minds or find new political homes. Granted, electorates look down on their representatives growing and thinking on their own in most countries, but the parties themselves don't have to take part in it.

It's just so dumb. Like, insisting that your candidates be elected by your membership is grand and all but it sort of forgets the most important part of winning elections, which is that your membership (ie the people that pay dues and show up to riding association meetings) is not the majority of people that vote for your candidates. Not by a long shot. Atwin was probably voted in by a lot of people who previously voted NDP or would have had the NDP in New Brunswick not been a clusterfuck of resignations, defections to the Greens and being lead by a well-meaning but inexperienced 21 year old.

Like can you imagine the coup that Singh could have pulled off if he stepped up to the podium and announced that Manly and Atwin were joining his caucus, and that he welcomes all progressive Canadians into his fold? But no, they handed a free MP to the Liberals and missed a golden opportunity to galvanize their base.

[Major-Tom]

Green Party council voting on process that could eject Annamie Paul from leadership

The Green Party federal council could vote tonight to kickstart a process that could remove Annamie Paul from the party leadership.

According to party members with knowledge of the issue, the party's federal council will hold a vote on whether to trigger a complex 30-day process under the party's constitution.

If the council votes tonight to launch that process, it will meet again on July 15. If 75 per cent of council members agree at that meeting to let a leadership vote go forward, party members could then vote to remove Paul from office through a motion at an annual general meeting.

One source said the Greens are overdue for such a meeting.

CBC News has reached out to Paul's office for comment.

How daft. She wrote a milquetoast and inoffensive statement on a complex issue where she probably didn't want to run the risk of overextending her prior knowledge and thereby accidentally catch flak. Nothing wrong with that.

[Shrillland]

In her farewell address to Parliament, Mumilaaq Qaqqaq delivered a scathing condemnation of Canada as a racist failure

What struck me the most, however, is that 13 outgoing MPs total gave farewell speeches in the House yesterday. This usually only happens when a no confidence vote or visit to Rideau Hall is imminent...but we're still at least two weeks away from a new Governor-General.

[Dresderstan]

In her farewell address to Parliament, Mumilaaq Qaqqaq delivered a scathing condemnation of Canada as a racist failure

What struck me the most, however, is that 13 outgoing MPs total gave farewell speeches in the House yesterday. This usually only happens when a no confidence vote or visit to Rideau Hall is imminent...but we're still at least two weeks away from a new Governor-General.

Maybe the wheels of an election are happening?

[Shrillland]

Paul's come out swinging after surviving her no-confidence motion

Conservative House Leader Gerald Deitell calls to have head of PHAC found in contempt of Parliament for defying a House order to hand over unredacted documents

[Greater Cesnica]

https://thegunblog.ca/2021/06/16/libera ... 0-attacks/

The Clerk of the Privy Council, the most-senior government employee and a top adviser to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, used Section 39 of the Canada Evidence Act to keep e-mails, memos and notes hidden from the court and the public.

A Federal Court judge on May 27 gave the government 30 days to produce all documents related to its crackdown.
The Clerk of the Privy Council, Janice Charette, signed the Section 39 certificate on June 14... “As a result of the certification by the Clerk, pursuant to s. 39, ‘disclosure of the information shall be refused without examination or hearing of the information by the court,’” government lawyers told the Federal Court yesterday.

“The attached s. 39 certificate is an absolute bar to filing with the Court under seal the information encompassed by the Order.”
...
The refusal is the Liberals’ latest obstruction tactic as they push ahead with their May 2020 Order in Council (OIC) that criminalized honest citizens and ordered the confiscation of suddenly blacklisted rifles and shotguns.

It's all so tiring. It's becoming increasingly apparent that the Trudeau government isn't interested in espousing transparency here. Trudeau wishes to pursue this re-election strategy of fucking with licensed gun owners, despite successive, increasingly strict gun control measures in Canada yielding no reductions in homicides and suicides. Rather, programs to tackle depression, mental illness, community-based rehabilitative and diversionary programs, and socioeconomic assistance provided to vulnerable populations such as Aboriginals have been shown to reduce firearms-related homicides and suicides.

[Borderlands of Rojava]

In her farewell address to Parliament, Mumilaaq Qaqqaq delivered a scathing condemnation of Canada as a racist failure

What struck me the most, however, is that 13 outgoing MPs total gave farewell speeches in the House yesterday. This usually only happens when a no confidence vote or visit to Rideau Hall is imminent...but we're still at least two weeks away from a new Governor-General.

Good. Canada needs to be outted for the widespread fakeness that's been going on.

[Greater Cesnica]

In her farewell address to Parliament, Mumilaaq Qaqqaq delivered a scathing condemnation of Canada as a racist failure

What struck me the most, however, is that 13 outgoing MPs total gave farewell speeches in the House yesterday. This usually only happens when a no confidence vote or visit to Rideau Hall is imminent...but we're still at least two weeks away from a new Governor-General.

I want to see the clown out. That's my top priority. Thus, this is a good sign for me.

[Dresderstan]

Paul's come out swinging after surviving her no-confidence motion

Conservative House Leader Gerald Deitell calls to have head of PHAC found in contempt of Parliament for defying a House order to hand over unredacted documents

Ah so she's using the "I am a black and am woman" argument. No wonder the Greens are in turmoil.

Potential election incoming as a result of this? Sooner or later the NDP has to pull the plug on Trudeau.

[Shrillland]

All-party committee(Conservatives dissented)proposes abolishing contract policing and encouraging all provinces and territories to create their own provincial/territorial police services like Ontario and Quebec have

[Greater Cesnica]

Paul's come out swinging after surviving her no-confidence motion

Conservative House Leader Gerald Deitell calls to have head of PHAC found in contempt of Parliament for defying a House order to hand over unredacted documents

Ah so she's using the "I am a black and am woman" argument. No wonder the Greens are in turmoil.

Potential election incoming as a result of this? Sooner or later the NDP has to pull the plug on Trudeau.

Unfortunately, I think the NDP has been effectively bought out by the Liberals. But God, I hope you're right.

[Luziyca]

In the foreign affairs side, China calls for the UN to investigate Canadian crimes against indigenous peoples as Canada calls for the UN to be given free access to Xinjiang to investigate against Uyghurs.

Honestly, I agree with both Canada and China on this one: there should be a full investigation into Chinese policies re. Xinjiang, which are at best, reminiscent of our residential school system, and there should be a full investigation into Canada's policies concerning indigenous peoples.

[Greater Cesnica]

Here we go again...

https://www.narcity.com/canadas-gun-con ... und-checks

Justin Trudeau and the federal government are changing Canada's gun control laws to beef up background check requirements.

At a June 22 press conference, Trudeau announced that as of July 7, Canadians applying for a firearm license will now have to undergo a background check that covers their entire life, not just the past five years.

"In the last few days alone, we've seen heartbreaking gun violence in some of our cities," Trudeau said, likely referring to a shooting in Toronto that injured three children.

Trudeau also said his government would be legally forcing gun retailers to keep records of all the guns they've sold — restricted or not — and strengthening oversight on gun transportation.

"No child should be caught in the crossfire. No community should be torn apart by tragedy," Trudeau said. "It has to stop."

So, remind me why a shooting in Toronto involving unlicensed individuals with unregistered handguns means that background checks for getting a gun license now extend back through your entire life? Where is the correlation?

More importantly, how exactly will this stop gun crime? Is the Trudeau government investing in community support programs? How about mental health initiatives? Perhaps economic relief for high-crime areas? Maybe better border checks to curb gun smuggling? Or even drug decriminalization/legalization to get rid of criminal organizations? Nope. Instead, let's just impose pointless, meandering, and increasingly restrictive measures on people who wish to get a license, as well as those who already do have a license like myself.

Ridiculous.

[Kubra]

Here we go again...

https://www.narcity.com/canadas-gun-con ... und-checks

Justin Trudeau and the federal government are changing Canada's gun control laws to beef up background check requirements.

At a June 22 press conference, Trudeau announced that as of July 7, Canadians applying for a firearm license will now have to undergo a background check that covers their entire life, not just the past five years.

"In the last few days alone, we've seen heartbreaking gun violence in some of our cities," Trudeau said, likely referring to a shooting in Toronto that injured three children.

Trudeau also said his government would be legally forcing gun retailers to keep records of all the guns they've sold — restricted or not — and strengthening oversight on gun transportation.

"No child should be caught in the crossfire. No community should be torn apart by tragedy," Trudeau said. "It has to stop."

So, remind me why a shooting in Toronto involving unlicensed individuals with unregistered handguns means that background checks for getting a gun license now extend back through your entire life? Where is the correlation?

More importantly, how exactly will this stop gun crime? Is the Trudeau government investing in community support programs? How about mental health initiatives? Perhaps economic relief for high-crime areas? Maybe better border checks to curb gun smuggling? Or even drug decriminalization/legalization to get rid of criminal organizations? Nope. Instead, let's just impose pointless, meandering, and increasingly restrictive measures on people who wish to get a license, as well as those who already do have a license like myself.

Ridiculous.

They need to look like they're doing something for a problem that, frankly, the government can do *nothing* about, so long as we have that big ol' border with flyover states. There just ain't no policing a border like that.
As I believe I've said elsewhere, Canada could be a real great place for gun owners if it weren't for the US.

[Immortan Khan]

Here we go again...

https://www.narcity.com/canadas-gun-con ... und-checks

Justin Trudeau and the federal government are changing Canada's gun control laws to beef up background check requirements.

At a June 22 press conference, Trudeau announced that as of July 7, Canadians applying for a firearm license will now have to undergo a background check that covers their entire life, not just the past five years.

"In the last few days alone, we've seen heartbreaking gun violence in some of our cities," Trudeau said, likely referring to a shooting in Toronto that injured three children.

Trudeau also said his government would be legally forcing gun retailers to keep records of all the guns they've sold — restricted or not — and strengthening oversight on gun transportation.

"No child should be caught in the crossfire. No community should be torn apart by tragedy," Trudeau said. "It has to stop."

So, remind me why a shooting in Toronto involving unlicensed individuals with unregistered handguns means that background checks for getting a gun license now extend back through your entire life? Where is the correlation?

More importantly, how exactly will this stop gun crime? Is the Trudeau government investing in community support programs? How about mental health initiatives? Perhaps economic relief for high-crime areas? Maybe better border checks to curb gun smuggling? Or even drug decriminalization/legalization to get rid of criminal organizations? Nope. Instead, let's just impose pointless, meandering, and increasingly restrictive measures on people who wish to get a license, as well as those who already do have a license like myself.

Ridiculous.

They need to look like they're doing something for a problem that, frankly, the government can do *nothing* about, so long as we have that big ol' border with flyover states. There just ain't no policing a border like that.
As I believe I've said elsewhere, Canada could be a real great place for gun owners if it weren't for the US.

Except even then it's a bad excuse. Canada has low rates of violence overall, let alone gun violence. Honestly we just need to scrap most of our gun laws, they are stupid and ineffective just like Canadian governance in general.

[Kubra]

They need to look like they're doing something for a problem that, frankly, the government can do *nothing* about, so long as we have that big ol' border with flyover states. There just ain't no policing a border like that.
As I believe I've said elsewhere, Canada could be a real great place for gun owners if it weren't for the US.

Except even then it's a bad excuse. Canada has low rates of violence overall, let alone gun violence. Honestly we just need to scrap most of our gun laws, they are stupid and ineffective just like Canadian governance in general.

Nah, I like the licensing requirements for restricted, I just don't like the selection. Like if you're gonna make it hard at least let folks have the real good-good, you feel? They earned it. A good chunk of prohibs should be moved down a category.
Gun violence has actually went up nationally, though of course not uniformly. Toronto is the culprit there, of course, though it's dubious whether they're actually to blame. Big city, smuggled handguns, what can you do?
And that's why the states ruins it for us, man.

[Kowani]

House of Commons passes bill to ban conversion therapy (263-63)

[Greater Cesnica]

Except even then it's a bad excuse. Canada has low rates of violence overall, let alone gun violence. Honestly we just need to scrap most of our gun laws, they are stupid and ineffective just like Canadian governance in general.

Nah, I like the licensing requirements for restricted, I just don't like the selection. Like if you're gonna make it hard at least let folks have the real good-good, you feel? They earned it. A good chunk of prohibs should be moved down a category.
Gun violence has actually went up nationally, though of course not uniformly. Toronto is the culprit there, of course, though it's dubious whether they're actually to blame. Big city, smuggled handguns, what can you do?
And that's why the states ruins it for us, man.

The concept of 'restricted' guns was always stupid. Have a uniform category of legal firearms. Repeal magazine capacity laws. Allow self-defense as a reason to purchase a firearm.

[Kubra]

Nah, I like the licensing requirements for restricted, I just don't like the selection. Like if you're gonna make it hard at least let folks have the real good-good, you feel? They earned it. A good chunk of prohibs should be moved down a category.
Gun violence has actually went up nationally, though of course not uniformly. Toronto is the culprit there, of course, though it's dubious whether they're actually to blame. Big city, smuggled handguns, what can you do?
And that's why the states ruins it for us, man.

The concept of 'restricted' guns was always stupid. Have a uniform category of legal firearms. Repeal magazine capacity laws. Allow self-defense as a reason to purchase a firearm.

Self defense is a piss-poor reason to carry a gun around here, m8.
The category of restricted is to keep range toys as range toys, minus handguns. On a range, there should be a sense of absolute freedom; less so on the average lethbridge denizens truck rack.

[Greater Cesnica]

The concept of 'restricted' guns was always stupid. Have a uniform category of legal firearms. Repeal magazine capacity laws. Allow self-defense as a reason to purchase a firearm.

Self defense is a piss-poor reason to carry a gun around here, m8.
The category of restricted is to keep range toys as range toys, minus handguns. On a range, there should be a sense of absolute freedom; less so on the average lethbridge denizens truck rack.

Is self-defense a piss-poor reason to keep a gun at home? Furthermore, what denotes a range toy? Why were AR-15s (pre-ban) range toys but not Tavors?