The "LOLCANADA" thread...again
So what's new?
I've noticed the Liberals are now ahead in all major polls and Trudeau hasn't even started to campaign yet
And I’m cue poilievre is once again threatening the first ever federal use of notwithstanding clause. It seems sadly to have devolved to any example where you disagree with the courts
And I’m cue poilievre is once again threatening the first ever federal use of notwithstanding clause. It seems sadly to have devolved to any example where you disagree with the courts
man conservative social media is completely confused about what this ruling is about, in before the idiotic takes get parroted ITT
No, back to work legislation and notwithstanding clause are VERY different. Any government can pass legislation, which the courts may or may not overturn as violating charter rights. Using the notwithstanding clause eliminates the courts so that even when legislation violates charter rights it is still law. That is the nuclear bomb of Canada’s system and should be used incredib
Yes but even under federal legislation its a slow process basically violating the rights . If your gonna order Air Canada workers back than teachers should be as well
I googled how many times Quebec has used the Not with standing clause in the last 6 years What would be your guess?
I was going to hide the answer but I do not see that option
It is 12
Do you struggle to follow conversations? You did a ridiculous moralizing about children being pawns. I mirrored that for you to hopefully indicate how ridiculous it was. Seems that failed.
One can have a debate on the merits. But as long as you have partisans screeching about using children has pawns there is no point.
LMAO, teachers striking, turning down a great deal, refusing 3rd party mediation, receiving 2 BILLION from the previous government to reduce class sizes but didn't are my arguments that this was a political and children were used as pawns.
Your argument is the Alberta government should have increased their offer without saying how and magically reduce class sizes even though funding already allows for 21 students a class even though the previous government gave them 2 BILLION dollars already to do it.
Swing and a miss! I didn't say that government should do anything. I simply pointed out how pathetically inept it is to try and accuse one side of a stalled negotiation about using children as pawns. This isn't me arguing on the merits - as was explained to you - but explaining why your rhetoric is ridiculous.
Of course, I suspect you are full of it on the merits as well. Can you give a reference for this 2 billion figure you talk about? My googling might be failing me, but I can't figure out what precise thing you are referencing. I see you also talked about 21 students per class - are you aware this seems to be a sort of average score and ignores many classes with more than 21 students per class?
I coach youth sports and have kids, I'd say kids are probably better behaved now then when we were growing up.
When did I say they didn't deserve respect? But pretending they work long hours and acting like they have the toughest job out there just isn't true. I have nothing against teachers, I just do not like the teachers unions and think they have way too much power.
So actually Covid end up being a good thing huh…
No harms done !
Yes but even under federal legislation its a slow process basically violating the rights . If your gonna order Air Canada workers back than teachers should be as well
I googled how many times Quebec has used the Not with standing clause in the last 6 years What would be your guess?
I was going to hide the answer but I do not see that option
It is 12
Very doubtful
Unless u includes the renewing of a previous use of it .
Since every 5 years you need to renew it if needed .
Like to protect the bill 101 and bill 21 .
Very doubtful
Unless u includes the renewing of a previous use of it .
Since every 5 years you need to renew it if needed .
Like to protect the bill 101 and bill 21 .
Note I said the last 6 years . So that would mean it could be 6 items renewed but free to use Google to prove me wrong instead of very doubtful as that is what I did because I suspected 3 or 4
The budget vote will be fun as an election I think only benefits the liberals . The NDP and Bloc should vote no and put the Conservatives in a horrible spot
Note I said the last 6 years . So that would mean it could be 6 items renewed but free to use Google to prove me wrong instead of very doubtful as that is what I did because I suspected 3 or 4
I’m asking because I did try ….
All I know of a new use of the clause was for the bill 21 .
So I have no idea what “new” stuff the clause been used for beside that .
Unless it’s solely on stuff being renewed automatically like for the old bill 101 and stuff like that .
I’m asking because I did try ….
All I know of a new use of the clause was for the bill 21 .
So I have no idea what “new” stuff the clause been used for beside that .
Unless it’s solely on stuff being renewed automatically like for the old bill 101 and stuff like that .
Hey I used Co pilot search . I myself know of the religious symbols ban and language laws on signage
Hey I used Co pilot search . I myself know of the religious symbols ban and language laws on signage
ok but you said 12 ?
that language stuff is decades old being renew
the new stuff about religious symbol is the bill 21 .
so yeah no idea where the fack they seem to imply quebec abused the clause with 12 examples shrug.
Lozen has made it quite clear he supports using the notwithstanding clause to impose cultural views he agrees with, he only disagree with using the notwithstanding clause when its an issue he doesn't agree with.
Lozen has made it quite clear he supports using the notwithstanding clause to impose cultural views he agrees with, he only disagree with using the notwithstanding clause when its an issue he doesn't agree with.
No I actually would like to see the not withstanding clause removed but I know Quebec will never go for it
ok but you said 12 ?
that language stuff is decades old being renew
the new stuff about religious symbol is the bill 21 .
so yeah no idea where the fack they seem to imply quebec abused the clause with 12 examples shrug.
I asked a different Chat GPT and got this answer
The province of Quebec has used the “notwithstanding clause” (Section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms) on multiple occasions — but there is no single universally accepted count because different studies use different inclusion criteria (e.g., counting renewals, counting omnibus uses, etc.).
Here are some reliable figures:
According to a research paper, Quebec’s legislature passed a total of 41 laws containing at least one notwithstanding‐clause declaration (including renewals and provincial equivalents) up to the date of that study.
Érudit
One authoritative source counts 16 new laws by Quebec invoking Section 33 between 1982–2024 (excluding renewals) and 49 renewals across statutes.
Cambridge University Press & Assessment
Another source (as of May 2017) estimates Quebec’s usage at 17 times in total (across provinces) by that date.
Centre for Constitutional Studies
+1
In short: Quebec has used Section 33 dozens of times (net use + renewals), making it the province that has invoked the clause most frequently.
Unlike Uke I can critter parties I support
Danielle Smith using the not with standing clause for a labor dispute is so wrong
Lozen has made it quite clear he supports using the notwithstanding clause to impose cultural views he agrees with, he only disagree with using the notwithstanding clause when its an issue he doesn't agree with.
Uke keeps lying as my original post started the teacher discussion
Will see if Uke can apologize being wrong
Uke keeps lying as my original post started the teacher discussion
Will see if Uke can apologize being wrong
Lol. Yes you were against the notwithstanding clause for teachers and for Quebec. But remember, you told us you supported Smith using the notwithstanding clause on her trans bills. So clearly the opposition isn't to the notwithstanding clause being used to impose your worldview, you only disagree with it when it isn't your worldview being imposed.
No I actually would like to see the not withstanding clause removed but I know Quebec will never go for it
quebec ?
the constitution got signed because all provinces wanted a lever to oppose federal government natural instinct of centralization...
that lever was the notwithstanding clause.
a way to make sure the country and provinces are runs by elected officials over non elected judges.
im sure you would love another trudeau in power with no notwithstanding clause and him doing many policies on provinces unable to contest it right ?
yes im sure you and alberta would love more power directed at ottawa at the expenses of provinces...
thats fine.
its bases on 40+ years.
not 6 years which i had trouble with.
yeah quebec being different on many aspects had to do a little more used of it facing ottawa intention of imposing its views.
This is a fascinating budget. It's crazy that a year ago there wouldn't be a single party that would advocate anything like it. In some ways it is wildly conservative - huge axe through the public service, operating costs, immigration, not bolstering social program spending - while at the same time making genuinely huge investments in sectors after sector of the economy in a way no conservative would propose. Trudeau wouldn't do this. NDP wouldn't do this. Harper or Poilievre wouldn't do this. But maybe, just maybe....it's actually the right response for the moment?
This is a fascinating budget. It's crazy that a year ago there wouldn't be a single party that would advocate anything like it. In some ways it is wildly conservative - huge axe through the public service, operating costs, immigration, not bolstering social program spending - while at the same time making genuinely huge investments in sectors after sector of the economy in a wa
I’m still up in the air on this budget but I think your analysis is fairly accurate. It’s just such a big number
he's exactly right about poilievre: https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/chris-d...
he's exactly right about poilievre: https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/chris-d...
Hey I said after Pierre lost his seat he needed to resign as leader . He may be right about Pierre but I despise crossing the floor. The people voted for a conservative candidate and if your that opposed to your leader resign and let an election be called .
I also said the Conservatives are the one party that does not want an election as they can not win with Pierre at the helm
If anyone should be outraged with a leader it should be you as Carney has almost removed most of Justin's policies and his budget addresses Justin's bloated public sector .
On the contrary, he has KEPT most of Trudeau's policies, and it's not like I've ever been team bloated public sector. If there was one classically "conservative" idea I'd really get behind, it would be being very "fiscally conservative" and running the government as efficiently as possible while still delivering good outcomes. So I'm not at all against shrinking the size of the civil service if it can be done without drastically reducing those services.
On the contrary, he has KEPT most of Trudeau's policies, and it's not like I've ever been team bloated public sector. If there was one classically "conservative" idea I'd really get behind, it would be being very "fiscally conservative" and running the government as efficiently as possible while still delivering good outcomes. So I'm not at all against shrinking the size of the
Kept most of his policies minor ones maybe but he has removed many of Trudeau's major ones
I guess the question is do the NDP support the budget? I just can not see the Bloc or Conservatives doing it or maybe they each have a few folks miss the vote
