Accidental Deliberations: Burning questions

How does a new U.S. president focusing on actual protectionism (not “trade barriers” in the form of the incidental effects of governance in the public interest) affect the viability of Brad Wall’s GTH and bypass projects which depend on perpetually expanding trade? And are we stuck with the multi-billion-dollar costs the Saskatchewan Party has tried ...

Accidental Deliberations: Burning questions

Does anybody actually believe for a second that a Republican-dominated Congress will be more willing to ratify a climate change treaty simply because it doesn’t contain binding targets? And if not, doesn’t a deliberate failure to include binding targets mean primarily that even if countries can agree on a treaty which could be ratified in ...

Accidental Deliberations: Burning question

Even leaving aside the past politicians who we’d expect to be mentioned in an election, the Cons’ ultra-long, ultra-nasty campaign has managed to drag three of the top ten Greatest Canadians into the political muck. So who has Frederick Banting in the pool?

Accidental Deliberations: Burning question

So apparently this week’s Macleans debate went ahead despite the exclusion of a party leader with seats in Parliament who wanted to be heard. Which raises the question: how is it that Elizabeth May didn’t refuse to participate, as she demands everybody else do when the shoe is on the other foot?

Accidental Deliberations: Burning question

What exactly do we expect CSIS to do with a possible data dump of every piece of information held by every federal government agency when at last notice, it was struggling to find the capacity to check e-mails for malware?

Accidental Deliberations: Burning question

C-51, the Cons’ terror bill, allows CSIS to covertly intrude on personal freedoms in two obvious ways. First, it enables CSIS effectively unfettered authority – without a warrant – to engage in any action which is not contrary to the Charter or other Canadian law, and which does not: (a) cause, intentionally or by criminal ...

Accidental Deliberations: Burning question

Jim Flaherty is taking credit for saving consumers money by tightening mortgage insurance rules. So how many extra thousands of dollars did he cost Canadian homeowners when he loosened precisely the same rules before?