In seeking out concentrations of expertise in Canada, it is difficult to ignore the extractive sector. Given the (good and bad) history and size of this sector, and the lack of global rivals in the density of expertise (other than Australia), should international assistance not leverage this expertise to achieve a lasting impact in developing countries?
In a world of financial and economic inter-connectedness it would be foolish to suggest that there won't be any knock-on effects from the hitherto number four largest economy worldwide in its political convulsions, but from this particular writer's standpoint, Canada's economy is sailing safely going forward.
Why were non-UK politicians around the world obsessed with weighing in on the Brexit debate? It's unbecoming for politicians to act like the nosy neighbour and get involved in the domestic dispute of a sovereign state. Unfortunately, Brexit has polarized the population in the UK. It has pitted regions against each other and has caused deep divides within political parties. But what's more troublesome is people that have no right to vote in the referendum aren't just engaged in the debate, they are attempting to influence its outcome. It's doubly worse that many of these people are elected politicians of foreign states.
Below the surface of the proposed British exit from the European Union is a sense of great consternation in the smaller countries that make up the United Kingdom. Having lived, studied and worked throughout the U.K. for the past two years, the divisions within the country are striking and broader than most North Americans realize.
My friend Chuck wants to kill himself. He is hoping if Bill C-14 does not pass in the Senate by June 6th, he will be able to legally commit suicide with the help of a doctor, thereby ending his constant, debilitating and painful battle with mental illness. Chuck is part of a group of patients who, despite being included in the Supreme Court of Canada's ground-breaking decision in Carter vs. Canada, have been cut out of the Liberal's Bill C-14. Here's why.
Our elected leaders are hopefully digging deep and trying to figure out what the right path is for Canada on Bill C-14: the Liberal's legislation on medically assisted dying. It's not an easy task. It may be the most important piece of legislation some of these MPs ever vote on. It's remarkable that our country has even gotten to this point in the first place, but we need to take it slow.
I'm proud of Mrs. Grégoire Trudeau's involvement and support of causes. I just think she chose the wrong audience at the wrong time. Most parents who work full-time or more would be over the moon to have one helper. To want to have two plus an office of staff comes across as tone-deaf and elitist, even if it is warranted by the purposes you are taking on. I think I speak for the majority of the average families out there when they would say that if you can't handle the workload you're taking on, you're going to have to consider cutting back or looking at taking some money out of your pocket to find a workaround.
More cynical commentators in Ottawa dismissed the newly minted Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development and Minister of Science portfolios as a simple rebrand of pre-existing cabinet posts. In some ways, that was an understandable reaction. After all the new Liberal government was widely criticized by opposition parties for being heavy on style and light on substance.
At the provincial level, three provinces are led by women, including Premier Rachel Notley in Alberta. Women make up 53 per cent of our province's cabinet ministers. In 2006, it was a mere 11 per cent. So, in a decade, that's progress. Federally, as in Alberta, cabinet is gender-balanced, a move that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau justified with the now oft-quoted "because it's 2015." Yet, in 2016, it must be noted that only 26 per cent of seats in the House of Commons are held by women. So, why is it that the lack of gender parity remains so pronounced in most levels of government across Canada?
We can, moving forward, outline a clear vision of who we are, what we stand for, and what we can truly offer to Canadians... I want to know how we -- New Democrats -- will do better and I want these plans grounded in evidence-based policy reflective of our values. And I want for our members to chart the course of our party, not for what might be popular at the time or what might gain support in the short-term to guide our decisions.
This weekend, the NDP is meeting in Edmonton to decide their direction moving forward. Eugene Levy once complained about filming a season of SCTV in Edmonton because "It's Edmonton." While I'm sure it's a great city, this is a party who is dreading at the Big E. The election of the past year saw an early lead blown, notable key members of the party lose their seats in the House of Commons, and a third place finish for Tom Mulcair's rookie federal election run. As the NDP head to the Gateway to the North, it's time to begin paving the highway towards the future.
By making it easier to navigate the tax rules and meet their obligations, Canadians will spend less time and less of their money on preparing their taxes, leaving more in their pockets. For Canadian businesses, productivity could improve as they spend less time, effort and capital dealing with tax compliance and red tape.
No one will ever know whether Ghomeshi would have been convicted had his accusers been more honest and candid. All we can say is that the Crown's case would have been far stronger. Knowing that they will be judged in light of such "rape myths," it may seem sensible -- even obvious -- to a great many complainants that certain pieces of information should be managed so that they conform to the stereotype.
On the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), International Trade minister Chrystia Freeland has claimed to be in "listening mode." And she says no decision has been made yet. It is widely reported that she is touring the country to hear Canadians on the TPP. But it is not clear whom she is actually consulting.