Yeah that's something I hear all the time. Even though they brought in fewer refugees at a slower rate than they promised, which was exactly what opponents wanted, they 'broke their promises' and should be faulted. Like bitching because they promised to hit you over the head with a hammer and didn't.
"herbie" said Yeah that's something I hear all the time. Even though they brought in fewer refugees at a slower rate than they promised, which was exactly what opponents wanted, they 'broke their promises' and should be faulted. Like bitching because they promised to hit you over the head with a hammer and didn't.
More so due to the completely unrealistic promise made to help grab headlines to win an election.
Just as if the Conservatives made this promise and delayed it, the Liberals would have been all over them. It's that type of nonsense that ruins Canadian politics.
"OnTheIce" said Yeah that's something I hear all the time. Even though they brought in fewer refugees at a slower rate than they promised, which was exactly what opponents wanted, they 'broke their promises' and should be faulted. Like bitching because they promised to hit you over the head with a hammer and didn't.
More so due to the completely unrealistic promise made to help grab headlines to win an election.
Just as if the Conservatives made this promise and delayed it, the Liberals would have been all over them. It's that type of nonsense that ruins Canadian politics.
You know, they still brought in the 25,000 by end of February instead of end of December. Not really a broken promise, they got them here as fast as they could, it's not like it was a deliberate decision to defer their arrival, and it's not a big difference in time. When you're campaigning from the opposition, you can only make an educated guess about what resources will be at your disposal once you're in office, so you have to cut them a little slack on finishing the settlement 60 days late. It's not like they brought them in a year later.
You know, they still brought in the 25,000 by end of February instead of end of December. Not really a broken promise, they got them here as fast as they could, it's not like it was a deliberate decision to defer their arrival, and it's not a big difference in time. When you're campaigning from the opposition, you can only make an educated guess about what resources will be at your disposal once you're in office, so you have to cut them a little slack on finishing the settlement 60 days late. It's not like they brought them in a year later.
I never said it was a broken promise, just unrealistic. If parties of all stripes make these stupid promises without knowing the full picture or scope of the plans.
FYI, When you double the timeline of your original plan, it's not "just 60 days".
I seem to once again be swimming against the grain of the rest of us who are right of centre. I like the idea of more migrants. The more people we have in this country, the bigger we are as a market. The bigger the market, the more money there is to be made.
And as someone upcountry tired of feeling like a "settler", maybe 300,000 more people trying to jam into Toronto/Vancouver would make people think "I/my employees can't afford to live here, maybe we should seriously relocate". The $1 million + bungalows there don't even seem enough to make them think straight.
Never mind the economy, full speed ahead !
Ever since the "good government" of Mulroney.
No doubt, this will hit a lot of hurdles and will likely change direction 3 or 4 times much like the 25k before 2015 ended election promise.
I don't trust McCallum to wipe his ass properly let alone run a program like this.
Why, is former Chief Economist of the Canada's largest bank a now considered to be a sketchy background or something?
Like bitching because they promised to hit you over the head with a hammer and didn't.
I don't trust McCallum to wipe his ass properly let alone run a program like this.
Why, is former Chief Economist of the Canada's largest bank a now considered to be a sketchy background or something?
Since when does an economist, 20 years ago, give one credibility on immigration?
The guy oozes a total lack of confidence when he speaks. Next to Stephane Dion, he's the true "dithers".
He's a good politician.
Yeah that's something I hear all the time. Even though they brought in fewer refugees at a slower rate than they promised, which was exactly what opponents wanted, they 'broke their promises' and should be faulted.
Like bitching because they promised to hit you over the head with a hammer and didn't.
More so due to the completely unrealistic promise made to help grab headlines to win an election.
Just as if the Conservatives made this promise and delayed it, the Liberals would have been all over them. It's that type of nonsense that ruins Canadian politics.
I don't trust McCallum to wipe his ass properly let alone run a program like this.
Why, is former Chief Economist of the Canada's largest bank a now considered to be a sketchy background or something?
It's similar to giving an accountant the job of wiring a delta starter to a star wound electric motor. The end result is a total cock up.
Yeah that's something I hear all the time. Even though they brought in fewer refugees at a slower rate than they promised, which was exactly what opponents wanted, they 'broke their promises' and should be faulted.
Like bitching because they promised to hit you over the head with a hammer and didn't.
More so due to the completely unrealistic promise made to help grab headlines to win an election.
Just as if the Conservatives made this promise and delayed it, the Liberals would have been all over them. It's that type of nonsense that ruins Canadian politics.
You know, they still brought in the 25,000 by end of February instead of end of December. Not really a broken promise, they got them here as fast as they could, it's not like it was a deliberate decision to defer their arrival, and it's not a big difference in time. When you're campaigning from the opposition, you can only make an educated guess about what resources will be at your disposal once you're in office, so you have to cut them a little slack on finishing the settlement 60 days late. It's not like they brought them in a year later.
You know, they still brought in the 25,000 by end of February instead of end of December. Not really a broken promise, they got them here as fast as they could, it's not like it was a deliberate decision to defer their arrival, and it's not a big difference in time. When you're campaigning from the opposition, you can only make an educated guess about what resources will be at your disposal once you're in office, so you have to cut them a little slack on finishing the settlement 60 days late. It's not like they brought them in a year later.
I never said it was a broken promise, just unrealistic. If parties of all stripes make these stupid promises without knowing the full picture or scope of the plans.
FYI, When you double the timeline of your original plan, it's not "just 60 days".
I don't trust McCallum to wipe his ass properly let alone run a program like this.
McCallum has been past his best-before date for some time now.
-J.