Tag Archives: Oral Questions

We actually pay for this?

Oral Questions and another non-answer on 31 October 2024

Hon. Steven Guilbeault:  

     Mr. Speaker, for four consecutive years, the Conservative Party of Canada slashed funding for Jasper fire prevention by $30 million every year. In the last six years alone, we have invested $800 million. If the Conservatives want to blame someone, they can go and talk to their colleague from Thornhill, who was the director to the minister of the environment in those days.

$800 million is a lot of money to have spent to prevent something from happening that happened anyway, so I have to ask what was that money actually spent on? Clearly not on cleaning up Jasper National Park.

In this day and age, we are inundated every day with government corruption mismanagement and lies so it really would not surprise me to find that this $800 million actually found its way to the nazi jew ex president of Ukraine who we officially still treat to houses in various parts of the world like Florida, the Bahamas and the Mediterranean Riviera. Our PM will of course be accepting free vacations in those Canadian paid for mansions as is his wont, I wonder of he will still be welcome when he is booted out and therefore can’t donate more taxpayers’ cash.

This minister promotes a hoax called man made climate change, and ignores the industrial pollution of our land, waters and air.  What a good little puppet he is.

Yet another tax?

The Honourable Jonathan Wilkinson Minister for Energy and Natural; Resources Devotee of WEF

MP for North Vancouver

Minister,

“You can’t wake a person who is pretending to be asleep. Navajo saying 

It has become very apparent in your answers to questions about the “carbon tax” during Oral Questions in our House of Ill Repute, that there is a new tax to which you are referring.

You mentioned the “pollution tax” many times and as far as I know there is no such a thing.  The current fad is that of attacking the carbon emissions from vehicles pollution, but it does absolutely nothing for any other kind of pollution by either industry or the public.

What really bothers me is not the sleight of mouth you’re using because we are very used to that from this current government, we have been subjected to it since 2015 so we should be by now.  No, what bothers me is that the upcoming budget is going to introduce yet another fund-raising scheme and call it a pollution tax, but it will not include such things as industrial waste, toxic pesticides on food crops, mining effluent toxic ponds, fracking damage to aquafers and lakes, plastic in streams, rivers, lakes and the oceans surround our country. It will not include the pollution coming from the fish farms right here in BC. It will not include the dust in the air of Vancouver nor the smoke from industries along the Fraser River, but it will almost certainly affect the way people live, heat their homes (if they are lucky enough to have one), get to and from work if they have a job, nor will it relate to the pollution from the 4G and 5G towers spreading throughout out country like a plague of phallic symbols.   It will however be paid for by the people of Canada as usual.

Pollution is not simply “exhaust” fumes, so a real pollution measure would be good, but this concept that the Climate Change hoax is instilling in all the sheep of this world leading to the elimination of carbon – net zero – is to destroy the major building block of life on the planet.

Perhaps you had better check with Klaus Schwab because even though he is old I am not sure he wants to die now as he hasn’t been crowned yet.

Jeremy

Canadian House of Commons farce call Oral Question Period

 

 

 

Anyone paying any attention to the last couple of weeks of QP would be painfully aware that this section of the House of Commons proceedings is becoming increasingly farcical every day.

 

The opposition, led by their attack poodle Poilievre, are barking up the wrong tree.

 

Even to me, a layman with no economic or real monetary training or expert knowledge in this field, it is clear that Poilievre really wants to accuse the Minister of Finance of insider trading.   I am not a fan of this Minister in any way as he clearly does not have the interests of Canadian uppermost in his mind. His concept of having private investors own our infrastructure through his Infrastructure Bank of Canada whilst refusing to borrow from our own bank at low straight interest rates instead of compounding interest being paid to privately owned international banks and investors cannot have the best interests of Canadians in mind.  In that, he is not alone as every Canadian politician seems to be afraid of those same bankers and investors.

 

However, it seems clear to me that when the Liberals took control they made no bones about increasing the tax rate on the wealthy at the end of December 2015.

I do not own shares or stocks in any company and so I did not have to make any decisions but anyone who was smart enough to have money invested would realise that in January of 2016 their tax rate would increase therefore to sell shares prior to then and pay a lesser tax rate would seem very logical.  There was never any doubt in my mind that this would happen on January 1st 2016, and not as Poilievre assumed on 1st April 2016.

 

However the Conservative attack poodle made the same sort of misheaded assumption that he made when his government increased the number of members by 30 while he set about decreasing the ability of thousands if not millions of Canadian to be able to vote would assure the re-election of the Conservative Party of Canada to power – were he and they ever wrong.   Very bad assumption Pierre.   Incidentally, the claim and assumption that more MPs would increase Canadian’s representation in the House was a blatant lie.   Firstly those 305 members already there were not able to have their say on behalf of their constituents on two counts, 1) they simply did not have the opportunity to express their constituents views due to the sheer number of them; and 2),  every bill introduced by the Harper government was closed to “debate” almost before it was introduced and no amendments were allowed either in committee or at report stage.  

 

To waste soo much time trying to trap a Minister over something so asinine and in fact so typically conservative in thinking takes away time away from real questions they should be asking about, for instance, the desertion of our moral and fiduciary duty to our wounded veterans and our aboriginal peoples’ abject living conditions.   Why the money is not flowing for infrastructure at the rate promised, and the waste of money on the celebration of 150 years since our mythical confederation could well be the subject of sincere questions.

 

It is all window dressings to hide their complicity in the myth of a sovereign and democratic Canada and frankly, I am tired of it.

 

Perhaps one of them could explain to me just how we are a constitutional monarchy when the last Queen we actually had was Queen Victoria.

 

Event: The year, 1901. With Queen Victoria’s death, the repeal of Section 2 of the BNA Act came into force, deliberately leaving the Dominion of Canada without a Monarch. To this day the BNA Act repeal of Section 2 has never been re-enacted.

 

http://www.nephalemfilms.com/themyth.html

 

Don’t hold your breath on that one.

 

Jeremy