News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 10K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 42K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 5.9K     0 

If it’s a Right, put it in the Constitution. Let’s add Housing while we’re at it. Here are the current six Rights under the Constitution:
  • Democratic Rights (Sections 3-5)
  • Mobility Rights (Section 6)
  • Legal Rights (Sections 7-14)
  • Equality Rights (Section 15)
  • Language Rights (Sections 16-23)
  • Indigenous Rights (Sections 25 & 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982)
If it’s not in the Constitution, it’s not a Right. Newb or not, our PM should know that.
Technically speaking its a privilege, not a right. A right is something that cannot be revoked outside of punitive measures in the criminal justice system. Healthcare is something that you can lose access to if you're seen as too much of an unnecessary burden to the system (for instance a diabetic patient who refuses to change their diet and reduce sugar intake).
 
Technically speaking its a privilege, not a right. A right is something that cannot be revoked outside of punitive measures in the criminal justice system. Healthcare is something that you can lose access to if you're seen as too much of an unnecessary burden to the system (for instance a diabetic patient who refuses to change their diet and reduce sugar intake).
Privilege is the wrong word here, as that indicates entitlement. Rather it's one of those things that should be right...

...and I agree, if our PM is suggesting it should be a right (no argument from me here) then he should make it a right.
 
Technically speaking its a privilege, not a right. A right is something that cannot be revoked outside of punitive measures in the criminal justice system. Healthcare is something that you can lose access to if you're seen as too much of an unnecessary burden to the system (for instance a diabetic patient who refuses to change their diet and reduce sugar intake).
I would be interested to know the legal foundation for withholding treatment of a person who is determined to be an "unnecessary burden" and if it has ever happened.

Privilege is the wrong word here, as that indicates entitlement. Rather it's one of those things that should be right...

...and I agree, if our PM is suggesting it should be a right (no argument from me here) then he should make it a right.
It's not his sole decision to make. It's up the provinces and the feds under the constitutional amending formula.
 
It's not his sole decision to make. It's up the provinces and the feds under the constitutional amending formula.
That really goes without saying...however, there needs to be someone up top to initialize it. And since Carny brought it up....
 
That really goes without saying...however, there needs to be someone up top to initialize it. And since Carny brought it up....
Fair enough, but with the general (lack of) knowledge around 'civics', going without saying is risky ground. Besides, constitutional conferences have become political kryptonite.
 
Angus Reid now with the same surge, though I don't understand that time scale on the bottom axis but I assume that is simply a copy/paste editing error.

Anyway, the meat of this: "Over this three-month period Liberal support has jumped 30 points in the city of Toronto, 25 points in 905 ridings."



View attachment 637503

1742305238565.png


With ~3,600 people polled, this Angus poll gives us the most insights on what is happening in the regionals with a sufficient enough of a sample size.

The numbers of Alberta are shocking. 31% for Liberals? It matches what yesterday's Leger poll is saying for Alberta as well. With those numbers, Calgary and Edmonton are surely in play for the Liberals. The same above poll has Liberals up +28 points to 39% in Calgary.

Carney may well decide to run in Edmonton if their internal polling matches Angus.
 
^A bit cold for the Aussies to do their sheep herding up there, but sure... <3
 

Back
Top