News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 10K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 42K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 6K     0 

PL1 said:
I thought he want to run Toronto
Click to expand...
That too. But according to Robyn Doolittle, the Ford Family has always expected one of their own would be PM someday. With the much more likeable Rob in the ground, Kathy, Randy and the K's keeping out of politics and Michael seemingly giving up on it, that leaves good ol' Dougie with no one in his way to go for the gold.
 
DSCToronto said:
Though I agree that an apology for publishing 'the truth' is usually NOT a good thing, you need to remember who we are dealing with here. Trump is both amazingly thin skinned and very impulsive. Sometimes one DOES need to apologise for something that is either (or both, in this case) not your fault or not worthy of apology because it's true. There are also 'apologies and apologies" and I remind you of the famous one in UK parliament. Insert your own punctuation. "Yes, I said that you are ugly it's true I am sorry for it."
Click to expand...
Mark Carney was being "Canadian" saying "sorry". Doug Ford was being "America" saving "do it my way only".
 
zang said:
Ford has been running for PM since he was a noob councillor. This isn't *really* about what's best for Ontario or Canada, it's what best fits the image he wants to convey for when he ultimately runs for the top job.
Click to expand...

Bingo. What better way - for good or ill - to increase his profile among the general Canadian public? He didn't have much national profile before - he does now.

AoD
 
Last edited:
I don't know. I know the Conservative base is a bit strange these days but I can't imagine there's enough support in the party currently for Ford to consider a run federally under the CPC banner. Even in the Harper heydays it was common for the PCs in Queen's Park to beef with the Conservatives on Parliament Hill. These are two very separate groups and if anything the CPC has moved miles away from where Ford's camp is under Poilievre. I don't know if there's any appetite, or potential, for the CPC to return to a more moderate position in the near-future. It's tough to imagine Ford entering a machine that has been decimated and rebuilt to worship Poilievre.
 
thettctransitfanatic said:
So apparently, THIS is what "Skills Development" meant...

Click to expand...

"“Every SDF recipient must comply with strict reporting, auditing, and results-tracking requirements to receive funding. These are set out clearly in each recipient’s transfer payment agreements (TPAs) with the ministry. Every project receives onsite monitoring visits, and the ministry conducts spot audits with recipients required to submit monthly reporting showing process towards meeting their (key performance indicators),” Figueredo’s statement continued.
“The ministry also has clear processes in place to investigate, recoup funds, void contracts, and take swift action when these strict requirements are not followed.”"

Just like the fact that they have strict evaluation criteria that was unceremoniously set aside? Speaking of which I wonder why the LCBO US liquor inventory was made a cabinet secret? I mean, who would want to hide any changes to the amount, and why would there be any changes?

AoD
 
Last edited:
narduch said:
It's pretty much a guarantee no actual training occurred for any of those companies receiving money from Ford's training slush fund
Click to expand...
I can guarantee this isn't true. Our unions (in construction sector) received funding and bought new equipment, tools etc and for sure it subsidized training. Most other trade unions have as well.
 
wopchop said:
I can guarantee this isn't true. Our unions (in construction sector) received funding and bought new equipment, tools etc and for sure it subsidized training. Most other trade unions have as well.
Click to expand...
Fine. Its actually pathetic how construction unions are aiding Ford in his corruption.

And I still think I'm right. I dont believe this strip joint did any meaningful training. Or that church that was supposedly training PSWs.

This entire program is a sham
 
narduch said:
Fine. Its actually pathetic how construction unions are aiding Ford in his corruption.

And I still think I'm right. I dont believe this strip joint did any meaningful training. Or that church that was supposedly training PSWs.

This entire program is a sham
Click to expand...
Sure, it is pathetic but keep it mind that wasn't all the unions.

But you aren't right, not entirely.

I agree that this company and their link to the fund sounds sketchy, but saying the entire program is a sham by implying no companies are using the money for training is simply wrong. Sorry. I was at the hall not even two weeks ago and they had new cranes, tools and all kinds of equipment in the skills centre.

That might sound like I'm defending the program and potential corruption. To be clear, I don't support that, but I do take exception to half truths, which don't help progressive causes.
 
Mihairokov said:
I don't know. I know the Conservative base is a bit strange these days but I can't imagine there's enough support in the party currently for Ford to consider a run federally under the CPC banner.
Click to expand...

The fact that this family of nouveau-riche failsons even thinks they have a shot at PM should tell you all you need to know. They’ve never been grounded in reality, and (again, according to Doolittle) believe they’re the Canadian Kennedys.

Mihairokov said:
Even in the Harper heydays it was common for the PCs in Queen's Park to beef with the Conservatives on Parliament Hill. These are two very separate groups and if anything the CPC has moved miles away from where Ford's camp is under Poilievre. I don't know if there's any appetite, or potential, for the CPC to return to a more moderate position in the near-future. It's tough to imagine Ford entering a machine that has been decimated and rebuilt to worship Poilievre.
Click to expand...
Doug and Rob used to tout how they could pull in Liberal and NDP voters. I suspect it was more they just mistook a growth from burgeoning nihilist never-previously-voters as people switching teams for their folksy charm.
 
Doug would likely be disastrous for this country, IMO. But probably not as disastrous as Poilievre...and for what that's worth.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top