Roundup: Hypothetical subways and more traffic

It was a quieter day, post-debate, but the leaders were all back on the road, mindful that there is still another debate later in the week. Andrew Scheer in Markham to promise funds for two Toronto subway projects – while lying about the Liberal record on said funding (the funds haven’t been released because there isn’t an actual plan for those lines yet) – and to further promise that he would fund any infrastructure project designed to ease congestion. Erm, except that this is a promise to induce demand because all of the data show that if you build more traffic infrastructure, that traffic just grows to fill it. It doesn’t actually relieve congestion – it just contributes to making it worse.

Jagmeet Singh was in Toronto to talk student loans, and when pressed about Bill 21 by the media, he said that if it made it to the Supreme Court of Canada that the federal government would “have to” take a look at it then – which isn’t really true, and they could put arguments forward at any court case along the way. This makes Singh’s position to basically punt the problem down the road for a few years, for apparently little electoral gain.

Justin Trudeau, meanwhile, went to Iqaluit in Nunavut, where he spoke about the North being on the “front lines” of climate change, and to meet with elders in that community. It also lets Trudeau make the claim that he’s the only leader to have visited the North during the campaign, for a few hours in any case.

Other election stories:

  • Maclean’s has some deeper analysis on the debate performance around Trudeau and Bill 21, Scheer and Indigenous issues, and Elizabeth May and the environment.
  • Here is a list of more misleading claims made during the debate.
  • Here’s a look at the parties policies on LGBT issues.
  • Here is yet another fact-check on the lie the Conservatives are propagating about the “secret” capital gains tax. Surprise – it’s a lie!
  • Here’s a profile of country singer and Conservative candidate George Canyon.
  • The ousted Conservative candidate in Burnaby is still running as an independent, but the ballot will still say “Conservative” because it was past the deadline.
  • Here’s a look at how the Bloc are making a comeback after they looked like they were about to slide into irrelevance after their party (briefly) split a year ago.

Good reads:

  • Syrian refugees who came to Canada after the last election are starting to become eligible to vote, and they are cherishing the ability to do so.
  • Canada’s failure to repatriate our foreign fighters could become a bigger problem if Turkey invades the Kurdish holdings in Syria where they are currently imprisoned.
  • The Canadian Forces have started cutting back on what they are reimbursing provincially-run hospitals when they treat military personnel, causing an uproar.
  • Those rumours of some suppressed story of Justin Trudeau’s departure from West Point Grey Academy are complete bullshit, and yet the Conservatives propagated it.
  • John Geddes has four takeaways from Monday’s debate.
  • Robert Hiltz expresses his displeasure over the whole sad affair.
  • Heather Scoffield notes that the immigration debate in this election has been relatively civil, but a robust economic discussion is also missing.
  • My column notes that Scheer’s plan to restore partisan appointments to the Senate is on the right path – but only within particular limits.

Want more Routine Proceedings? Become a patron and get exclusive new content.

2 thoughts on “Roundup: Hypothetical subways and more traffic

  1. I would have guessed Jagmeet Singh’s vote against the Ontario Sex Ed curriculum would have been a bigger deal for those prioritizing LGBT issues since Doug Ford and the Ont. P.C. got a lot of deserved flack for it.

    Reading your posts have kind of given me a different impression of the Philpott and Wilson Raybould. I saw the CPAC “Ridings to Watch” profile for Markham—Stouffville and journalist Laura DiBattista narrates how Philpott was “moved” from Cabinet after she spoke out for SNC-Lavalin and then she “quit” caucus all together over a matter of principal. Correct me on this, but I thought your posts were clear she resigned of her own accord and she timed it to embarrassed the PM by waiting until after he gone to Rideau Hall to a new Minister of Veteran Affairs so he’d have to go back again to Rideau Hall for her replacement. Why she resigned I don’t exactly get, but she certainly wasn’t removed? And she didn’t quit caucus, but she was expelled from caucus over her insisting to “Maclean’s” run her “there’s more to this story” interview with them on the same day the federal budget was released as well as her involvement in Wilson Raybould secretly recording her telephone conservations with the Clerk of the Privy Council? That’s not really a principal or policy disagreement, right? Or have been misreading and misremembering what you have written up on this?

    http://www.cpac.ca/en/programs/ridings-to-watch/episodes/66040670
    (It’s around the 4:25 mark)

    Sorry, I feel like I’m treating you like CPAC’s ombudsman.

    • Philpott resigned from Cabinet of her own accord, citing a matter of principle, but was later booted from caucus in part because of her media strategy of trying to spread drips of information across various outlets over several days.

Comments are closed.