Canada BS Thread

More Science bitches.

 

Duh now I get it.

 

Some of the changes were good, some were bad, but I know you don't give a shit so let's leave it at that.

 

Just saying I'm not shocked that a federal agency got it's budget destroyed . Which one didn't in the last decade , especially any of them that have any science in them

 

True. Somethings needed to change though. For example Pesticide registration. Companies used to have to complete several years of independent testing data at dozens of sites in Canada before registering a product. Even if the product had thousands of trials conducted worldwide that data was no good until a half decade of Canadian data was generated. This prevented companies from bringing certain products to he market based on the cost of registration. With fewer tools in a farmers tool kit IPM is infinitely harder, not to mention the fact that with less products available ecological stewardship becomes more and more costly. Once Health Canada took over PMRA pesticides were treated much like medicines which accelerated and cheapened registration which is good for the farmer and the consumer. Hopefully all the extra incoming bureaucracy will see that and not mess with the system for the sake of it.

 

Next up, the minister of nice hair.

 

http://www.nationalpost.com/m/wp/bl...abinet-compares-to-stephen-harpers-first-team

 

Oh wait, now it's been divided up between the minister of hair care products and the minister of best hair care techniques.

 

I'm very alarmed at the gender equality standard being set by this Parliament's cabinet. It should always be an equal opportunity system for any person of any gender/race/etc but the job should always go to the best candidate no matter whatever group you want to put them in.

 

They will allow Trudeau to pull double duty on that one. No one else wants to take the fall, so to speak.

 

I'm less alarmed at that as I was the fact that ministers under Harper did nothing in their portfolios except read statements written by the PMO

 

You know what they say about two wrongs

 

Not sure you could actually say any of the women chosen to the cabinet posts are not worthy of the post

 

I read Coyne's article already

 

I'm reserving judgment till they get a chance to govern but I don't see any reason that the choices for ministers are a problem

 

At first glance promising equal gender representation in the election before even knowing what talents were available seemed rather bold, risky, attention getting move, but then again there are many factors in past cabinet selections and merit certainly was not always high on the list of competing priorities. I'd agree with Pete here, there is gender representation and from their resume background, merit as well.

 

In other news , I drove in Vancouver for the first time in about 20 years today

 

Were there more worthy candidates?

I just don't like the 50/50 precedent. I could care less if the entire cabinet was female as long as they are better than the other candidates available. I doubt the 50/50 split worked out because the best candidates were selected, but who knows.

 

TBH similar promises are hurting private companies which is why they got rid of them and overwhelmingly went to best candidate hiring practices. To each their own though.

 

I also want to point out I work at a business with more female employees than male... because they were the best candidates for the jobs offered, not because our company made a silly promise to our shareholders.