Press Feed
Pages Menu

Ettore Fiorani

Ettore Fiorani is a student in Criminology and Political Science at the University of Toronto.

CPC Leadership – The Case for Kevin O’Leary

Despite not having officially announced his candidacy for the leadership of the Conservative Party of Canada, business magnate Kevin O’Leary is effectively in the running. On Monday, O’Leary held a luncheon for Conservative Members of Parliament in Ottawa. At the luncheon, attended by roughly 20 Conservative Members of Parliament and Senators, O’Leary delivered a speech. Throughout his speech, O’Leary took shots at Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, dubbing him “surfer dude.” He expressed frustration over the management of the economy, and said he can beat Trudeau in 2019. Can he? Right now, it’s hard to definitively answer that question. Considering Trudeau is only in his first term, that will be a daunting task, but O’Leary will shake things up more than any of the other 14 declared candidates currently in the race. And that alone makes him a top contender for the Tory leadership. What does “Mr. Wonderful” bring to the race? While he doesn’t need an introduction as much as the other candidates, it’s worth going over O’Leary’s background first. His background differs greatly from the other candidates, and indeed other prominent politicians. That in itself is one of his potential strengths. Kevin O’Leary was born to an Irish father and a Lebanese-Canadian mother in 1954 in Montreal. After his father’s early passing, O’Leary took his mother as a source of inspiration. He often credits her with teaching him about savings, and inspiring him to make the jump into the world of business. In addition, O’Leary was inspired by seeing the frustrations and hardships a middle-class family, and even more so a single mother, often face. After studying business and years working in the world of business, O’Leary was involved in deals worth millions of dollars, if not more, by the 1990s. As an outsider, Kevin O’Leary can appeal to… Read More

Setting the Record Straight – Why Peterson is Right

  For over a month now, the University of Toronto has been engulfed in a debate over free speech and transgender rights. These issues are always present on university and college campuses. For example, we’ve often seen controversy over offensive Halloween costumes, or whatever else happens to be offending the prima donnas on the radical left. Psychology professor Jordan Peterson, however, has brought these controversial issues to the limelight with some comments he made during the start of the school year. Peterson’s comments have gained him friends and foes alike, not to mention they’ve made him a bit of a celebrity (his Twitter following has soared, and he is a coveted interviewee in Canada and abroad). So, what were these comments? To sum it up, the opinion that has surrounded Peterson with controversy is his staunch opposition to Bill C-16, which would see the Criminal Code and Canadian Human Rights Act amended to include gender identity protected by discrimination provisions. It seems the bill is on its way to becoming law, having just passed the house, with only 40 Conservative MPs voting against it. If Bill C-16 becomes law, discrimination based on gender identity would result in punishments such as a monetary penalty. There is no mention of jail time as punishment in the legislation, but Professor Peterson has asked what would happen if one failed to pay the fees that would result from the discrimination. Peterson refuses to use gender-neutral pronouns, even if people ask him to. Some of these pronouns would be “ze”, “xe” or “they” (singular).  He has no problem using “she” for trans women, however. The Professor is worried that the prospective law would result in the government essentially forcing people to use specific language, and punish people who fail to use that language. And it’s… Read More

The Liberals tabled two bad ideas last week

Last week, the Liberal government hinted that they are considering two policies that might leave many scratching their heads: lowering language requirements for immigrants, and implementing a “guaranteed minimum income” policy. John McCallum, a longstanding and influential MP for the Liberal Party, said that his government would consider lowering the language requirements of immigrants seeking to become Canadian citizens. It is not rare to see McCallum being at the forefront of changes proposed by the Liberals. After all, he is now the Minister of one of many portfolios Trudeau has given a new, liberal, social justice-ish name (departments such as Citizenship and Immigration and Foreign Affairs have been re-named Immigration, Refugees, and Citizenship, and Global Affairs respectively). However, this idea now being considered sounds unusually odd, and frankly bad, even if it comes from the quirky and blindly partisan John McCallum. Per McCallum, the consideration comes from the number of immigrants and non-citizens who have reported to the government, through their MPs office or otherwise, that they are having trouble meeting the language requirements necessary to be granted Canadian citizenship. That may be an issue, but is lowering standards really how we should fix this problem? There are many things pointing towards this being the wrong approach. First of all, it is absolutely clear that Canada has two official languages: English and French. It has always been an expectation for immigrants to learn the language of their new country. Furthermore, it is obviously beneficial that people learn the languages of the land as best as they can. If people don’t, there are many foreseeable problems. For example, if someone does not speak English in Ontario, or French in Quebec, they might have trouble finding a job. In Europe, failed integration of immigrants is a widespread problem. In Canadian cities like… Read More

#RealChange, from the Establishment?

  Justin Trudeau, in his quest to replicate Obama's "Change" campaign, has actually managed to convince some Canadians that a Trudeau government will be the change people have been looking for. Some are perplexed by this, as evidence only points out Justin Trudeau is as establishment and out-of-touch as one can be.     Let's begin with the man himself. Justin is no Obama. President Obama, if he knows about Justin, might feel offended by the Liberals attempting to replicate his campaign. Obama, like him or not, is a self-made man. He grew up in a single-parent home, put himself through school, and eventually made it to the higher echelons of American society. President Obama is also a much more serious leader, as he refrains from taking part in the bizarrely childish behaviour Justin often does (i.e. making penis jokes while speaking about the mission against ISIS). Unlike Justin, he has matured through experience and age. Obama is a serious, experienced, and self-made leader.   Justin, in contrast, was born an elite. As he himself put it, he "won the birth lottery". All his life, he grew up enjoying the spoils of being one of the top Laurentian elites in the country. He grew up in the Prime Minister's residence, hanging out with European royal families, being an (self-described) "international traveler", and so on.   No one should resent him for his privilege. After all, winning the birth lottery just happened, he obviously didn't choose to be born.   However, Justin never really used his privilege to make himself a more well-rounded person. He mainly focused on snow-boarding, acting, and whitewater rafting before becoming an MP. He didn't use his privilege to become a charity champion like Bono, or a renowned businessman like Mitt Romney (also born in privilege). Point… Read More

Disgraceful Trudeau and the NDP dead wrong on refugee crisis

Starting Wednesday night, images of three-year-old refugee, Aylan Kurdi, being carried out of the Turkish shores dominated the news as well as social media. Naturally, the news turned the stomachs of many and intensified the spotlight on the ongoing refugee crisis stemming from the Middle East. Unsurprisingly, political leaders rushed to make the expected public remarks about having to do more, what a tragedy it is, and so on. Chris Alexander, Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, suspended his re-election campaign in Ajax to go back to Ottawa and deal with the crisis. On the opposition’s side, Thomas Mulcair gave emotional remarks, demanding more action, but also had the decency and temperament to stress that it is not the time to point fingers over such a shocking tragedy. Justin Trudeau, however, failed to avoid controversy once again. The Liberal leader squarely placed the blame on Minister Alexander and the Conservative Government, thereby spearheading an already blossoming politicization of the tragic event. He accused the Minister of having no compassion, and that he couldn’t suddenly find compassion in the middle of an election campaign. Interesting he said that, as it appears Trudeau’s compassion for refugees fleeing ISIS suddenly reawakened when he saw the viral picture of the dead boy. Before that, Trudeau hadn’t spent much of his campaign bringing up the thousands of people ISIS has displaced, and the many more it has slaughtered. On top of this, many media outlets misleadingly claimed that Minister Alexander had personally rejected the application of Kurdi’s family. Fortunately, the media was eventually forced to report the truth, after the government confirmed there had been no application for entry into Canada by the family of the deceased boy. Whether Trudeau’s attack and the media’s misleading framing of the tragedy are classless or not comes down to… Read More
Page 1 of 212