Trudeau children's nannies being paid for by taxpayers - Polidicks

[QUOTE]Canadian taxpayers are paying the wages of two nannies hired to care for the children of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his wife, Sophie Grégoire-Trudeau, according to cabinet orders posted online.The hirings were approved late last week, with cabinet authorizing the appointment of the two women under the Official Residences Act as "special assistants at the prime minister's residence." They will be paid between $15 and $20 an hour during the day and $11 to $13 an hour for night shifts effective Nov. 4 — the day Trudeau and his cabinet were sworn in.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]One of the women hired was with the Trudeaus this past week on the prime minister's foreign trip that wrapped up Monday at the UN climate change conference in Paris. She posted photos online of the couple's two children who came on the trip.There were also shots of her with the Trudeaus' youngest child on Facebook visiting museums and at the hotel where they stayed in Paris. The prime minister's director of communications, Kate Purchase, said in an email that the two women who have been hired are doing more than childcare.[/QUOTE] [url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/justin-trudeau-nannies-taxpayers-1.3344533]Source[/url] [url=http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/justin-trudeau-nannies-hypocritical-1.3345671]other article on topic[/url] [url=http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/editorials/Trudeaus-nannies-a-petty-scandal-360060071.html]Further reading[/url]

Doesn't he get paid enough to hire them himself?

" They will be paid between $15 and $20 an hour during the day and $11 to $13 an hour for night shifts effective Nov. 4 — the day Trudeau and his cabinet were sworn in." Somehow I expected they would be paid way more... As it is, depending on what other duties they have at the PMs residence this is hardly a scandal isn't it?

Still a more appropriate use of taxpayer money than Mike Duffy's use of his official budget for personal expenses.

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;49236243]Doesn't he get paid enough to hire them himself?[/QUOTE] He's creating jobs though!

seriously this is such a non issue its retarded. Harper used to use tax payer money to get fucking haircuts.

Its kinda part of the deal. Its like complaining about how the PM gets government housing. Not a fan of Trudeau at all but this is silly.

[QUOTE=Elv02;49236328]" They will be paid between $15 and $20 an hour during the day and $11 to $13 an hour for night shifts effective Nov. 4 — the day Trudeau and his cabinet were sworn in." Somehow I expected they would be paid way more... As it is, depending on what other duties they have at the PMs residence this is hardly a scandal isn't it?[/QUOTE] 15-20$/hour is pretty good for a 24 hour job, they make 15-20$ for probably 12 hours of day work and 11-13$ for a few hours at night, thats more than most care workers, as far as their duty goes though they are probably also managing the residence groceries and more so its not a real issue

honestly i dont see the problem seems like a fair wage, its not like two nannies will sink the economy

I think the major complaint behind this is Trudeau blasting the Conservative childcare Program during the election by arguing that "families like his" didn't need taxpayer-funded childcare. I'd argue that the context is a little different. but the sentiment still stands. The wealthy in general can afford to provide childcare for their kids, but a major government official who will be away from his children to conduct services of the state should have that provided to him.

Cuz it's 2015 amirite?

[QUOTE=DEMONSKUL;49237248]Cuz it's 2015 amirite?[/QUOTE] you don't even have to support Trudeau to know this is a dumb complaint

Does it really matter? It's such a non issue. I don't even care if the prime minister gets his childcare paid for. Like that's sort of earned isn't it? I dunno.

[QUOTE=Aman;49237264]Does it really matter? It's such a non issue. I don't even care if the prime minister gets his childcare paid for. Like that's sort of earned isn't it? I dunno.[/QUOTE] They get salaries and shit, why can't they use that?

[QUOTE=Aman;49237264]Does it really matter? It's such a non issue. I don't even care if the prime minister gets his childcare paid for. Like that's sort of earned isn't it? I dunno.[/QUOTE] What the fuck kind of country could we call ourselves if we weren't even capable of providing official childcare for the most powerful married couple in the nation? What next, calls for 24 Sussex Drive to be converted into a rental duplex and sold off and the new PM has to have an aide organize renting an Ottawa apartment every time they take office? Being forced to tweet the PM's expense account in realtime? Replace the PM's official vehicles with a beater? This is bullshit.

The Conservatives are complaining that taxpayers are paying for the nannies, and the NDP are complaining that he's not paying them enough. This is unpopular on all fronts. Personally, I don't give a shit.

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;49237398]What the fuck kind of country could we call ourselves if we weren't even capable of providing official childcare for the most powerful married couple in the nation? What next, calls for 24 Sussex Drive to be converted into a rental duplex and sold off and the new PM has to have an aide organize renting an Ottawa apartment every time they take office? Being forced to tweet the PM's expense account in realtime? Replace the PM's official vehicles with a beater? This is bullshit.[/QUOTE] He has enough money to pay for a nanny. After ragging on the "rich people" for using benefits given to them by the government, he goes ahead and uses taxpayer money to pay for his own childcare services. It's called a double standard, if he has gone out of his way to announce the perils of giving the wealthy government childcare programs, why is he doing it himself? This can easily be passed off as "It's so little money, why care?" but its more of a principle, than it is a massive waste of money. Couple this with the recent discreditable behavior by the liberals that was set to light by an[URL="http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-auditor-report-1.3347035"] auditor general[/URL], and I view this government in a very similar light as the last one. [editline]3rd December 2015[/editline] Let's not forget when he also said we [URL="http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2015/07/21/justin-trudeau-wont-accept-his-familys-child-care-benefit.html"]"Wouldn't accept child-benefits"[/URL] Well, he didn't accept benfits, all right! He just used taxpayer money.

[QUOTE=itisjuly;49237282]They get salaries and shit, why can't they use that?[/QUOTE] Where does the PM's salary come from?

[QUOTE=Tuskin;49238328]Where does the PM's salary come from?[/QUOTE] Clearly avoiding the obvious. Public and Private finances are completely different things. He is being paid by the public however it is expected that the money used to hire and pay for theses nannies come from his private funds. We have the same problem here someone who isn't even a person serving in parliament got a massive amount of work done on buildings with public funds. Which is odd considering no where in our constitutions says that they can do this type of stuff, So, I'm sure its been added somewhere along the lines for us anyway.

If his wages are paid through tax money, and he then pays someone to do something (in the event that he DOESN'T use tax-payer money directly, though he is), isn't he still technically using tax-payer money?

[QUOTE=Zero-Point;49239475]If his wages are paid through tax money, and he then pays someone to do something (in the event that he DOESN'T use tax-payer money directly, though he is), isn't he still technically using tax-payer money?[/QUOTE] No, money that be is paid for his service to the government is his, not tax payers

[QUOTE=Zero-Point;49239475]If his wages are paid through tax money, and he then pays someone to do something (in the event that he DOESN'T use tax-payer money directly, though he is), isn't he still technically using tax-payer money?[/QUOTE] It's being paid by the taxpayer as much as pilfering money from the petty money box is being paid by your employer. Technically the money comes from the people paying you, but it was not money you were supposed to use as personal income.

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;49237398]What the fuck kind of country could we call ourselves if we weren't even capable of providing official childcare for the most powerful married couple in the nation? What next, calls for 24 Sussex Drive to be converted into a rental duplex and sold off and the new PM has to have an aide organize renting an Ottawa apartment every time they take office? Being forced to tweet the PM's expense account in realtime? Replace the PM's official vehicles with a beater? This is bullshit.[/QUOTE] Meanwhile "TaxPayers federations" ignore shit like Harper and provincial governments not allowing bidding on BILLION dollar contracts.

If this is fine, where should the line be drawn?

[QUOTE=MatheusMCardoso;49244803]If this is fine, where should the line be drawn?[/QUOTE] I don't see the issue with him using this, a world leader isn't going to be able to be there for his kids as much as any other parent. As long as it isn't an obnoxious amount of money it should be treated as if he's paying staff, which he is.

[QUOTE=MattSif;49246045]I don't see the issue with him using this, a world leader isn't going to be able to be there for his kids as much as any other parent. As long as it isn't an obnoxious amount of money it should be treated as if he's paying staff, which he is.[/QUOTE] Why does the taxpayer need to be involved, though? He can afford to pay it himself, just as all the other "rich" Canadians can.

This isn't shocking news. His security is paid for by taxpayers, too. What, should he have to hire private security?

[QUOTE=MattSif;49246045]I don't see the issue with him using this, a world leader isn't going to be able to be there for his kids as much as any other parent. As long as it isn't an obnoxious amount of money it should be treated as if he's paying staff, which he is.[/QUOTE] A world leader as any hard working father also.

[QUOTE=TheFilmSlacker;49248948]People are freaking out like he's taking most of their paychecks to fund his nannies. Honestly, is this even an issue?[/QUOTE] To me, its less about the hard numbers and more about the hypocrisy of the situation.

In other news, the gardeners and the guys renovating 24 Sussex is also paid for by taxpayers money. [editline]5th December 2015[/editline] Seriously, do we honestly have nothing against this guy that we literally have to scrape the bottom of the barrel to get at him?