- i don't have any direct criticism on the transitioning workers section, but i'll point out that this isn't really my concern. i mean, it's a problem that kind of solves itself, if you actually do this right. i am in support of retraining programs.

- i don't really care about the tax code, one way or the other. you're neither going to attract me with a good tax policy nor repel me with a bad one. it's just irrelevant to me.

- with the retreat of the ndp from the left and towards the neo-liberal consensus, the greens have recently become the last alter-globalization party. if you're still opposed to nafta, regardless of the changes to it, the greens are the only party that still opposes it, and other deals like it. they are the only party opposed to the isds provisions. since 2015, this has become another reason to actively support them.

=================

immigration is something where i may have less agreement with them, although they don't seem to be terrible on this, either. they're not explicitly arguing for increases in immigration. they want more money for integration, including for english and french instruction, which is good. they want to ban the "temporary foreign workers program", which is good. they want to focus on professional accreditation, which is good. i would also support policies designed to strengthen civil rights at the border, and ensure that the rule of law is being upheld for non-citizens.

i don't know if being a climate refugee ought to be grounds for opening the doors, though. my positions on this are subtle:  i don't support deportation in much of any context, even for criminals (i don't think that foreign countries appreciate us deporting criminals. put them in jail, and try to rehabilitate them.), but i think you have to have a good reason to get in, because we don't have infinite resources. i mean, there's a contradiction here: the greens know we don't have infinite economic growth, so they should conclude that we can't have infinite refugee inflows. i think the primary policy ought to be to help potential climate refugees adapt by working with their local governments - and that this should be seen as a primary foreign aid goal.

i don't think that we should abolish the safe third country agreement with the united states, either. that's a knee-jerk reaction to a president you don't like, it's not a carefully thought-through long term policy. we will come to regret that.

i do not think that family reunification should be given priority status in evaluating immigration or refugee claims.

and, i would oppose giving "cultural institutions" charitable status, as well. rather, if there's a tax policy i'd be likely to actively support, it would be in taxing churches, mosques and other religious groups.

but, these are minor concerns to me, overall, and my disagreement with this part of the platform is unlikely to prevent me from voting for the party. immigration is not a ballot issue for me. i would rather work to shift the party's positions on this through internal debate than attack it from the outside, as this is not where my core political allegiances exist, one way or the other. but, i'm not going to silence or censor myself, either - i'm going to insist on the debate, and insist it's up for debate.

======================

- while i would support converting the relevant vehicles to electric cars, i'm not a particularly strong advocate for postal workers. we should keep a state-run system of easily accessible post offices, but i don't mind picking up my own mail. again: that's not a ballot issue.

================

the section on sustainable farming is refreshing to see in the sense that it avoids most of the nonsense you see floating around on the internet today (although, i wonder how some people would react to that, if they're legitimately concerned and don't know better.).i just have a few minor points.

while i agree with the need to cut down on pesticide use as well as the need to cut down on transportation costs, i am far more concerned about the safety of urban farming than i am concerned about, say, gmos. i'd be more likely to eat a gmo tomato grown in a field than i would be to eat an organic tomato grown in a rooftop in toronto, and the reason is that the air and soil quality is likely to be terrible, in the latter. in a lot of ways, this is a question of regulation. but, due to toxicity concerns, i'd argue for labeling of urban products, so people know what they're getting. i like the controlled conditions for urban greenhouses (perhaps in conjunction with things like hydroponics) better than rooftops or backyards....

i would also like to see some kind of explicit federal support for the idea of insect farming, as it's a more healthy, sustainable and humane way than veganism to generate protein for human consumption.

lastly, while it's mostly a provincial issue, doing something with compost would help with that 2.5% from landfills.

=============================

the fisheries thing is complicated, and while i support management, i'll leave that one to the experts, other than to point something out - being where we are in canada, so long as we're not overfishing, there's almost no way we can lose on this. swordfishing in nova scotia? we have salmon in bc, how about tuna in newfoundland? quotas are key...and relevant quotas that understand changing migration patterns are paramount.

===================

- as a low income artist, the best way to support me is via a livable gai and through actualizing real, affordable housing. i'm never going to sell my product; it will be left to fiuture generations to evaluate it.

- what are the serious opportunities for industrial cannabis waste to aid in the shift to bio-plastics? but, that's an r&d question, something that needs funding.