Canadian Politics: Not so boring, actually.

[Saya]

Right, I figured with the stability of our government right now it deserves to move out of the Elections thread, although we might not actually be far off from another election after all.

http://ca.news.yaho o.com/s/capress/...iscal_update_2

OTTAWA - Liberal and New Democrat MPs were getting details today of a coalition agreement the two parties have worked out to replace Stephen Harper's minority Conservative government.


The parties each called emergency caucus meetings to lay out the plan under which the Tories would lose power to Canada's first coalition government in 91 years.

Negotiators from both parties were still finessing the deal in the early-morning hours, but the Liberals had agreed over the weekend to give the New Democrats 25 per cent of cabinet positions.


Under the proposed deal, the Liberals would hold the key cabinet positions of finance, treasury board and deputy prime minister.

What has not been agreed to as of yet is where NDP Leader Jack Layton - or other New Democrats - would sit around the cabinet table.


Just who leads the Liberal party, and becomes prime minister, also remained far from resolved early Monday.

The Liberals were split into four camps on the issue, although Stephane Dion has been overseeing the negotiations, a source told The Canadian Press. But there was concern in Liberal ranks about the public perception of installing Dion as prime minister.


He was rejected by voters in a general election just six weeks ago and has said he will step down after the party chooses a new leader in May.

Sources close to Liberal MP and presumed frontrunner Michael Ignatieff say he wants little to do with an agreement he did not oversee that may handcuff him for years if he is elected leader.


There had been reports that Ignatieff had agreed to lead the coalition.

But leadership contender Bob Rae, who met with Ignatieff over the weekend, said the reports were inaccurate.


The two parties had agreed to jointly govern for two-and-a-half years, said an NDP source who is involved in the talks. But the Bloc Quebecois, which would not officially be part of the coalition, was not prepared to give them so long a lease on life.

The coalition government's survival would depend on Bloc support.


The Conservatives' frantic efforts to scupper their defeat will include a further release of secretly recorded conversations from a weekend NDP caucus meeting that outlines their wishlist in any coalition government.

Rae said internal Liberal party issues could be resolved to ensure a workable coalition that would focus initially on providing the economy with much-needed stimulus as the country moves into recession.

So apparently the NDP and the Liberals are going to team up and replace Stephen Harper! Of course this depends on the action of the Bloc as well.

I'm going to wait until I see what they plan to do, however, before I throw my support behind this. On one hand, Harper will be gone and we will have a leftist government, which 62% of Canadians voted for. On the other hand, it might be hard for the Liberals and NDP to get along with the Bloc and smooth it out. I also wonder who will be the prime minister.

[$haDe]

Honestly, US is just A COUNTRY !!

Licking it ass is a sick and abominable way to gain prestige and fame under its shadow.

ps. Off-topic ?

[Saya]

Not really, Harper is in love with Bush after all XD but the main reason they are giving for this is that he has given no plan to fix the economy. You know how America had the bailout, and every other Western country had some sort of stimulus package? We didn't.

[Saya]

http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/548865

So the Bloc agreed to support the NDP and the Liberals, and there was supposed to be a confidence vote to oust Harper, but Harper got permission from the Governer General to close Parliament until January 26. I didn't even know she could do that! I thought the Governer General's job was just symbolic.

So there's democracy for you folks. "We make up 62% of the majority! We should lead! Lets vote on it!" "........No."

Although this might play out well for the coalition, they have time to plan now who's going to be our prime minister.

[$haDe]

Is it to late to reply ?

Originally Posted by Saya

Although this might play out well for the coalition, they have time to plan now who's going to be our prime minister.

Sound like conspiracy.

[Saya]

Back in the world of "They can DO that?!!!" Not only can a leader close down Parliament to avoid a vote of confidence, but apparently something I missed was one of the reasons WHY the coalition was outraged.

"The Tories precipitated the constitutional crisis by delivering a fiscal update last week that lacked economic stimulus plans but would instead have cut public financing for federal political parties and banned public sector unions from striking for two years."

http://www.google.com/hostednews/can...gnzRX2kw9-vtEA

They can ban strikes?!!!

Also, Dion has stepped down as leader of the Liberals, Michael Ignatieff is the leader now and may very well be our Prime Minister in January

[LaBelleDameSansMerci]

Originally Posted by Saya

http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/548865

So the Bloc agreed to support the NDP and the Liberals, and there was supposed to be a confidence vote to oust Harper, but Harper got permission from the Governer General to close Parliament until January 26.

Yeah, the GG is the one who technically can decide whether to grant an election, give it to a coalition, or say "Work it out."
http://www.gg.ca/gg/rr/index_e.asp
I think the GG could be quite a phenomenal force. She signs bills and can refuse to sign them if she thinks there's a good reason not to.
She also gives out Orders of Canada and Military Merit...
She's also supposed to make sure that Canada always has a PM and government. So if someone dies, she has to make sure that a new PM is selected as soon as possible.
"in times of emergency or special circumstances, exercising the special personal authority of the Governor General to appoint or dismiss a prime minister or dissolve Parliament. This authority is rarely used." (http://canadaonline.about.com/cs/gg/a/ggrole.htm)
But for the most part, yes, the GG is symbolic, and just signs stuff "on advice of the PM/cabinet ministers"
Hehehehe.... she pierogied parliament. XD

And yes, they can ban strikes if they think it's in the interest of the public. I think Ontario has banned teacher strikes, as well as a number of other provinces (Link to article here). I think there are quite a few branches of the public sector that we could miss for a while.

I don't like Harper. I know that they'd all probably like to be dictator however deep down, but Harper shows it too much...

[Saya]

So, she's like the Queen of Canada?

[LaBelleDameSansMerci]

Kind of. She's the Queen of England's representative in Canada. She's here so we don't have to go running off to England every time we want to do ANYTHING.

[$haDe]

Originally Posted by LaBelleDameSansMerci

Kind of. She's the Queen of England's representative in Canada. She's here so we don't have to go running off to England every time we want to do ANYTHING.

I thought she don't have any "real power".


Isn't it more like people respected her and obey her will ?


or She DOES hold a power ?

[Saya]

She does have power, evidently, but this is the first time I've heard of a governor general step in and override Parliament.

[LaBelleDameSansMerci]

In 1926 the GG refused to grant an election to MacKenzie King and instead gave the government to the conservatives. The GG does have powers and has used them on occasion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reserve_power#Canada

[$haDe]

*nods*


It's more complicated than I expected.

I'm thinking about moving to Canada or... just go to the college.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by LaBelleDameSansMerci

In 1926 the GG refused to grant an election to MacKenzie King and instead gave the government to the conservatives. The GG does have powers and has used them on occasion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reserve_power#Canada

I really regret that in highschool I was unable to take Canadian History, I got stuck with Geography.

I think I now better understand the view that we should leave the British Commonwealth.

*nods*


It's more complicated than I expected.

I'm thinking about moving to Canada or... just go to the college.

Neat You'd probably end up in BC, right? Its gorgeous there.

[$haDe]

Originally Posted by Saya

I really regret that in highschool I was unable to take Canadian History, I got stuck with Geography.

I'll take mine harder and finish weaving your unfinished tales, Great Saya..

Originally Posted by Saya

Neat You'd probably end up in BC, right? Its gorgeous there.

Of course, it has to be BC.

I heard the weather is like in Thailand.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by $haDe

I'll take mine harder and finish weaving your unfinished tales, Great Saya..




Of course, it has to be BC.

I heard the weather is like in Thailand.

More like the weather in Thailand than the rest of Canada I suspect Coastal BC at least is pretty warm. I'd love to move there myself but its pretty damn expensive to live there, although I'm told its more than worth the cost.

Actually getting there would be half the battle, I'm on the opposite end of the country, it would be cheaper for me to fly to England XD

[LaBelleDameSansMerci]

Coastal BC only gets down to about 2 or 3 degrees C in the winter. Its absolutely balmy compared to the rest of Canada.
It's going down to -18 tonight, here.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by LaBelleDameSansMerci

Coastal BC only gets down to about 2 or 3 degrees C in the winter. Its absolutely balmy compared to the rest of Canada.
It's going down to -18 tonight, here.

Ouch >.< it only ever gets that cold here with windchill.

Our weather is being weird, it was freezing yesterday but earlier this evening I was outside in a tank top, it was that warm o.O

[7734¯7IA3]

Originally Posted by Saya

http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/548865

So the Bloc agreed to support the NDP and the Liberals, and there was supposed to be a confidence vote to oust Harper, but Harper got permission from the Governor General to close Parliament until January 26. I didn't even know she could do that! I thought the Governor General's job was just symbolic.

So there's democracy for you folks. "We make up 62% of the majority! We should lead! Lets vote on it!" "........No."

Although this might play out well for the coalition, they have time to plan now who's going to be our prime minister.

LMFAO! She has ALOT MORE power then YOU think! But what's really disturbing (this this should also disturb YOU), is that we the people of Canada did NOT elect her - she was (illegally) appointed by an irresponsible jack-assed-sponsorship-scandalizing "Fiberal" Government...


As for your 62% majority, you need to define WHO is the Majority???? You should keep in mind that the NDP, Fiberal, and SEPARATIST Bloc, have totally different policies...The Majority of ppl did NOT vote for disparate policies...This problem is due to two major issues:

1. The number of seats in any riding, and
2. That the Canadian economy (and therefore jobs/public opinion) is divisible between western (energy) and eastern (manufacturing) economies. When one does good the other does bad...

The solution to this problem is to have the winning party decided by popular vote - not on how many seats is won in one given area- this is what caused all this mess in the first place. The idea of a "riding" is totally archaic in today's modern age...It needs to be replaced with popular vote to decide, once and for all, who the Canadian people voted for...

LMFAO! when I saw the coalition signing the biggest lie in history, I immediately thought of the Three Stooges! Man what a fucking farce...

[Saya]

Originally Posted by 7734¯7IA3

LMFAO! She has ALOT MORE power then YOU think! But what's really disturbing (this this should also disturb YOU), is that we the people of Canada did NOT elect her - she was (illegally) appointed by an irresponsible jack-assed-sponsorship-scandalizing "Fiberal" Government...

Nope, it wasn't illegal, the people of Canada never elected the Govenor General, technically the Queen of England appoints her based on the advice of the prime minister.

As for your 62% majority, you need to define WHO is the Majority???? You should keep in mind that the NDP, Fiberal, and SEPARATIST Bloc, have totally different policies...The Majority of ppl did NOT vote for disparate policies...This problem is due to two major issues:

1. The number of seats in any riding, and
2. That the Canadian economy (and therefore jobs/public opinion) is divisible between western (energy) and eastern (manufacturing) economies. When one does good the other does bad...

The solution to this problem is to have the winning party decided by popular vote - not on how many seats is won in one given area- this is what caused all this mess in the first place. The idea of a "riding" is totally archaic in today's modern age...It needs to be replaced with popular vote to decide, once and for all, who the Canadian people voted for...

LMFAO! when I saw the coalition signing the biggest lie in history, I immediately thought of the Three Stooges! Man what a fucking farce...

The riding system is generally reflecting the popular vote. If we went with the popular vote the Conservatives still wouldn't have a majority. We'd still have this mess.

There is no majority, but 62% of Canadians didn't want Harper, so why should he be prime minister? Its better for the three parties to work together and be better reflective of how Canadians tend to have leftist values.

[LaBelleDameSansMerci]

Originally Posted by 7734¯7IA3

This problem is due to two major issues:

1. The number of seats in any riding, and
2. That the Canadian economy (and therefore jobs/public opinion) is divisible between western (energy) and eastern (manufacturing) economies. When one does good the other does bad...

Ummm... There's one seat per riding.
The problem is that we don't have any sort of proportional representation. The Green party should have a lot more seats, and the conservatives should have fewer.
The first-past-the-post rather screws over the little parties that have low levels of support spread out all over the country, and gives a disproportionatly large amount of power to parties that have concentrated support (like the Bloc)

Originally Posted by 7734¯7IA3

It needs to be replaced with popular vote to decide, once and for all, who the Canadian people voted for...

I hope you don't mean "forever." People's tastes and ideologies change, you know. That's why we have periodical elections.

[7734¯7IA3]

Originally Posted by Saya

Nope, it wasn't illegal, the people of Canada never elected the Govenor General, technically the Queen of England appoints her based on the advice of the prime minister.

Then it is also an archaic system that needs to be replaced by popular vote just like electing any other leaders who have considerable "power"...Hell, just do away with Monarchy altogether...

Originally Posted by Saya

The riding system is generally reflecting the popular vote. If we went with the popular vote the Conservatives still wouldn't have a majority. We'd still have this mess.

You're totally wrong on that front, because most of the ridings are situated in eastern Canada, i.e., the SPUTTERING Manufacturing sector, which does NOT represent the entire country; it represents those places where there are a lot of ridings based on population of MANUFACTURING not Energy/resources!, which is a really stupid and UNFAIR way of gauging popular opinion...

Originally Posted by Saya

There is no majority, but 62% of Canadians didn't want Harper, so why should he be prime minister? Its better for the three parties to work together and be better reflective of how Canadians tend to have leftist values.

But this is where your assertion is in error; most Canadians do not have leftist values, if you know what "leftist" really means. If most Canadians had Leftist values, they (ALL 62%) would have voted for the NDP. The Fiberals are the "lets-take-a-sample-of-the-popular-opinions" type of government that will follow what ever the "flavor-of-the-month will go, **chuckles** , they seem to have an "identitiy crisis" (70 seats proves that NOBODY wants them)- I'm sure neither NDP'ers, nor Separatist would like that. And as for the Separatists, well, the name implies the policy -a Quebec that is separate from Canada- which I would agree with if they would finally grow some balls and assert themselves, instead of fear mongering and constantly blackmailing the federal government into making special concessions for "poor old Quebec"...LMFAO!!! Ya know what?? If ya wanna get outta da Country just say so!!! Her Majesty's Bloody English Canada will be more than Happy to oblige! Just pay your fair share of the Federal Deficit and get the fuck out!

But don't get me wrong...I like Quebec and have relatives there but the Bloc??? Pffffft!

[7734¯7IA3]

Originally Posted by LaBelleDameSansMerci

I hope you don't mean "forever." People's tastes and ideologies change, you know. That's why we have periodical elections.

Yes, they change but not in a span of even as little as four years...We've been stuck in this blasted postmodernist era since WW2 ended.. and I hate it! I long for another artistic movement to obliterate postmodernism....and yes this time its FOREVER! **laughs like sideshow bob** HAA HA, Ha,HA!!!!

Dammit, wish I had a video to show you.....Oh wait how about this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=beCcl...e=channel_page

ROFLMFAO

[Saya]

Originally Posted by 7734¯7IA3

Then it is also an archaic system that needs to be replaced by popular vote just like electing any other leaders who have considerable "power"...Hell, just do away with Monarchy altogether...

That I do agree with.

You're totally wrong on that front, because most of the ridings are situated in eastern Canada, i.e., the SPUTTERING Manufacturing sector, which does NOT represent the entire country; it represents those places where there are a lot of ridings based on population of MANUFACTURING not Energy/resources!, which is a really stupid and UNFAIR way of gauging popular opinion...

http://www40.statcan.gc.ca/l01/cst01/demo02a-eng.htm

Are you saying Ontario gets more ridings because they manufacture, and Alberta gets less ridings because they have oil? Its calculated by population, and about half of Canadians live in Ontario and Quebec. Newfoundland has oil resources too but we have a very small population, so we only got seven seats.

But this is where your assertion is in error; most Canadians do not have leftist values, if you know what "leftist" really means. If most Canadians had Leftist values, they (ALL 62%) would have voted for the NDP. The Fiberals are the "lets-take-a-sample-of-the-popular-opinions" type of government that will follow what ever the "flavor-of-the-month will go, **chuckles** , they seem to have an "identitiy crisis" (70 seats proves that NOBODY wants them)- I'm sure neither NDP'ers, nor Separatist would like that. And as for the Separatists, well, the name implies the policy -a Quebec that is separate from Canada- which I would agree with if they would finally grow some balls and assert themselves, instead of fear mongering and constantly blackmailing the federal government into making special concessions for "poor old Quebec"...LMFAO!!! Ya know what?? If ya wanna get outta da Country just say so!!! Her Majesty's Bloody English Canada will be more than Happy to oblige! Just pay your fair share of the Federal Deficit and get the fuck out!

But don't get me wrong...I like Quebec and have relatives there but the Bloc??? Pffffft!

We have leftist values, but I did not say most Canadians are socialists. Back when we had the Liberal minority, a poll was done that concluded that over half of Canadians like the idea of a Liberal minority supported by the NDP, being left leaning.

http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article/1...-minority-poll

The NDP while being the only clearly leftist party, the Liberals always do try to appeal to NDP voters by saying they are all for social programs.

While the Bloc's main focus is Quebec independance, they do have a stance on issues, and is also left leaning:

http://www.ctv.ca/mini/election2006/...rint_bloc.html

[7734¯7IA3]

Originally Posted by Saya

Are you saying Ontario gets more ridings because they manufacture, and Alberta gets less ridings because they have oil? Its calculated by population, and about half of Canadians live in Ontario and Quebec. Newfoundland has oil resources too but we have a very small population, so we only got seven seats.

I didn't say that...YOU said that...Its simply that the ridings have not changed to reflect a changing Canadian economy- that's what sucks...And Yes, Ontario/Quebec has more ridings because Manufacturing is an older economy, nay was the backbone of the Canadian economy since WW2, so it follows that more ridings would be in Ontario/Quebec...I mean, c'mon,. politicians aren't stupid.. If it wasn't for manufacturing we wouldn't have an annoying separatist bloc to deal with....

Originally Posted by Saya

We have leftist values, but I did not say most Canadians are socialists. Back when we had the Liberal minority, a poll was done that concluded that over half of Canadians like the idea of a Liberal minority supported by the NDP, being left leaning.

I didn't say Canadians were Socialist either...But in any case, you do know that when ANY party is in power at any time, a "poll" will always reflect the populations' disapproval of the CURRENT government's policies/agenda...(there's always something that's irking Canadians) So that is no surprise and is to be expected, but still does not support your argument because it is heavily context dependent.... i.e., "back when....." i.e., article was made in 2004...when the West was doing well and the eastern manufacturing was just starting to go downhill...LOL! I don't care about 2004. In fact, 2004 was when the eastern part of the country was crying because the manufacturing sector was starting to sputter...I foresaw this long ago, and thank almighty God that I didn't make ANY investments- just blue chip-Baby!....Today, the Canadian population is far better educated and I'm glad for it...

Originally Posted by Saya

The NDP while being the only clearly leftist party, the Liberals always do try to appeal to NDP voters by saying they are all for social programs.

This plays VERY nicely into my argument that the"Fiberals are the 'lets-take-a-sample-of-the-popular-opinions' type of government that will follow what ever the 'flavor-of-the-month will go'"...By appealing to the NDP'ers they are in fact lying to them, (by "saying they are all for social programs") because the reality of corporate capitalism soon sets in and they have to choose between social programs or generating thousands of potential jobs for the private sector...jobs, which, in turn pay the necessary taxes to fund such social programs....

Originally Posted by Saya

While the Bloc's main focus is Quebec independance, they do have a stance on issues, and is also left leaning:

http://www.ctv.ca/mini/election2006/...rint_bloc.html

2006, in my mind, (and every other rational Canadian mind) is history. What was the average price of Gas in 2006? How was Alberta doing in 2006? How was Ontario doing in 2006? What's more disturbing in that report is the blatantly PREDOMINANT appearance of the word "Quebec". Sorry, I'm not convinced...As I have asserted before, the name implies it all...separatist equates to nothing less than a separatist, and as far as I'm concerned, the sooner they leave, the better, so that that rest of Her Majesty's Bloody English Canada can get on with its "agenda"...