Should the West separate?

[dudlee]

In canada's 1867 constitution that is still used today it clearly states the equation used for representation.It is, you take the population of all the provinces and divide it by 279.That equation is written in canada's constitution, READ IT.

If you divide the population by 279 that equals 120,000 people per representative.BC, Alberta,Saskatchewan, Ontario,Manitoba, all follow closely to this formula, but Quebec's ratio is 1 mp per 70,000 people .Quebec has 1.675 mla's to our 1.

Is that fair?Or is that favoritism?

[NAB]

I think there have been modifications since 1867 dudlee, even before the BNA Act of 1915.

I did come across this..

"The British North America Act, 1915, introduced a further restriction to the principle of Representation by Population as it stipulated that a province would always be entitled "to a number of members in the House of Commons not less than the number of Senators representing such province." This has become article 51A of the Constitution Act."

Quebec (formerly Lower Canada?) has a long history of trying to avoid dominance by the rest of Canada (Upper Canada, now for the most part Ontario, in early times).

Nab

[FunkyBunch]

Also I'm pretty sure you can't take away seats from a province due to population changes.

[Glacier]

Also I'm pretty sure you can't take away seats from a province due to population changes.

you are correct. You cannot lose seats, you can only add seats to provinces.

[usquebaugh]

Do you admit that the 1926 appointment of a Coalition government didn't work and that is why it has never been granted since that time? and that this attempt is both based in lies and deceit?

No. Just because something has failed once, doesn't meant that is necessarily bound to fail again. The only truly dangerous precedent set by all this is the Governor-General agreeing to the PM's request to prorogue Parliament when the PM is faced with a non-confidence vote. That is something only dictators do. Only someone who fancies himself the king of Canada would dare suggest that the legal creation of a coalition government is a "coup." Those are the sort of delusions of grandeur Conservatives used to accuse Trudeau of, but he never stooped to the ridiculous level that Harper has. Harper is clearly one of the worse PMs Canada has ever had (though, of course, the distinction of the worst clearly belongs to Mulroney, Harper's bosom-buddy). If he's going to violate the Charter of Rights and Freedoms with a minority government, then Canada should definitely never hand Harper and the CPC a majority.

So, no, I don't believe this attempt it not based in lies and deceit. You're just parroting the Conservative-spin they sent out to their MPs, and apparently to their local henchmen.

You still haven't admitted that Harper wrote that letter in 2004. Still in denial?

Also, will you admit that the Conservative government has cut funding to medical marijuana research and is only fuelling the need for Canadians to rely on large (US-based) pharmaceutical companies? The Liberals nearly had it legalized, until the god-damned US stepped in. Thankfully, Obama is considering legalization, but we'll need a Canadian government that is receptive to such bold change, and it won't be the Conservatives who will answer the call to benefit Canadians. The only way to end the prohibition on marijuana is to elect a federal government that isn't the spitting-image of the US Republicans.

[Crying-Angel]

This whole thing is a farce. THE PEOPLE voted Harper in. I do not believe that the politicians who are completely out of touch with most of Canada anyway, should have the right to dissolve the government that WE CREATED.

Why do we have so many whiny politics in this country. It is embarrassing. Instead of all this energy being put in to their own interests maybe they should start putting the energy to better use and start working together on the things that the citizens of Canada care about and NEED!

How about looking after the elderly, the disabled, our educations systems, our health systems, the juvenile act...need I go on?
It is about time for these people to suck it up and take their responsibility to the citizens more seriously.

[usquebaugh]

Actually, you didn't vote for Harper. His name wasn't on the ballot you checked off at your polling station. He's only the PM because he's the leader of the Conservatives. Also, the coalition has legal precedent.

Harper doesn't give a damn about the elderly, the disabled, or other vulnerable members of Canadian society. Besides, the only any of the measures in the budget that pay any attention to those most in need is the result of the threat of the coalition taking over. Prior to that, the Conservatives were prepared to not even try to help Canadians during the recession.

[Crying-Angel]

Actually, you didn't vote for Harper.

You should be able to get what I mean...

His name wasn't on the ballot you checked off at your polling station. He's only the PM because he's the leader of the Conservatives. Also, the coalition has legal precedent.

I don't care about the legal precedent (most precedents in this country have led to a weakening of our laws) I care about getting on with the business of the people. And you say that Harper doesn't care about the vulnerable people...can you show me how the other parties are participating, right now, in giving a damn about the people? What are they doing right now about the problems that I just talked about? How many social changes are being debated and revised right now? What are they doing to work with the Harper government in getting things done? (Harper is not the only person in Ottawa with a responsibility to the people.) It takes everyone to get off their butts and do something, not just one. And They are all too busy with their own agenda to be doing anything in the parliament for the citizens...


Harper doesn't give a damn about the elderly, the disabled, or other vulnerable members of Canadian society. Besides, the only any of the measures in the budget that pay any attention to those most in need is the result of the threat of the coalition taking over. Prior to that, the Conservatives were prepared to not even try to help Canadians during the recession.

[usquebaugh]

Until Parliament reopened this past week, the MPs had only worked 13 days since June 20th, 2008,
thanks to Harper calling an early election, and then proroguing Parliament. The only reason that nothing was getting done prior to now is that Harper closed everything down (with the Governor-General's permission).

Do you really think that the other parties had any choice but to react to Harper's divisive economic update? You should note that he's retained the portion that will deny women the right to equal pay for equal work! He hasn't taken into account that there are still 600,000 people that paid into EI for years and yet cannot collect this service, even though he's extended services for those already on it. He has failed to address this pressing issue for many Canadian citizens. The EI system in this country needs to be reformed. Not to mention blowing that 300 million dollars on an election that didn't get him the majority he thought he deserved.... Oh, and he blew the surplus that he inherited from the Martin Liberals. For a supposed economist, he really doesn't know how to govern in a fiscally responsible way.

Layton is correct to assert that the Conservatives may have their budget passed, but just as they were unwilling to do anything last fall (until pressured by the threat of a coalition), there is still no guarantee that this highly secretive government will keep its promises. Don't you know that this government does not like responding to requests for information that the public has a right to under the Freedom of Information Act? That's not a good thing for a government to be getting away with. As I've said before, Harper can yammer on about how he's only doing what the Liberals did, but if he remembers that he campaigned on the premise (one could also say "promise") that he'd be better than the Liberals, he's really moving in the wrong direction. He's had his chance. Let Canada have a PM who can greet President Obama and look him in the eye, and not one who did his best to cost Obama the Ohio primary with NAFTAgate.

The only federal government that would ever increase services/funding for vulnerable Canadian citizens is the NDP, and to a lesser extent, the Liberals.

[JohnCambell]

Heres the one thing that I believe is politics... It's hard enough doing your own budget at home, and deciding what to cut and what not to cut.

Ubisoftque, It would be very funny to see you head on head with Harper. With all this knocking him with how bad he is. Then we'ed see what a rear end you become. You couldn't make a budget for a fly. Or even run Canada for a pack of squirrels.

[NAB]

Don Martin has an excellent article this morning. Here are some excerpts..

""Welcome to Political Reality 101.

...Yes, the same Stephen Harper now all grown up as Canada’s Prime Minister, who concluded in his 1991 master’s degree thesis that aggressive government intrusions into the free market economy should be avoided because they are usually just political ploys for re-election.

This week’s deficit budget ensures this economics student has learned the hard lesson that classroom theory doesn’t always mesh with political reality. Having enacted the most aggressive fiscal response in decades to cushion the hard landing of a Canadian recession through a series of monster spending deficits, Mr. Harper has arguably become the federal echo of a politician he often vilified — Ontario premier (now Liberal MP) Bob Rae.

...in the coffee break hallway of a conference I attended there yesterday, the backlash buzz was how this Conservative leader is posting spending numbers Calgarians only associate with Pierre Trudeau and Brian Mulroney.

Those who know him best are particularly disappointed. It’s a safe bet, for example, that the budget would not receive a passing grade from the professor who marked Mr. Harper’s master thesis.

Dr. Atkins figures the budget deficit sets up Canada for higher inflation, taxes and interest rates. “This is not an economic budget in my mind. It’s a political budget, much more so than any other budget has been a political budget,” he told the Calgary Herald.

Keep in mind this is the same Dr. Atkins who defended the Prime Minister’s seemingly callous shrug at the recession during the fall election campaign. “He’s sticking to his inner beliefs, rather than abandoning them for the political reality,” Dr. Atkins proudly stated at the time.

But Stephen Harper has created a new ideology of conservative pragmatism that sacrifices fiscal rectitude to political necessity. There’s no room for right-wing or left-wing designations now.

If the Conservatives had refused to join a world of bank backing, corporate bailouts and accelerated public works by posting a balance budget devoid of serious stimulus, Mr. Harper would have been a former prime minister this week, having lost a Commons confidence vote on the budget.

Given that Canada’s trying to find steady legs in a world economy of reeling instability, it’s possible future economists will be forced to give Mr. Harper a higher grade than this current circle of academics.

If nothing else, he deserves full marks for having the flexibility to do what’s required quickly instead of resisting change like some stubborn student who refused to grow up.""

Full article: http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blog ... -face.aspx

[sanemind]

The biggest liars in parliament are the NDP/s/ They make nothing but promises, knowing they will never be the government. so they will not have to keep them.Layton wants to close the borders, idiot that he is can not see we can not survive rhat way. Look at the auto industry. most go to the usa. So get off the bad mouthing bandwagon.P>M> Harper and offer some comon sense words of wisdom.

[dudlee]

Actually, you didn't vote for Harper. His name wasn't on the ballot you checked off at your polling station. He's only the PM because he's the leader of the Conservatives. Also, the coalition has legal precedent.

Harper doesn't give a damn about the elderly, the disabled, or other vulnerable members of Canadian society. Besides, the only any of the measures in the budget that pay any attention to those most in need is the result of the threat of the coalition taking over. Prior to that, the Conservatives were prepared to not even try to help Canadians during the recession.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Legal precedent? Trying to use a statute that was used unsuccessfully in 1926? I guess desparate times call for desparate measures, and the whole ,"Well other countries in the world do it" Crap, doesn't cut it.Face it, any threat , especially from a communist and separatist parties, is a Coup, if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck?
As for being in love with Harper, get real, the Conservatives are just the lesser of the 5 evils.I would much rather see the West separate than to have to keep voting for a Centralist government that constantly ignores the West.BC has been destroyed by the Pine Beetle , the Feds have done nothing to stop it's spread,Russ Hardgrave and the Auto sector in Ontario Boo-Hoo and they are acknowledged instantly.What is that ?
I just look at our provincial election, or as I call them ,"Erection" and I freak.The choices are , The more of the same Liberals, where Hongcouver only matters, or the New Dummies Party? I can't believe this but I am honestly looking at either the pot party or the other little parties.
As for your Pot comment, I think it should be legalized and taxed so that the criminal element will be lessened and the taxes collected can be used for medical fixes and other underfunded liberal areas.

[dudlee]

Hell yes we should separate, just look how iggy says"Oh it's OK for Nfld Reps to vote against it but I bet Western liberal reps aren't?
Nfld is complaining about not getting as much federal money while BC ,Alberta, and Saskatchewan, get nothing. Looks more like Williams is trying to become Duceppe jr. and Iggy thinks it's alright for Nfld to have a protest vote.

Yet another example of how the west is Ignored, or given no value by the centralist politicians

[dudlee]

dudlee wrote:
Do you admit that the 1926 appointment of a Coalition government didn't work and that is why it has never been granted since that time? and that this attempt is both based in lies and deceit?

No. Just because something has failed once, doesn't meant that is necessarily bound to fail again.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

To follow this way of thinking bath water should be consumed.Not tried for 83 years, should we then go back to horse and buggy or how about ice chests instead of fridges, oh and back then women were not allowed to vote, is that OK ?