Zepaholic
-
Posts
778 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Zepaholic
-
-
To say that the Bloc is dangerous is laughable. Have they ever succeeded even in their own long-standing intent? NO. It's simply another scare tactic, one that people here and south of the border have heard and tuned out. It's not going to work. They are a legitimate party, voted in, an example of democracy working. The Bloc have agreed to support this coalition for 18 months, the other parties for 30, I believe, which means the coalition will exist for 18 months.
The Bloc...
Political Mission: The Bloc Québécois (also known as the "BQ" or the "Bloc") is a federal political party, though it runs candidates only in the federal electoral districts of Quebec. Its members and supporters come from a broad spectrum of political orientations by the party's central purpose: to promote the secession of Quebec from Canada or, when the desire of Quebecers for secession is weak, to promote the "interests" of Quebec. It is perhaps for this reason that the party's web site is extremely light on details concerning matters of policy or ideology.
Within the BQ can be found not only proponents of Quebec secession and independence, but proponents of Québécois nationalism. The latter view Quebec as a place that is, first a foremost, for "pur laine" (i.e., "pure wool", or "old stock") Quebecers: a place in which the French language, culture is preserved, and in which the future is determined by those with a long, francophone, ancestral history in Quebec, for those with a long, francophone, ancestral history in Quebec, even if to the detriment of newcomers. That nationalist sentiment is perhaps epitomized by the speech given by Parti Québécois leader Jacques Parizeau following the failure of the 1995 Quebec secession bid, in which he blamed the defeat upon "money and the ethnic vote".
Whether simply seeking independence for Quebec, or whether seeking a nation state, the BQ's position on newcomers to Quebec can be summarized being based on the "melting pot" model. The party has been vocal in opposing state-funded multiculturalism:
"In Quebec, the emphasis is on integration. Not assimilation but integration. The official definition of integration is as follows: integration is long term multi-dimensional process of adaptation, distinct from assimilation. In this process, the knowledge and use of the common language of Quebec society is a fundamental driving force. The process is consolidated in a society, where participation by all Quebecers is guaranteed and where immigrants and members of cultural communities find their place and are recognized as full members of the communal, social and political life of a pluralistic francophone society.
This policy has received unanimous approval in Quebec; it is never an issue, unlike the Canadian policy.
We cannot help but notice that multiculturalism enjoys anything but unanimous approval. The Decima and Gallup polls published in 1993 showed that 75 per cent of Canadians rejected the policy of multiculturalism and favoured a style of integration similar to Quebec's.
Given the government's investment in multiculturalism, it is a sad thing to see it fail. For the year 1993-94 alone, the government invested $38,846 million. The program has existed for 20 years. How many billions of dollars have been invested to date in a flawed policy which the country does not want?
The policy is not working and even its target public, members of ethnic communities, are criticizing it. I cite as an example the overwhelming support for Neil Bissoondath's first book. His supporters were unanimous in saying that the government should only concern itself with helping immigrants to integrate into our society and fighting racism-end of story. He noted that the federal government's policy tended to create ethnic ghettos, which in no way foster integration and full participation in political, economic and social life.
We also cannot leave unmentioned the absurdities made possible by the multiculturalism policy. Barely six months ago, a consultation paper from the Minister of Justice proposed that culture or religion be permitted as a defence against criminal charges. Because of the ensuing uproar, the minister had to recant and withdraw the proposal. That is one example of how far some people will go to promote different cultures.
In closing, I would like to stress that a sovereign Quebec would continue to favour integration and respect. The current Minister of International Affairs, Cultural Communities and Immigration, Bernard Landry, confirmed that position just a month ago.
Please allow me to quote him: ``Quebec will not use the public purse to subsidize cultural differences. Our government is against multiculturalism. Although the Quebec government acknowledges the fact that Quebec is multi-ethnic, it favours a policy of cultural convergence in one common culture, fortified by foreign sources''. That sums up well Quebec's position on multiculturalism and deals with the issue effectively."
- BQ MP Christiane Gagnon
House of Commons Hansard, April 5, 1995
Party History: The BQ was founded in 1990 following the failure of federal government and the provinces to amend the Canadian Constitution according to what was titled the Meech Lake Accord: a set of proposals that would constitutionally entrench "recognition" of Quebec as a "distinct society", bilingualism, and other changes that some (notably, Quebec's premier of the time, Robert Bourassa, and Canada's Progressive Conservative Prime Minister of the time, Brian Mulroney) thought would strengthen the Canadian federation.
Comprised at the time of Progressive Conservative ("PC") and Liberal party members who left those parties to form the Bloc, the party's first leader was former PC cabinet minister Lucienne Bouchard. Bouchard led the BQ to win 54 seats in the House of Commons: just enough seats to form Her Majesty's Official Opposition.
Following the Quebec secession referendum of 1995, Bouchard stepped down from the leadership of the party to lead the Bloc's Quebec provincial soul mate, the Parti Québécois. The leadership of the party was assumed by Michel Gauthier for just over a year. The party's current leader, Gilles Duceppe, assumed the leadership of the party on March 15, 1997 .
In the federal general election of 1997, the BQ under Duceppe won only 44 seats, losing its Opposition status to the Alberta-based Reform Party of Canada (led by Preston Manning, son of longstanding former Alberta Premier Ernest Manning, whose Social Credit Party of Alberta remained in power there for decades). In the federal general election of 2000, still under Duceppe, the party won fewer seats again: 38. Since that time, several of those seats have been lost in federal by-elections. Some BQ MPs have announced that they do not intend to seek the nomination for the 2004 general election.
Given the party's reason for being, one would expect the BQ's popularity to continue to dwindle as Quebec's interest in secession fades. However, the fact of the matter is that, apart from the BQ, the Liberal Party in Quebec currently has no formidable competitor. Thus, until another party takes considerable root in the provinces, BQ candidates can be expected to continue filling the vacuum left when voters decide not to re-elect Liberal MPs in that province.
Summary: The are against multiculturalism and instead want a "convergence into one common culture, fortified by foreign resources". They stress the need to "end racism" yet they blame the referendum loss on the "ethnic vote". Their agenda is for independence from Canada yet they shamelessly crawl into bed with the opposition parties "for the betterment of Quebec".
I enjoy talking to my Canadian friends so i will not persue this subject further. Politics are divisive, as proven here. I remain sceptical and feel that this little coup d'etat will decimate our economy and polarize this nation.
Good luck, friends.
-
Well one thing is for sure, this country is going to learn what the real role of the Gov. General is. I hope she understand's the scope of her responsibility. Whatever she decides.
Check out this gem from the CBC re: the Bloc view...
Accord 'in the best interests of Quebec': Duceppe
The Bloc would not officially be a part of the coalition, but the new government's survival would depend on its support.
Duceppe said his party entered into an agreement that is "in the best interests of Quebec, of Quebecers during this time of economic difficulties."
"We chose for the time being to give priority to the economic situation and to the assistance we must provide to people," he said.
He added he did not agree to support the coalition beyond the 2011 date because the various parties could not agree on "concrete action to recognize the Quebec nation."
Parliament is due to vote on a Liberal no-confidence motion on Dec. 8. If Harper's government were to lose a confidence vote, Dion would request that Jean approve the proposed plan to form a coalition government.
But the Governor General, who is currently on a state visit in Europe, could also decide to send Canadians to the polls for a second time in less than two months. The prime minister could also still block coalition efforts by proroguing Parliament — that is, suspending it without dissolving it.
In other words, when Canada's economy and identity are sufficiently decimated due to this coalition, the people of Quebec will, in the year 2011, be presented with another opportunity to depart this nation.
Great...just fucking great.
-
Don't look now, but Canadian politics is getting exciting. Really!
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/12/01/...tion-talks.html
Harper could soon be known as leader of the longest minority government, and leader of the shortest minority government. Way to go.
Sooooo glad that election's come back to bite him in the ass (finger's crossed)
I'm genuinely curious if anyone knows the number of times that the ruling political party was the same in US and in Canada. Some politicians were using the 'change' rhetoric left right and center. Where have I heard that before?
There is NOTHING exciting about a coalition gov't headed by a leader that was sounded trounced(lowest electoral support ever for a Lib leader), the NDP and the real winners in this fetid stew, the Bloc. A coalition Gov't cannot survive without long term support from the Bloc...the same party that wishes to tear this country apart.
This is nothing but a backbench coup. I sincerely hope that the Gov. General does NOT allow this sorry afair to go through. Economic implications aside, it insults the Democratic process that this country undertook 6 short weeks ago.
The results are in:
Higher taxes
Higher debt
Higher interest rates
Higher unemployment
Deeper regional division amongst Canadians
General chaos(historically 100% failure rate with ANY coalition Gov't)
No thanks. I'll take the pig i know...
-
Ok, so I'm self-employed and that means work is done at home and outside of it. When I'm at home preparing I've been increasingly inundated with ever annoying telemarketer calls. If you sign up with someone and they do a periodic check, or if you're elderly and appreciate some sort of service, or you're a charity, fine. If you're not, stop calling people everyday, five times a day!!!
So, I offer a public service via a rant:
I just signed up today. If you're annoyed, too, here's what you can do about it.
I signed up on the first day. The annoyance of these...these....PEOPLE is maddening.
FYI, some companies are exempt from this list but most are not. SIgning up has really cut down on the volume of calls to this house.
-
Just curious as to everybody's opinion of these gas pipeline bombings that took place last week in Dawson Creek. Domestic or foreign ? What are your thoughts ?
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...ada&s_name=
Domestic. The letter received said something about our "home lands"...local.
Some small but radical band of misfits who have no idea what kind of disaster they almost caused. Enviro-geeks, Native people or some kind of militia group would be my guess.
Terrorists have bigger fish to fry.
-
This is an issue that I have been struggling with for quite some time . I do believe in our UHS and have no desire to see it change but the wait lists are a major problem. However, without getting too far into the politics of the situation it is pretty clear to me that over the last 8 yrs.there is an ajenda in BC that is leaning towards limited privitization. We could have been funding the system properly and reformed it at the same time but, our gov. has chosen only to go after healthcare workers and has allowed administrators a free pass. IMHO, the gov. is waiting us out. Having said that, I think they are winning and unless there is a major shift in thinking on the part of the general public, we will have much more in the way of private healthcare period. I believe in being fiscally responsible, I don't believe in throwing good money after bad but, it's absurd to think that by not funding the system properly and at the same time not making administrators accountable is the answer. With all that said, I have reluctantly come to the conclusion that I am living a pipe dream and real reform will not happen anytime soon. That leaves only one option at the moment to clear out the wait lists, limited privitization for those who can afford it. If nothing else, it may actually reveal just how underfunded and mismanaged our UHS really is. Maybe everyone will wake up a little when they have to pay for some services and demand a more accountable and properly funded UHS for our children and future generations.
Yukon, I'm not sure that I've answered your question but the previous posters are accurate about SIN taxes. I'm in favour of them but as I've stated, that money should be made available to the healthcare system otherwise they're just another gov. money grab. That I'm not in favour of
Question: If a Professional athlete sustains an injury that requires attention, do they wait in line for an MRI? Do they wait in an overcrowded ER for a couple of hours to be looked at? Hmmmm, let me think....
You already know the answer, i'm sure of that.
-
Wow well I can only speak as a patient not as a worker in the field, but I have had excellent care each time I needed it in hospitals. That said, I do not doubt that the problems you raise are legitimate and need addressing, but that's the application within the universal health care system, the system itself as a framework I would definitely leave in place. Would you agree or would you prefer to privatize?
Unless the Gov't recognizes and attempts to remedy the aforementioned issues, i would have to support a 2-tier system. The framework for the UHS i would definitely keep in place but the wait times are absolutely unacceptable. If the people with loads of cash want to get out of line and pay out of pocket for treatment, i have no problem with that. It would take a huge burden off the existing system and allow people who need immediate help to get it before their situation gets worse.
Again, i prefer to keep the system as is but it's not working for way too many people.
-
So how is the old "sin tax" going these days up there? I wish that this country would wake up and legalize gambling and use the revenue to solve the woes. And throw in Mary Jane too. They have the answer to their problems right at their damn fingertips but it just never happens. Just imagine, they cant stop gambling and drugs. Never could and never will. So why not run the bookies out of business, make betting on football and sports legal and everybody wins. Even the addicted gamblers will have a shot at collecting here and there rather than being financially raped by the government on lotteries they will never win. And the government spends millions advertizing it. Its all bullshit. The entire process. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer. They exploit the uneducated poor and sell them lottery tickets. And they say much of the money is going toward education. Bullshit. Then why are the tap and pell grants so bad these days? I am on the Canadien thread I know. But I just wonder what you Canadien friends of ours think? I know they are pounding you on alchohol and tobacco up there. But I dont know how your health care system seems to be so superior to ours. Well, Ive said enough for now. Ill read some responses if there are any.
Where to start, where to start...
Health care...I can tell you first hand that our so-called "world class" universal HC is a mess. My work takes me into the biggest Hospitals in the GTA and the situation is grim. We are critically short of Nurses, ER's are embarrassing overcrowded, Doctors are fried to a crisp and if you need to see a specialist, well, take a number and be prepared to wait 6 months or more. How about a 4-6 month wait for an MRI? Sound good? 6-8 weeks for Cancer surgery that really needs to be done within a week? Knee and hip replacement? Hopefully you will survive long enough to get on the table.
To be fair, the MD's and Nurses are very well trained and are highly competent. The standards are very high in that regard. The issue is, of course, a Gov't run system that means well but is horribly mismanaged and under-funded. Our tax dollars at work....again. Still, all we need to stand in line is a valid health card and some patience. The treatment is "free", which is funny unto itself. The cost actually comes out of your weekly cheque throughout the year but nobody wants or needs to discuss that...
Sin Tax...Well, only about 22% of Canadians still smoke and much of their fix comes from cheap Native smokes that the Gov't can't touch with taxation. They(gov't) have done it again; creating a thriving underground economy due to overtaxation.
Alcohol seems to be vital to our national fabric(LoL) and they can tax it all they want. Canadians love their beer!
Gambling...I'll leave this to somebody more qualified. I don't gamble and have no interest in it. We have a limited number of Casino's which i consider to be legalized robbery anyway. Just my opinion, i know many who love it.
Bottom line...Canada has a so-called "social safety net" which gives people comfort and hope that they will not suffer. For the most part, this semi-socialist agenda does keep most from suffering but it also gives false hopes and expectations. Way, way too many people expect to be taken care of instead of taking care of themselves and using Uncle Fed to bail them out in a tough period. I hate this aspect of our Nationhood but understand it's relative merits upon the national Psychi. We need to be more independent in our thinking and need to see more accountability from our Gov't.
May seem like a scathing report but really, i'd choose to live nowhere else on Earth. We are a young nation that just needs to grow up a little.
-
I never never whine and whine about how my country is run. I know it's run poorly and have accepted the way it is because i can't change it.
I just responded here because someone said for everyone to vote. And i just replied that i am not going to vote for someone who lies and makes promises they will not keep which is pretty much everyone who is running.
Of course they lie, everybody lies...welcome to the real world. The issue here is that you, as a voter, need to exercise your right to call whomever out for lying and misrepresentation.
You are free to speak out against something that will greatly affect your future as a citizen but choose not to. For the life of me i do not understand the apathy of non voters but i'm just going to leave it at that.
-
It's not an excuse. There is no one worthy. They are all a joke. The one who was relected is one of the biggest jokes. I am not going to contribute to the problem.
You just don't get it. If you think that the PM is a problem then you MUST vote to rectify the problem.
The real problem in this country is the 40% who don't vote and still whine about issues they have no right to whine about. You either want to live in the Peoples Republic of Ontario or wish to join some covert militia that wants to overthrow everything our past generations fought for.
People who don't vote need to STFU!
-
You know man. I don't care about your politics and who you would have voted for but, I think it's a shame that you didn't exercise your right to do so. To say that there was no one to vote for is IMO a lame excuse. People have fought and died for all of us so that we can have that right to vote. Not doing so is a slap in the face to them not to mention a slap in the face to all of us who did vote. Luckily for you, you live in a country that still allows non participants to have a voice. Just my two cents
Brilliant post and worth way more than 2 cents.
Respect to you.
-
I didn't vote again. The reason the voting numbers are so low is because there is no one worthy of being voted for.
And once again the public voted for a person that they bitch and complain about all the time. Steven Harper. Good going.lol Let the complaining about Harper resume even though he was voted in again.
If you didn't vote(again) then you shouldn't even be discussing this issue. You have revoked your right to alter agenda's that does not suit your needs.
You live in Toronto which probably means at least 4 local candidates with different agenda's to suit different people. None of them had any policy that you could relate to?
Sad.
-
Another Tory minority Gov't. IMO, the right decision by Canadians. Keep Harper on a leash, say NO to more taxation and remain relatively stable in this difficult period of our lives.
-
Tower House
No big deal, my house looks better than that.......NOT
Fabulous pics.
-
Jimmy Page's Handwriting
Jimmy's notes explaining his concept for the laser pyramid violin bow solo he would perform during the 1979 Knebworth Festival:
Wow! This is an absolute gem.
Thanks for sharing.
-
Hi Juliet,
Petrol is 1.51 a litre this morning in Vancouver.
BrutalCollusion is easy when there is no direct competition.
I believe that private companies are entitled to unregulated profit margins but that said, the lack of integrity and greed shown by Oil Execs is criminal.
You get the tar, i'll get the feathers.
-
Hi Z:
I hear ya...
Carbon tax??.....no thanks Stephane...
Stuff that went down in English speaking rural Ontario during Chretien....pretty scary times.....
Pas Stephane...pas meaning "no"
Hi Juliet,
Latest poll results: Tories 41%, Libs 26%....OUCH! I'm sure that this news just makes your day...
p.s. Even "Mr. Enviroment", Jack Layton has panned the carbon tax. Lib stategists are grade schoolers.
-
I'm refering to the current immature ad put out by the Tories in their pathetic attempt at trying to hurt Dion...
Dion is doing a fine job at hurting himself...he doesn't need help from Harper.
-
Hi Zepaholic,
I think we're talking about two separate issues here. If, as you rightly point out, the circumstances merit for parliament having to be dissolved (going against his own rules on calling elections notwithstanding), then whether or not he's arrogant is irrelevant. He HAS to, right? But if you read my post, I was referring to his thinly veiled disdain for the democratic process and his attitude towards many of those he has to work with in government when the cameras are off.
I'm glad he's calling an election as there is one issue that I agree with him on (Arctic), and disagree with just about everything else. I list them, but I really mean everything else, so take your pick.
But I hope this clarifies things.
Patrycja
No problem, and thanks for the clarification. And as for thinly veiled disdain for democratic process, well, i do believe that Canadians have been coping with this issue for some 40 odd years...under all political banners.
I don't believe that anybody need remind anybody about Jean Chretiens track record on corruption, pork barreling and lying to his voting public. Mulroney is another story altogether....
-
Harper is very arrogant and privately has no problem contravening the democratic process to get what he wants. The public sees this only in small doses. But I know people who've had to work with him. Ass.
If he was as arrogant as you believe than he would NOT be putting his job on the line and calling an early election. He has a responsibility to all Canadians to move the country forward with a Parliamentary agenda and if an agenda cannot be agreed upon by all parties then it must be dissolved.
-
Well, oh well!
That bloody redneck, Harper, he knows quite well he's going to be re-elect, minoritary.
Canadians from 'coast to coast', let's unite our forces and kick the shit outta Harper...
Viva la Revolucion!
Hilarious! A former member of the Young Liberal Club and a person who was born and raised in Toronto is a "redneck".
I suppose that any Eastern Canuck who move to any point west of Thunder Bay would be considered to be "turncoat rednecks"?????
-
-
TSRTS because it's makes me feel so f'in ALIVE!
This is a seriously difficult album to choose a best song from. You can pick a #1 if you try hard enough but everything else would be #1(a).
-
McCartney Plays For Thousands At Free Quebec Show
They claim his presence evokes painful memories of Britain's conquest of New France in 1760.
The absurdity of this statement alone makes the whole story a farce. Hardcore separatists will resort to anything to further their agenda.
Brutal
Oh CANADA!
in Ramble On
Posted
Well put and fingers crossed.
My biggest concern is timing. Going into uncharted waters in these dangerous econmic times is not prudent, imo. We shall see.