Jump to content

Recommended Posts

A friend of mine told me that the 2010 Chev. V8 Camero that he ordered will be made in Canada. Ottawa, I believe. It's due to be deliverd in June or July 2009. He said that initially, none of the Chev. 2010 Cameros will be made in the USA.... And that Chev. chose the Canadian plant to assemle the Cameros because they wanted one of the best plants in NA to do it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

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...

Excitement is a subjective matter, I suppose. But on to more serious implications, Harper strained the bounds of democracy and broke his own promise to not call another election to keep his very tenuous grasp on power. Make no mistake - it was not 'what the people wanted' since you can hardly call the lowest voter turnout in the nation's history a resounding gong of support. Harper has been implementing less than democratic means of keeping his power throughout his tenure and now it is biting him in the ass. What he has passed and sought to pass was not 'best for the nation' but best for his government to stay in power. I cannot stress this enough. I'd list them but have no time right now - work and all. I can get back to you, but I think you are already well versed with what has transpired and has been proposed and passed, we just disagree on the impact.

The coalition is temporary, as is Dion's presence at the helm. Part of what brought an agreement among the three parties was the very fact that his role would be temporary. The parties are well within their right to do this if they believe it is best for the country. Had they not done this now, it would have allowed Harper to gain further control over a nation reeling in the economic crisis. What has he implemented to help stimulate the economy, other than attempting to take funding money away from the other parties? How the hell is that best for the nation??? It's totally taking advantage of a bad situation to nail the power of the other parties, so I say good for them.

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 Governor General will NOT have allow another election to take place. The last time the GG had that choice the nation hadn't had an election for way longer than 6 weeks, and the GG still felt it was too soon from the last election.

This will put fire to the heels to the Libs to get another leader in place, initiate an economic aid package to the tune of $30B, and send a very strong message that Harper's democracy-in-name tactics will not be tolerated. I for one am happy that the other parties didn't just sit on their hands and adopt an oh well there's nothing we can do attitude. Dont' kid yourself - the greatest dissent has been within the Conservative party, hence all the silencing of members and media restrictions.

What does it say that Harper is being criticized by politicians past and present, from other parties and his own?

The results you listed are what has already happened in part lead to where we are today. No thanks to the pig that I know. I'll go a much needed change.

Edited by Patrycja
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello/Bonjour:

I was listening to the RDI (French network ) this a.m. Gilles Duceppe (leader of The Bloc) was being grilled by the announcer...I need to learn more French...I understood some words..(femmes, hommes, jamais=never)

I also heard Elizabeth May (leader of Green Party)on the CBC. She will support a coalition...

The GG arrives home soon...

Harper and the Tories plan to fight back

The plot thickens..

Juliet :witch:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Clearly, successive minority governments indicate that the country has no confidence in the leadership of any of the parties to lead. What we have going on here is a direct result of Harper failing to accept that fact. He stated quite clearly on election day that as far as he was concerned, a second minority result for his party was as good as a win and that he would consider it to be so. The seeds of this coalition were born the minute he said that and disatisfaction amoung members of his own party have given it the green light. Having said all that,

Proroguing parliament would be a disaster for the country given the financial crisis that is going on. Not having a sitting parliament at this moment would be IMHO, criminal.

Having the country run by a coalition that effectively will be led by a party that will be going through a new leadership campaign untill May, is almost as bad.

Having the Gov. General forced to decide the fate of OUR parliament is just downright

childish on the part of all of these politicians and an insult to the democratic process we enjoy in this country

No, for me the country has already spoken and it has said that it doesn't want any of

these players to have the power of a majority gov. A coalition, would be going against the wishes of the people. Therefore, IMHO, the only responsible thing to do now is to have Harper and the conservative minority amend the budget and stop this nonsense.

It may cost Harper his role as leader of the party but that will be a fight for another day and in the meantime, maybe we can actually have a working parliament that was put there by the people of this country

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

The Bloc's position about being a part of Canada is clear, no argument there. Yeah, the '95 referendum when Parizeau blamed the failed secession bid on money and the ethnic vote makes one proud, doesn't it? Not. But that was Parizeau and that was in 1995. The party's still around because it was voted in; that's democracy. Similarly, the coalition, though unusual, is legal. As part of the coalition, the Bloc has made some important concessions, including having no seats, and agreeing to vote with the coalition for the next 18 months (not the 30 month term because the other leaders refused Quebec autonomy concessions), among others. This is an unprecedented time, and though we disagree on how to get there, we want the same thing - for Canada to prosper. When the dust settles, may we all do so.

Link to post
Share on other sites
. This is an unprecedented time, and though we disagree on how to get there, we want the same thing - for Canada to prosper. When the dust settles, may we all do so.

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.

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

I agree with both you and Patrycja. At the end of the day the country must be everyone's first priority. Bad timing ? Yeah, I'm with ya on that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks Swede ! :)

My pleasure. I've heard a lot of great music that comes out from Canada. Hopefully I'll visit your country someday, I gotta check out that amazing nature you got over there. Of course I'll have to check out some clubs and live music as well! :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Well thanks very much :) Yeah the timing's bad bad bad. And now I hear word that more concessions are being given left right and center. Things seem to be changing by the hour. I wouldn't even mind a PC leader taking over (emphasis on the 'P' part as it would likely be someone more centre than right). Stability and stemming the economic tide should be the top priorities. Anyone who sells us anything different should be shown the revolving door.

I agree with both you and Patrycja. At the end of the day the country must be everyone's first priority. Bad timing ? Yeah, I'm with ya on that.

Cheers, Ally. It seems a given that elected leaders ought to do what's best for the country, right? Sadly, a strong reminder, bad timing and all, needs to be given. It's a wake-up call for all the parties, I think. You can't just bully your way through, nor can you pussyfoot your way through either. Can we have a real leader for this nation? Probably not without some smelling salts, a live chicken, and working knowledge of Latin :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
My pleasure. I've heard a lot of great music that comes out from Canada. Hopefully I'll visit your country someday, I gotta check out that amazing nature you got over there. Of course I'll have to check out some clubs and live music as well! :D

Hello Swede :wave: A few years ago my sister toured throughout the Scandinavian region and from her pictures it is clear you have some very beautiful areas as well. Whenever you're ready, we'll be happy to give some suggestions, coast to coast. Cheers!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well thanks very much :) Yeah the timing's bad bad bad. And now I hear word that more concessions are being given left right and center. Things seem to be changing by the hour. I wouldn't even mind a PC leader taking over (emphasis on the 'P' part as it would likely be someone more centre than right). Stability and stemming the economic tide should be the top priorities. Anyone who sells us anything different should be shown the revolving door.

Cheers, Ally. It seems a given that elected leaders ought to do what's best for the country, right? Sadly, a strong reminder, bad timing and all, needs to be given. It's a wake-up call for all the parties, I think. You can't just bully your way through, nor can you pussyfoot your way through either. Can we have a real leader for this nation? Probably not without some smelling salts, a live chicken, and working knowledge of Latin :D

Well said Patrycja. So, when are you running for office ? :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
I agree with both you and Patrycja. At the end of the day the country must be everyone's first priority. Bad timing ? Yeah, I'm with ya on that.

Thanks Ally. Sorry for the earlier rant but for cryin' out loud, we just spent umpteen millions on a Gen. Election 7 short weeks ago and now this fiasco!?!?!? :slapface::slapface:

Forget partisan politics, i am livid. I hope that the GG closes shop and calls an election. I guarantee you that at least 14 Canadians will have enough interest to give whomever a very strong mandate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well thanks very much :) Yeah the timing's bad bad bad. And now I hear word that more concessions are being given left right and center. Things seem to be changing by the hour. I wouldn't even mind a PC leader taking over (emphasis on the 'P' part as it would likely be someone more centre than right). Stability and stemming the economic tide should be the top priorities. Anyone who sells us anything different should be shown the revolving door.

Your quite welcome.

Cheers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks Ally. Sorry for the earlier rant but for cryin' out loud, we just spent umpteen millions on a Gen. Election 7 short weeks ago and now this fiasco!?!?!? :slapface::slapface:

Forget partisan politics, i am livid. I hope that the GG closes shop and calls an election. I guarantee you that at least 14 Canadians will have enough interest to give whomever a very strong mandate.

No need to apologize at all. This is very serious buisness we are talking about and we are concerned about our country and it's future.

There are many things that could happen in the coming day's but I must say that I honestly feel that none of this needed to happen in the first place. Harper has made a mistake by treating the opposition as if they did not exist. A minoity gov. does not have that luxury. He has overestimated himself by doing so. The simple solution to this situation is for him to resign as Prime Minister. He has not been able to gain a mandate in two elections and clearly there is opposition to his leadership within his own party. With 3 lame duck leaders, the coalition IMHO is not the answer and I think it would create more problems with public confidence than it would solve. Given the problem at hand, and not bringing my own political views into the mix, Harper's resignation is the only viable and honourable solution. Maybe then parliament can get back to working on the country's buisness.

Link to post
Share on other sites
No need to apologize at all. This is very serious buisness we are talking about and we are concerned about our country and it's future.

There are many things that could happen in the coming day's but I must say that I honestly feel that none of this needed to happen in the first place. Harper has made a mistake by treating the opposition as if they did not exist. A minoity gov. does not have that luxury. He has overestimated himself by doing so. The simple solution to this situation is for him to resign as Prime Minister. He has not been able to gain a mandate in two elections and clearly there is opposition to his leadership within his own party. With 3 lame duck leaders, the coalition IMHO is not the answer and I think it would create more problems with public confidence than it would solve. Given the problem at hand, and not bringing my own political views into the mix, Harper's resignation is the only viable and honourable solution. Maybe then parliament can get back to working on the country's buisness.

Well said...again. However, i do not believe that a resignation will make the perps in this so-called coalition back off. To think that an Economic "statement" started all this fuss....well, it didn't. The seeds for this discontent were started during Harpers last mandate and now they have pulled the proverbial rabbit out of the hat.

WORST-TIMING-EVER!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well said...again. However, i do not believe that a resignation will make the perps in this so-called coalition back off. To think that an Economic "statement" started all this fuss....well, it didn't. The seeds for this discontent were started during Harpers last mandate and now they have pulled the proverbial rabbit out of the hat.

WORST-TIMING-EVER!

It is. Let's see what Harper has to say tonight during his TV spot. All may be revealed :D

Link to post
Share on other sites
Please enlighten us later Ally. Us americans who are clueless about your system up there. I have relatives there but havent seen them in over 15 years. Ive been out of touch since the days of Trudeau. Is the sin tax still going strong there? Are the French still at great odds with the rest of Canada? I remember going to my cousins wedding there in Ontario and they had not a good thing to say about the province of Quebec.

We have a parliamentry system Yukon. In that system it's possible to have what's called a minority government. At the moment that is the Conservative Party. They do not have enough seats to form a majority but they won more seats in our recent election than any other single party. The Liberals, NDP, and the Bloq party's between them, have more seats than the Conservatives do and have formed a coalition to vote against the budget that the Conservatives have drafted. This vote is to take place on Dec 7th. If the budget is voted down then that would be the defeat of the Government and another election would have to take place. It get's quite complicated from here Yukon but I'll do the best I can. The leader of the Conservatives Prime Minister Harper knows that his party will probably loose the vote. He has two options that he can ask be implimented by the Govenor General( the Queens rep. to Canada )

1. he can ask that parliament be prorocured which effectively means parliament would be suspended untill a set date, that date is rumoured to be Jan 31. The GG can also order this on her own or deny the request

2. He can ask for the GG to order another election. The GG can also order an election on her own or deny the request.

All of the above are possible and that meeting takes place tomorrow morning

Now, without getting into the politics of this situation what all of these options mean is that Canada will not have a working budget at a time when, as everyone knows, the financial world is so fragile.

Kinda like not having a sitting Congress and Senate at this point in time in your own country.

Points of order : The coalition will be led by the Leader of Liberal Party. That leader will be gone in May as he had already stated that he was leaving after his defeat in this recent election 6 weeks ago.

The coalition has agreed to work together for a set time frame

The Govenor General has never had to make this call at any time in our history but is in the legal position to do so as per our constitution.

This is new ground for Canada and although perfectly legal, it is dividing the country at a time when stability is so important. The arguments of provincial seperation, east and west, are starting to rear their ugly heads again.

I'm sure I missed a bunch of things Yukon so maybe other's can wade in but I hope that explains things well enough...for now

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hmmm/ It sure can be confusing. I dont know what it means but the Canadien dollar has never been worth more in comparison to our dollar in my lifetime. So you guys must be doing something right? Or is it just luck so to speak? The ugly heads of provincial seperation I assume are like comparing our red and blue states. Dems vs Republicans so to speak? But it has always seemed like its French Canada/Quebec against the rest of Canada generally speaking? Or does it run deeper than that. For instance, does Ontario vary far from British Colombia and Alberta and where to the Maritime provinces fit into all of this? I have much to learn as governments are very complicated. too complicated for the average layman's perspective on all of it.

The federal political power base is in Central Canada. Quebec and Ontario. The rest of the country has alway's felt alienated. That's a debate for some other forum and some other time. I will say though that I'm personally not in favour of any seperation. I'm not suggesting that this vote will lead to that only, it has flamed the fires , so to speak. I do however feel that this country has to consider "redistribution" of the current number of seats that are alocated to western Canada. I'm sure they feel the same in the Maritimes as well

Link to post
Share on other sites
I do however feel that this country has to consider "redistribution" of the current number of seats that are alocated to western Canada. I'm sure they feel the same in the Maritimes as well

As an Ontario resident, i couldn't agree more.

Perhaps somebody from the West or East could bring a little more common sense to Parliament Hill.

p.s. the latest is that Harper will resign immediately if the GG does not grant him a suspension of Parliament. Stay tuned...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...