Canadian Mac Forums at ehMac banner
Status
Not open for further replies.

The Canadian Political Thread

1M views 25K replies 92 participants last post by  Vader101 
#1 ·
Now that the 2011 election is over, let's use this thread to discuss Canadian politics as they transpire over the next 4 years. :)

Please keep the discussion civil and I kindly request no personal attacks or insults directed towards fellow ehMac members.

It would be refreshing to avoid over-the-top hyperbole as well. :) We're all Canadians and lets not make people out to be left-wing or right-wing caricatures or turn things into a WWE fight promo.

I may not be a supporter of Prime Minster Harper, but he does endorse ehMac.ca. :D





^ Picture I took on a nice trip to Ottawa this past winter.
 
See less See more
2
#5,161 ·
You know what is funny is that as much as the opposition clamors over the "anti-democratic" nature of the Bill it has received far more public attention and scrutiny than it ever would have as 5 separate little bills. Pretty ironic actually.
Gotta link for that?
 
#5,162 · (Edited)
Gotta link for that?
You know what is funny is that as much as the opposition clamors over the "anti-democratic" nature of the Bill it has received far more public attention and scrutiny than it ever would have as 5 separate little bills. Pretty ironic actually.
Sorry no... I should have stated:

You know what is funny is that as much as the opposition clamors over the "anti-democratic" nature of the Bill IMO it has received far more public attention and scrutiny than it ever would have as 5 separate little bills. Pretty ironic actually.
:rolleyes:

Just look for media links for other Budget Implementation Bills vs. this one and I think the proof will be in the pudding.

As much as the Opposition wishes to claim that the Government is "hiding" the changes the Government is proposing in Bill C-38 it seems the Opposition and the media are absolutely fully aware of them... so where exactly is anything being hidden?

Do tell...

This is the nature of our democratic system and a free media... nothing remains hidden for long even when it is just purely baseless BS and even when there is no proof. In the court of public opinion it remains a "fact"... i.e. guilty by accusation.

The very fact that there is so much attention on Bill C-38 shows that the system is working and there is no repression of facts or hiding... It's just plainly obvious.
 
#5,163 ·
It makes it no less distasteful.

Harper has little respect for democratic structure....he is losing ground in public opinion.

If the left merges - it will be a very long time before the right gets another chance with their low support numbers.....perhaps that's why the frantic maker over.

A parody is what is emerging. XX)
 
#5,164 ·
Just look for media links for other Budget Implementation Bills vs. this one and I think the proof will be in the pudding.

As much as the Opposition wishes to claim that the Government is "hiding" the changes the Government is proposing in Bill C-38 it seems the Opposition and the media are absolutely fully aware of them... so where exactly is anything being hidden?

Do tell...

This is the nature of our democratic system and a free media... nothing remains hidden for long even when it is just purely baseless BS and even when there is no proof. In the court of public opinion it remains a "fact"... i.e. guilty by accusation.

The very fact that there is so much attention on Bill C-38 shows that the system is working and there is no repression of facts or hiding... It's just plainly obvious.
Nothing is being hidden, it's all on record, but it is harder for the public and the media to focus on dissimilar things that are packed together in an omnibus bill.

I agree with Stephen Harper on this issue (circa 1994). As he said back then, it is anti-democratic in that it forces MPs to accept or reject the package as a whole. They can't represent the wishes of their constituents if they might like some parts of the omnibus bill and dislike others.

And as the G&M article mentions, I believe this approach shows contempt for MPs, the Opposition and ultimately of Parliament. Why doesn't the Government simply put their whole legislative agenda into a single bill, plunk it in front of the House, invoke closure on debate and be done with the Parliamentary session inside a week, if they aren't going to allow MPs to do their jobs and debate the individual pros and cons of various proposed laws? There is a reason we have a Parliament and an Opposition as a check and balance against the Government. The current Harper government seems to want to dispense with this.
 
#5,165 ·
Nothing is being hidden, it's all on record, but it is harder for the public and the media to focus on dissimilar things that are packed together in an omnibus bill.

I agree with Stephen Harper on this issue (circa 1994). As he said back then, it is anti-democratic in that it forces MPs to accept or reject the package as a whole. They can't represent the wishes of their constituents if they might like some parts of the omnibus bill and dislike others.

And as the G&M article mentions, I believe this approach shows contempt for MPs, the Opposition and ultimately of Parliament. Why doesn't the Government simply put their whole legislative agenda into a single bill, plunk it in front of the House, invoke closure on debate and be done with the Parliamentary session inside a week, if they aren't going to allow MPs to do their jobs and debate the individual pros and cons of various proposed laws? There is a reason we have a Parliament and an Opposition as a check and balance against the Government. The current Harper government seems to want to dispense with this.
There was no closure there was time allocation and if Peter Julian didn't pull his 11 hour long stunt there would have been plenty of time for other MPs to speak. The fact of the matter is that the real work on legislation is done in Committee not in debates in the House and C-38 will have plenty of time in Committee.

The Opposition is clearly doing their job as there has never been so much attention drawn to a Budget Implementation Bill which is usually very sleepy stuff indeed.
 
#5,166 ·
There was no closure there was time allocation and if Peter Julian didn't pull his 11 hour long stunt there would have been plenty of time for other MPs to speak. The fact of the matter is that the real work on legislation is done in Committee not in debates in the House and C-38 will have plenty of time in Committee.

The Opposition is clearly doing their job as there has never been so much attention drawn to a Budget Implementation Bill which is usually very sleepy stuff indeed.
Correction for screature: I did not state that there was closure for C-38. Don't know what you're on about there.

Besides that, you dodged the question that Stephen Harper brought up in 1994, that using omnibus legislation is inherently undemocratic.

Does it make it better that you think it's "sleepy stuff"? No.

Does it make it better that you think Parliament does no "real work"? No. I think many would disagree with you on that point. Harper's tendency (and that of his supporters) in recent years has been to downplay the importance of Parliament, hence his sanctions by the Speaker and his willingness to prorogue. He likes to act as if he was elected President.

Yes, there is less grandstanding in committee, but the 1994 version of Harper and others have argued that using omnibus legislation hamstrings committee's abilities as well.
 
#5,167 ·
Correction for screature: I did not state that there was closure for C-38. Don't know what you're on about there.

Besides that, you dodged the question that Stephen Harper brought up in 1994, that using omnibus legislation is inherently undemocratic.

Does it make it better that you think it's "sleepy stuff"? No.

Does it make it better that you think Parliament does no "real work"? No. I think many would disagree with you on that point. Harper's tendency (and that of his supporters) in recent years has been to downplay the importance of Parliament, hence his sanctions by the Speaker and his willingness to prorogue. He likes to act as if he was elected President.

Yes, there is less grandstanding in committee, but the 1994 version of Harper and others have argued that using omnibus legislation hamstrings committee's abilities as well.

Sorry I misread what you stated.

He was doing what is the job of any leader of the Opposition, to oppose.

Now as PM he is doing the job of any majority government, moving as much of their legislative agenda through the legislative process in as timely a manner as possible.

Trudeau did it, Mulroney did it, as did Chretien it is the way of majority governments.
 
#5,168 ·
it's just more Harper talking points to distract from the real issue of their abuse of power.

"real work on legislation is done in Committee" - except that it's a Finance Commitee looking at the bill, and they are not qualified to judge the impact on the enviroment, immigration, fisheries, etc.... that this bill goes out of it's way to introduce.

"there has never been so much attention drawn to a Budget Implementation Bill" - because there has never been an Implementation Bill like THIS one.
 
#5,169 ·
it's just more Harper talking points to distract from the real issue of their abuse of power.

"real work on legislation is done in Committee" - except that it's a Finance Commitee looking at the bill, and they are not qualified to judge the impact on the enviroment, immigration, fisheries, etc.... that this bill goes out of it's way to introduce.

"there has never been so much attention drawn to a Budget Implementation Bill" - because there has never been an Implementation Bill like THIS one.
Your not fully informed i-rui there is to be a special sub-committee to look at and have expert witnesses called by all parties to specifically address the environmental aspects of the Bill.

Not to mention the Finance Committee is free to call any witnesses it chooses as are individuals, i.e. citizens free to apply to the Clerk of the Committee to testify before the Committee.

So what is your point it is getting as much attention being an omnibus bill as it would have if it were broken up into smaller Bills?
 
#5,170 ·
Your not fully informed i-rui there is to be a special sub-committee to look at and have expert witnesses called by all parties to specifically address the environmental aspects of the Bill.

Not to mention the Finance Committee is free to call any witnesses it chooses as are individuals, i.e. citizens free to apply to the Clerk of the Committee to testify before the Committee.
it's a sub-committe of the FINANCE committee. That is who will be looking at the bill, and it will be from that perspective that the members look at it.

So what is your point it is getting as much attention being an omnibus bill as it would have if it were broken up into smaller Bills?
my point is that ramming through legislation in ominbus bills is a **** poor way to govern and slaps democracy in the face. That is enough to warrant the negative attention the bill is receiving.
 
#5,171 · (Edited)
it's a sub-committe of the FINANCE committee. That is who will be looking at the bill, and it will be from that perspective that the members look at it.
They will be looking at it in all its ramifications.


my point is that ramming through legislation in ominbus bills is a **** poor way to govern and slaps democracy in the face. That is enough to warrant the negative attention the bill is receiving.
So the opposition is doing its job then... if the public at large sees it as an affront to democracy then the government will pay for it in 2015.

Seems like business as usual to me when it comes to politics.
 
#5,172 · (Edited)
Your not fully informed i-rui there is to be a special sub-committee to look at and have expert witnesses called by all parties to specifically address the environmental aspects of the Bill.

Not to mention the Finance Committee is free to call any witnesses it chooses as are individuals, i.e. citizens free to apply to the Clerk of the Committee to testify before the Committee.

So what is your point it is getting as much attention being an omnibus bill as it would have if it were broken up into smaller Bills?
For the first time ever, Our Glorious Leader, is limiting the opposition as to which members may sit on the special sub-committee, so much for the sub-committee serving any useful purpose for the citizens.
 
#5,174 ·
#5,175 ·
^^^^^^^

When the government is put in charge of money, this inevitably happens. You see money spent in a way that you would never spend it. The answer to this problem? Take the money back and spend it yourself on projects you think are worthwhile
 
#5,176 ·
#5,177 ·
^^^^^^^

When the government is put in charge of money, this inevitably happens. You see money spent in a way that you would never spend it. The answer to this problem? Take the money back and spend it yourself on projects you think are worthwhile
Of course the libertarian fantasy utopia is not even remotely the answer to this problem. The answer to this problem is better regulation of politician's activities, and of money in politics, a government that is forced to answer to it's citizens, which all flows out of a more engaged and aware citizenry. Without citizens paying attention, we deserve the government we get.

In the past few decades we have already come a long way in ethical rules and regulations for our political representatives, it is much harder for those who are just in it for the pork to fatten themselves and their friends than it would have been a generation or two ago.

While the Harper Conservatives played to this sentiment years ago when it helped them beat the scandal-ridden Libs, promising a new transparency and accountability, they are now doing everything possible to avoid these principles.
 
#5,178 ·
Of course the libertarian fantasy utopia is not even remotely the answer to this problem. The answer to this problem is better regulation of politician's activities, and of money in politics, a government that is forced to answer to it's citizens, which all flows out of a more engaged and aware citizenry. Without citizens paying attention, we deserve the government we get.

In the past few decades we have already come a long way in ethical rules and regulations for our political representatives, it is much harder for those who are just in it for the pork to fatten themselves and their friends than it would have been a generation or two ago.

While the Harper Conservatives played to this sentiment years ago when it helped them beat the scandal-ridden Libs, promising a new transparency and accountability, they are now doing everything possible to avoid these principles.
Very good points, GA ........... and all too true. I voted for the Conservatives when I believed that then MP Harper would lead the Conservatives and the country to an era of "new transparency and accountability". I was mistaken.
 
#5,180 ·
Of course the libertarian fantasy utopia is not even remotely the answer to this problem. The answer to this problem is better regulation of politician's activities, and of money in politics, a government that is forced to answer to it's citizens, which all flows out of a more engaged and aware citizenry. Without citizens paying attention, we deserve the government we get.

In the past few decades we have already come a long way in ethical rules and regulations for our political representatives, it is much harder for those who are just in it for the pork to fatten themselves and their friends than it would have been a generation or two ago.

While the Harper Conservatives played to this sentiment years ago when it helped them beat the scandal-ridden Libs, promising a new transparency and accountability, they are now doing everything possible to avoid these principles.
Yes. Why is the government even handing out so many grants that we can't keep track of them all? If you want to live in a nanny state, expect to be treated like children.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top