Canada - Does this makes any sense to anyone?!
 

I like Canada - always have. But this is just idiotic. Please DO NOT turn this into a blame Canada thread.

Wednesday » May 7 » 2003

<b>Canadian troops in Kabul have no guns
Require German chaperones until paperwork is done</b>

Chris Wattie, with files from Sheldon Alberts

<a target=new href="http://www.nationalpost.com/home/story.html?id=C2A5FDDA-5B72-423F-ABDB-F03AF81002AD"> National Post</a>


(John) McCallum


An advance party of Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan is walking the streets of the capital unarmed because the government has not yet signed a routine agreement under which NATO peacekeeping troops are allowed to carry weapons.

The Canadians are being guarded by German soldiers while they are in Kabul.

The 25 officers and men of the Canadian Forces' "theatre activation team" have been in the Afghan capital since last month, preparing the way for the almost 2,000 Canadian troops who are to join an international force there this summer.

A spokeswoman for the Department of National Defence said they cannot carry weapons because Canada has not signed the "Military Technical Agreement," a deal with the interim Afghan government under which the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) operates.

"So the authorization to carry weapons has not been given to Canadians," Lieutenant Hollie Ryan said. "It will be forthcoming ... we don't know when, but in the meantime ISAF members are providing security."

Opposition critics called the revelation that Canadian troops were defenceless "a national embarrassment."

The opposition critics also demanded that the Liberal government sign the agreement allowing them to bear arms immediately.

"It's a screw-up," said Leon Benoit, the defence critic for the Canadian Alliance. "Afghanistan is an extremely dangerous place and it's going to get even more dangerous. By leaving our soldiers without the ability to defend themselves, the government has put them in danger."

John McCallum, the Defence Minister, dismissed the criticisms as "nonsense" and said the Canadian team in Kabul is well protected by their German escorts.

"I think this is a total non-issue," Mr. McCallum told reporters. "It is a small group of reconnaissance people. They are very ably guarded by German troops, our partners, who are obviously armed. It is a question of getting the diplomatic agreement signed.

"When the Canadian army is in Afghanistan, it will of course be armed."

Major-General Lewis MacKenzie, a former commander of peacekeeping troops in Bosnia, said the 25 Canadians are likely the only adults in Afghanistan who are not "armed to the teeth."

"With what's going on in Afghanistan right now, especially with the ambushes of Westerners, I would want them to at least be able to defend themselves," he said.

"The good news is they could probably buy whatever weapons they need on the nearest street corner, with all the ammunition, too."

Maj.-Gen. MacKenzie said there is no usual practice for arming reconnaissance parties sent in advance of peacekeeping missions, but added that during the mission to Bosnia he commanded in the 1990s, "everyone was armed to the teeth."

The 22-nation force, which is limited to operating in Kabul, is sanctioned by the UN, but under NATO command.

Its mission is expected to be a hazardous one. Former Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters have been increasingly active outside of the capital and attacks on Western civilians and soldiers have become more frequent in recent weeks.

At least 14 ISAF members have died in the past year, half of them in a German helicopter crash, and its troops have come under sporadic but increasing attacks from a resurgent Taliban and loyalists of rebel warlord Gulbuddin Hekmatyar.

The wife of one of the soldiers now in Kabul, who did not want to be identified, told Global National the government had put her husband in danger without allowing him any way to protect himself.

"I don't expect a professional soldier to go on the street without a weapon and I don't expect a professional soldier to be sent into a war zone without a weapon," she said.

"If someone were to run at him ... what's he going to do? [Say]: 'Stop, I'm Canadian, go away, don't hit me, don't shoot me'?"

A Canadian battalion and a headquarters group will join the NATO-led security force in Afghanistan by August, the Defence Minister announced earlier this week.

After months of negotiations over Canada's specific role in the mission, Mr. McCallum said on Monday the 3rd Battalion, Royal Canadian Regiment (RCR) and the 2nd Canadian Mechanized Brigade Group and Signals Squadron, both based in Petawawa, Ont., will form the first six-month deployment of troops.

A second rotation of troops will be sent next February, in what Canadian defence officials are calling Operation Athena.

Earlier yesterday, NATO's secretary-general thanked Canada for offering to lead the Kabul mission early next year. Canada had asked NATO to take overall command of the ISAF force because it lacked key capabilities to fulfil the task. But Ottawa has asked NATO to name a Canadian officer to lead the mission for a six-month period beginning next February.

"What I can say is that we are deeply grateful for Canada for making the commitment and for serving in ISAF and for making the suggestion that from now on this is a full NATO mission," said Lord George Robertson, who met on Parliament Hill with Jean Chrétien, the Prime Minister.

Hmm....lets put our troops in harms way but not give them any way to protect themselves. What an insane way todo things, no matter who would have done it.

And our govenment is led by a "moron"? C'mon guys - at least give your own troops some means to protect themselves!

lol, we should probably be reading "US" in place of "westerners." Anyway, one of the critics already admitted that it wasn't a usual practice to arm recon teams. Secondly, from past experience the main threat to Canadians, troops or otherwise, has been from the US--luckily they have _German_ soldiers guarding them. Finally, they aren't your troops hdwareguy.

Speaking of the Liberal Cretian government in Canada, when do you guys have another election?

Don't worry, Phaenx, Jean Chrétien is retiring and will most likely be replaced by Paul Martin, a financial shark.

As for the unarmed recon team, this falls into the same category as the person who spoke the infamous "Bush is a moron" quote and the booing of the US national anthem during an Islanders vs. Canadiens game in Montreal, which would be the "Gets-blown-way-out-of-proprotions-by-the-media-who-happened-to-be-there-at-the-time" category.

As with the other 2 examples, I'm pretty sure that this type of thing happened before, as buraucracy is a retarded, baffling beast. While I certainly agree that not arming soldiers in a war zone is embarassing, I don't think that this article fully illustrates what situation those 25 soldiers are in, as it's clearly composed of a lot of filler about Canada's role in the war and NOT reports from these very soldiers whose lives are supposedly threatened.

Don't worry. We can pelt our enemies with Timbits.

If that doesn't work, then we break out the day-old timbits.



The horror.

it's pummel them with timbits, not pelt!

For the ignorant Yanks, such as myself I did a google search for "Timbits"

Timbits are round donuts (or 'donut centres' I guess) one can get at Tim Hortons.

which in america-talk is "Munchkin at Dunkin Donuts" :D

grin, the whole pummeling with timbits thing is from a TV show in Canada that aired recently called 'Rick Mercer : Talking to Americans'

Rick Mercer is a comedian here in Canada and its kinda like a Jay Leno - Jaywalking. It's pretty funny.

That one gave me the best laugh of the day.

I have faith in our troops one way or the other.

In fact, I will go on record right here and right now, that Canadian troops will capture Osama Bin Ladden - ALIVE in Afghanistan.

A huge international controversy will errupt when Chretien initially refuses to hand over Osama to the Americans instead saying that we will send him to the international court in the Hauge.

President Bush threatens to tax our timbit exports and then flatten us with everything he has unless we hand him over pronto.

I can see the headlines now......

"CHRETIEN TO BUSH, SAY PRETTY PLEASE"

:p

And any prisoners of war can be tortured with poutine.That'll teach them

Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan, hazardous area, not allowed to have weapons? Sounds like a royal screw up to me. Somebody better hope their German escorts do a good job of protecting them, or I would think there may be hell to pay.

Instead of weapons to arm Canadian soldiers, several crates of red tape were loaded onto the transport plane.

Unfortunately thought,drenched in red tape the plane was unable to take off due to mechanical problems dating back to 1965.

Not to worry, though. The Canadian Navy ordered BOTH old submarines it purchased used from Britain to be deployed somewhere in the vicinity, both as a safeguard and a good way to justify the cost. Unfortunately, weapons were not included in the original sale package, but we're talking about SUBMARINES here! They run silent and deep, like the Red October... D'you ever see that flick?

Yet another reason for Alberta to seperate from the rest of this deadweight country.

So my statement didn't come out as clear as I had intended. I know these troops aren't US troops. The statement was intended to be taken as a thought that went through some Canadian leaders mind when making this decision.

Appologies for not making myself clear on that.

Woah! I never thought I'd hear the word "separate" outside of Quebec.

I just found this in the Wall Street Journal

"Why give weapons to our soldiers? If we win without 'em, fine. And if lose, we can say, 'Oh, so you beat us. We didn't even have any weapons. Whaddya want? Big deal!' If you ask me, the best defense our country could have would be an army of poorly equipped, untrained, unarmed women."--Bill Murray, "Saturday Night Live," <b>Feb. 9, 1980</b>!!!!

"Canadian soldiers are back in Afghanistan, but this time, they don't have any weapons to help protect them. In Ottawa's rush to put Canadian troops on the ground, 25 elite Canadian soldiers arrived in Afghanistan only to find that they are not allowed to carry guns. What makes the situation particularly embarrassing is that the troops have been assigned German bodyguards to protect them."-<a target=new href="http://www.canada.com/national/globalnational/">-Global TV, May 6, 2003</a>

Just another sign of the poor planning going on within our military. I, personally, find it rather embarassing that our men and women who, potentially, give up their lives to protect our freedom are not well prepared enough to do so.

It's not the first time, either. Remember the whole CF-18 battery fiasco during the Bosnia skirmish? If we're gonna do something, we should at least do it right.

Actually its been around in Alberta for a while, but its really starting to pick up.

[sarcasm]Maybe they can look really mean and scare the terrorists into giving up.[/sarcasm]

It's been talked about in BC too. I'd be happy as a clam to kiss central Canada goodbye.

I can't believe that you guys from Canada can talk about how fucked up we are and go straight into a diatribe about how your own provinces are wanting to leave. Did I miss something here? It would seem that the parts you are most willing to part with are those that appear to be the most desirable. Wanna' trade them for Mexico - we'll give you written rights to trespass and egress so you're not cut off from some of your parts.

The fact that Canada is fucked up does not make the US less fucked up. Ergo, their criticism of the US - unless it is dependent on a relative comparison to Canada - is still valid.

Quote:

Did I miss something here? It would seem that the parts you are most willing to part with are those that appear to be the most desirable. Wanna' trade them for Mexico - we'll give you written rights to trespass and egress so you're not cut off from some of your parts.

You don't actually own Mexico...right now.

Anyways, I think it would be best if we could make it alone, but failing that joining the US in the same capacity as Puerto Rico is conceivable.

basically the duality can besumed up as this:
if you are an outsider to the country and make a comment, you'll be drawn quatered and boiled in oil by canadians defending the entire country, but within, we have our petty squabbles (ok speeratism isn't that petty, but still).
kinda like a family, you can beat up on your little brother or make fun of them, but if someone else does, you beat the crap out of them.

Good Ridence.

I thought to make this a fair trade we'd do it democratically and let the Mexican citizens vote. The majority of them have already abandoned it and are up here so they probably wouldn't object.

I assume you have a similar attitude for Alberta seperation. You can be smug about it now, until you reaslise how much money you easterners suck from us and are then faced with the cold hard reality of trying to maintain the current levels of nepotism, wasteful spending, social program bureacracy and regional payoffs that keep the liberal party in power. Then you will be in shittown.

Same old tired western victim crap.

Blame the eastern banks, the eastern railway, blah blah blah. Blame everyone but yourself. "We sell you leather for 4 dollars a hide and you sell us shoes for $5.00 a pair"

To that i respond - "Well, have you ever worked in a shoe factory"?

No-one sucks anything from you. You make your own life, stop blaming others for your problems.

My father doesn't own the royal bank, nor do i, nor does anyone i know. The whole big bad ontario thing is not reality. I have never collected a dime of assistance from anyone in my fucking life. I have been working since i was 15 years old, blah blah blah.

I know and work with several people from the west, and Nova Scotia too, who have come to toronto for reason or another and have come to realize that there is no grand plot; that people are people are people and no-one in the east "has it in" for anyone in the west, or elsewhere.

You need to live here to appreciate that.

I was actually born and raised in Hamilton, and believe me, it was bred into me to despise Toronto; to go forth to the tiger cat argo games and seek out argo fans and beat them to a pulp because they were from "hogtown"

Then i moved here.

Didn't like it at first. My family and friends snickered, called me a traitor to the cause, etc.

But then you begin to open your mind and you ralize that the average joe in toronto is busting his hump just like everyone else. That in fact, he's ok, nice even. You then realize that the hatred that was bred into you growing up was wrong.

..............................................................................................

The liberals are in power because more people voted for them than anyone else.

As long as there is fiscal responsibility, i will vote for that party.

Paul Martin took 9 years of coservative thieving, stealing, and corruption complete with back breaking deficits and turned our economy into the strongest of all the G-7 nations. He eliminated deficits, got rid of bureaucracy, and gave us budget surpluses for the first time in my life.

For that alone, I will vote for him.

As strange as this is to be doing this:

Keep it CIVIL, gentlemen.

Make your points in a civil fashon. I won't tolerate intra-province bashing anymore than I will tolerate intra-state bashing.

Consider this your first, last and final warning.

People in the west (most of them, theres always loonies) don't believe the average person out east has some conspiracy to take all our money, it's the government.
For example, since 1960 Alberta has lost over 200 billion in equalization money to other provinces, quebec has gained over 200 billion. The amount this year that alberta is loosing is 8 billion.
When you consider the GDP of Alberta is just over 90 billion, thats almost 10%.
The charest government in quebec was just elected, one one of the things they are looking to do is get more equalization payments, squeezing even more money out of alberta, and making us loose our heritage trust fund (a fund that gets us through times of low oil prices, it's a buffer)
When you look at it, only two provinces give out equalization payemnts, ontario and alberta, and alberta gives out twice as many payments as ontario.

The TD bank resently relased a report stating the the calgary edmonton corridor is the richest in Canada, at 40% above the national average
However, that regions per captita earning are only 4.7% above national levels.
wages are 2% higher.
afer tax income is only 6% higher.
Wheres this 40% going?

Now with all this money flowing out of alberta, You'd think we'd have some chance to influence Canada's politics, but we really don't.
We try and do something in the province that the federal government doesn't like, they threaten to withhold tax money from us, even if it's things that other povinces have already done (adding the option of private health care for one).

The majority of Albertans don't want to seperate from Canada. (70%) however, we see Quebec threatening and whining, and basically getting there way, so we view it as the only possible solution now.

While I'm not going to dvelve into the whole Central vs. Everyone else argument (I find it more useful to correct problems than just talk about them.........vote fer me!), I do have a slight comment on the quote from James T. Kirk:

"The liberals are in power because more people voted for them than anyone else."

Actually, if you look at the total number of people who actually voted (ie. by population and not voting district), they didn't win with a majority and the differences aren't nearly as pronounced (they still won, granted). This, to me, is the failure of democracy: when you have roughly 20% and up of your population not voting........and then them whining about the government.

Yep, Ontario and Alberta are net payers, no doubt about that.

And Toronto is a net payer in Ontario, yet, the city is almost broke. Figure that one out.

This city pays more in taxes in pure quantity terms than any other city in the country. The provincial Gov't takes, and in return downloads welfare, and highways, and other former provincial plans onto the city.

We can't even get a dime out of either the province or the feds to build a subway which in my books is a pretty noble project.

We pay boat loads of money in ontario and get a few rail cars back.

But what are you going to do?

Cut the other 8 provinces loose and say tough titties for you?

I have worked in Quebec quite allot. Probably about half my year is spent working in Quebec. I have really gotten to know the Quebecers and the province quite well.

The quebec boys i work with bust their humps too. Though suprisingly, they think that they are net a net payer provice also. The myth of the laid back quebecer is a myth believe me. I used to think the quebecers were a whiny lot too. But then I started working there and my opinion changed (again). There a pretty good lot. I have never had any "English dog" grief.

I can't speak for the bearaucracy, but, the people i have met are all suprisingly friendly.

I can't tolerate any separatist BS from anyone be they from Quebec, or Alberta, or BC. It's all about political lust. Lucien Bochard et al knew that they could never be prime minister of a Canada because they don't have what it takes. So, you want to be king and pope, you have to separate. It's not what's good for quebec, or alberta, it's all about power and wanting more.

Duck duck,

That is the draw back to the parliamentary system, BUT, I still like Paul Martin. The man is tough and knows how to run a country and balance the books.

The number one issue with me is fiscal stability and responsibility.

With it comes harmony.

When everyone is doing OK, they have a job, some money in their pocket, a slight sense of security, a feeling of working towards something, people are happy.

Mulroney was a lying, theiving, cheating, corrupt, bribe taking, ass kissing no good, low down, rotten stinking THEIF of a prime minister.

Under him deficits went through the roof and unemployment went insane.

The man ruined the PC party singlehandedly.

I don't care what they say, HE TOOK THAT MONEY.

What we need for a little national unity is a good old fashioned hockey series.

I say Canada verses the United States. Best of 7 series. Winner takes all. Nothing binds us together better than that.

And of course you know who would win. ;)

Come down south, here in the U.S. only 40% of the registered voters actually go to the polls and vote.

I will agree paul martin is my hopeful for the liberal candidacy (not that I'll actually vote for the liberals). and brian mulrooney was a buffoon.
As I said before I don't have a problem with the persons, it's the government, I reliaze the average joe in quebec, ontario alberta, or newfoundland really is about the same, there just trying to get there job done, get some cash, and enjoy there life.

It's a basic problem for any state (province, state, country, municipality, etc) in which allocation offunds is done at the top that those who give the most, get the least, bascially the rich or populus subsiding the poor/desolate areas.
I have no problem with equalization payments. The issue I have is with control.
It all boils down to power.
Everyone wants it, those who have it don't want to give it up.

No matter where you live, Moosejaw or Tulsa, it always seems to come back to taxes. Someone is always paying more than they should and the deadbeats next door are living off the fat of the land. There would appear to be a verey simple solution to all of this. My plan:

Do away with every form of taxation that exists.
Figure out exactly how much money government needs. At all levels.
Take the GNP - divide it by the amount of money needed to fund the government at all levels and make that the percent of a national sales tax.

This way everyone pays their fair share. It makes no difference if you are 2 or 102. It makes no difference if you have no children or 112 children. It makes no difference if you are a corporation making 809 gazillion dollars or a 2 dollah Ho that had one customer. It makes no difference if you are a billionaire or an illegal immigrant. This way no one has a bitch coming. The government has all the money it needs and knows when it is coming in. Everyone pays their fair share - there is no way to avoid it, and they all lived happily ever after.

LD may have a point.

Income taxes are paid by the middle class - like me.

The rich pay fuck all (yet cry they pay too much), the poor pay fuck all (yet cry they don't get a big enough handout)

We have the GST here in Canada (which is a national sales tax) which is HATED (myself included).

But it's hard to beat.

Sure, you can pay the guy who does your roof cash and beat it there, but for the most part, you can't beat it.

If there is one thing i can't stand it's assholes who don't pay their taxes.

They want to use the roads, schools, hospitals, and everything else, but they don't want to pay for it.

Uh...sorry to tell you this but my reasons for wanting to seperate from the east aren't the same as those given by either the CCF or Social Credit to validate their proposed economic systems. My arguement is with the government itself...

Quote:

I know and work with several people from the west, and Nova Scotia too, who have come to toronto for reason or another and have come to realize that there is no grand plot; that people are people are people and no-one in the east "has it in" for anyone in the west, or elsewhere. You need to live here to appreciate that. I was actually born and raised in Hamilton, and believe me, it was bred into me to despise Toronto; to go forth to the tiger cat argo games and seek out argo fans and beat them to a pulp because they were from "hogtown" Then i moved here. Didn't like it at first. My family and friends snickered, called me a traitor to the cause, etc. But then you begin to open your mind and you ralize that the average joe in toronto is busting his hump just like everyone else. That in fact, he's ok, nice even. You then realize that the hatred that was bred into you growing up was wrong.

Never said it was a conspiracy. I don't doubt you guys are all trying to survive (although understand that my experience with Torontonians have tended to involve alot of arrogant stereotyping on their part), nor that you aren't part of an evil plot. But what I am upset with doesn't require some evil plan to be afoot.

Quote:

The liberals are in power because more people voted for them than anyone else. As long as there is fiscal responsibility, i will vote for that party. Paul Martin took 9 years of coservative thieving, stealing, and corruption complete with back breaking deficits and turned our economy into the strongest of all the G-7 nations. He eliminated deficits, got rid of bureaucracy, and gave us budget surpluses for the first time in my life. For that alone, I will vote for him.

The liberals are in power because a first-past-the-post system ensures that they will have the majority in parliament and the growing centralization of power ensures that their control is absolute.

If you think that the liberal party is fiscally responsible, you are either so ignorant of what has happened that you shouldn't even be posting here, or you are a straightfaced liar. I am not trying to be rude -even if i am being- but there is no other way to put it. I don't want to list off all the financial scandals and publically reported waste that this government has been involved in (for there is a limit to these posts) but suffice to say I really can't understand how you could possibly refer to them as fiscally responsible.

Martin's budget surpluses came because taxes were raised through orders-in-council and good economic luck. The first few 'surpluses' were budgetary smoke and mirrors and they - luckily for him - worked out after a while. I will give them some credit for doing some stuff better (not that it was hard given their predecessors) but to ignore everything that has gone wrong is rediculous.

No. Cut them off and say, start living within your means...especially Quebec.

[quote]
I have worked in Quebec quite allot. Probably about half my year is spent working in Quebec. I have really gotten to know the Quebecers and the province quite well.

The quebec boys i work with bust their humps too. Though suprisingly, they think that they are net a net payer provice also. The myth of the laid back quebecer is a myth believe me. I used to think the quebecers were a whiny lot too. But then I started working there and my opinion changed (again). There a pretty good lot. I have never had any "English dog" grief.

I can't speak for the bearaucracy, but, the people i have met are all suprisingly friendly.

[quote]

Their ignorance on that subject is part of the problem, although I don't doubt Quebecers themsevles are nice.


Government tends to be the problem there.

Quote:

I can't tolerate any separatist BS from anyone be they from Quebec, or Alberta, or BC. It's all about political lust. Lucien Bochard et al knew that they could never be prime minister of a Canada because they don't have what it takes. So, you want to be king and pope, you have to separate. It's not what's good for quebec, or alberta, it's all about power and wanting more.

No. That's what you want to dismiss it as because you can just brush it off there. We are being taxed without representation, without consideration, and at a very unfair rate.

We don't get a fair return on our taxes, nor do we even get as much money as other provinces (regardless of how much was paid in). We also get ignored...when peace river or the red river flooded, where was the federal aid money? It came along quick when Chretien's area flooded...

They aren't perfect, but they are far better than any of their predesesors.

We must live in a different country, because under Paul Martin, my income taxes have been cut twice. The ony tax increases i have suffered of late have been property taxes.

Sure there has been waste - the HRDC loosing a billion dollars, the gun registry programme costing another billion, but it pales in comparison to Mulroney and his corrupt conservative blow boys. That bastard was running 50 billion dollar deficits, and exactly where did that money go?

Lastly, I would respectfully point out that luck has nothing to do with a strong economy my friend. The strongest economy amoung all G-7 nations does not come without a sound fiscal policy. I am quite sure that the boys in Calgary love Martin just like the boys in Bay Street, and would gladly have him in big chair before Stephen Harper.

If by any of their predecessors you mean Mulrooney, you might have a point...but otherwise that is a pretty big claim you can't substantiate.

Quote:

We must live in a different country, because under Paul Martin, my income taxes have been cut twice. The ony tax increases i have suffered of late have been property taxes.

You don't notice the taxes because they are the order-in-council kind, or they are not consumer taxes and therefor you don't notice them directly.

Quote:

Sure there has been waste - the HRDC loosing a billion dollars, the gun registry programme costing another billion, but it pales in comparison to Mulroney and his corrupt conservative blow boys. That bastard was running 50 billion dollar deficits, and exactly where did that money go?

Would you stop bringing up Mulroney? He is irrelevant. His corruption does not justify theirs, nor does his relatively worse actions make theirs any more acceptable.

Quote:

Lastly, I would respectfully point out that luck has nothing to do with a strong economy my friend. The strongest economy amoung all G-7 nations does not come without a sound fiscal policy. I am quite sure that the boys in Calgary love Martin just like the boys in Bay Street, and would gladly have him in big chair before Stephen Harper.

Circumstance has been a hell of alot of it, Martin and the liberals are just great at taking credit for it. Regardless, I agree that he hasn't done that bad a job ensuring that we can benefit from circumstance, but I still think that Alberta would do better if we were less tied into the federal government...even if it wasn't complete seperation and involved a huge decrease in our federal taxes.

Ontario is a net payer.

We pay more than we get back.

The additional cash goes to help support those provinces less fortunate.

I accept that and figure that it's the right thing to do.

It's funny, but you don't hear the Americans squabbling about the fact that some states pay more than they get (of that i am sure.) They just figure it's for the good of the country.

When political power is concentrated in Ontario that is an easier thing to do, isn't it. You aren't in the same politically excluded position as Alberta.

Quote:

It's funny, but you don't hear the Americans squabbling about the fact that some states pay more than they get (of that i am sure.) They just figure it's for the good of the country.

Yes, well they probably feel that being a part of the country benefits them, where as we don't. This goes beyond transfer payments.

Tell ya what.

Let's move Ottawa to Lethbridge, then see how YOU like dealing with it.

Well the physical placement of the capital doesn't really have much to do with it since it won't change how things are run, but thanks for not really responding but instead trying to avoid the arguement. It really makes me feel correct.

Actually, I was flipping through the May 12 edition of McLeans magazine today and ironically, the editor's column was talking about how little aid came from the Federal Gov't to Toronto regarding the recent SARS crisis which has cost the City of Toronto upwards of a billion dollars in lost revenue.

The FEDS offered 10 million in disaster relief, which the editor contrasted to the 157 million given by the Federal Gov't to the West when the Red River flooded in 1997and the 717 million given to quebec during the ice storm of 1998 i believe.

Sorry i can't post the link, you will have to pick up the May 12, 2003 edtion of McLeans. Their site won't allow you to read the magazine for free i would guess.

So don't feel too hard done by there smashy......

And they have green camoflauge too! In the desert! I wonder if the PC's will ever gain majority again, after all of that Brian Mulroney jet scandal crappy PM stuff. I would love to see Joe Clark as PM, but I don't think that will happen any time soon. Friggin' liberal dictatorship, I tellls ya!

Well, seeing as joe clark is stepping down, i doubt he will ever be PM eiter, and as long as the reform exists to split the vote on the right, i doubt you will ever see anything but a liberal gov't.

The reform need to go away....

Wow, I had no idea there was such a seedy underbelly to Canadian politics. This is an interesting read.

This is only scratching the surface... wait until Senate Reform gets trotted out...

I'm in the Canadian military and the fact that the boys don't have there weapons is not very confidence building...

As for Alberta separating...I just got back from there and you can keep it!!!
:D

But you can't take it.

Canada must remain united or the States will buy us out from under our feet!!!!!

Back off USA or you get none of our bacon!!!!!;)

Indeed.

well, it might be dumb....but at least they showed up.

hehe...that would be interesting LOL.

Sad but true.

You could see a minority government... Liberal/NDP or Liberal/PC (if the PC can swing the vote).

One of the most successful governments in the past 40 years was a coalition of Liberals and NDP.

Anything but Reform and Bloc...

I think the main reason I don't see Paul Martin as such a "wonder" economist is the fact that he's merely refunding some of the money that the Liberal party took under Trudeau in the social splurge. It seems great to ya now, but let's look at the big picture. Hypothetically, let's draw some numbers. Let's say that under Trudeau, they take $20 million. Now, under Paul they give back $8 million. It seems great now, but look at the net result. Don't get me wrong, I love Paul for getting that money back to us. It's just that I think we should be paying off the debt even more so. I mean, if we all personally ran our households the way the government runs the country (with the debt, etc.), we'd have all our possessions repo'd and be out on our butts in the street.

As for how the federal government is run, I'm all for the whole electronic voting in the House. I think that it could be done safely enough that we wouldn't need to worry about electronic hampering. We'd still have elected officials, but they could actually express their opinions through their votes. If you're a liberal and you don't vote as Jean, you're kicked out (for the most part). Same for the other parties. That's not right. That's just an elected dictatorship. We vote privately; why don't they? It's almost foolish to think that everyone in a party will hold exactly the same views. Humans are too complex and wonderful for that, I think.

On the Senate? Get rid of it. The PM can use the clause in the BNA (I think this one) where he can just overthrow the vote (like Mulroney did). Our taxes are just going to pad the wallets of some lucky stiffs who do nothing. If they were as involved as the US Senate, keep 'em. But they aren't and so they're just wasting our tax dollars.

As for the Reform going away........

1). the PC either need to realize that they are washed up and join (which I don't necessarily agree with)

2). the Reform needs to get their act together to get the majority (they came so far so quick).

3). the Reform need to disband, join the PC, and both need to "meet in the middle" over issues.

4). EVERYONE NEEDS TO VOTE! This one still ticks me off. If we're a liberal country--fine. If we're a conservative country--fine. But we'll never truly know until everyone votes. As sad as it is, the destiny of the many is being decided by the few (when the many have a chance to change that........that's the part that gets me).

I am all for abolishing the senate.

It's a usless piece of crap that serves NO purpose. Get rid of it.

Furthermore, get rid of half the politicians we do have. Every province has half the MP's it currently has.

There is no need to have so many hangers on.

I say give Senate teeth... have an elected Senate and give them the power they should have to act as a balance to the Parliament.

As it stands, when there is a majority government in power, the PMO can do what it wants...

I also say let's get rid of the Queen... It's about time we had a Republic of Canada.

I'm all for giving the Senate power except one huge problem. Making changes to the BNA (I think this is the one that the PM uses to, basically, overthrow the Senate. If it's not this one, please tell me which one it is cuz I'd like to know) would make it so that people would wanna change other stuff, too. Remember Meech Lake? So while giving the Senate teeth (ala U.S. which got it right IMHO), I don't find it feasible. You're, essentially, asking Parliament to give up some of their power. I'm sure they'd love to do that. ;)

As for the Queen..........as long as she's not getting a huge chunk of our taxes, I haven't a huge problem with her. She is a part of our heritage, but as soon as the old hag becomes a money pit, lose her. Her coming over and all is nice, but there's no bloody way my tax dollars are going over to the U.K. to heat all her palaces, etc. That may seem a lil' shallow, but I can stay true to my heritage of Britain just as easily by hanging a pic of her somewhere than pay taxes to her (odd, seeing as how I'm a "put your money where your mouth is" kinda guy). I guess I don't really feel any allegiance to her because she's not our leader anymore.

The British North America Act is no longer in effect. It was superceded by the Canada Act (Constitutional Act of 1982). The Canada Act made us a fully sovreign state.

It combines the old BNA and incorportates a number of amendments. It was agreed upon by all provinces except Quebec.

It would take some Constitutional wrangling but I'd say now is the time. With Jean Charest as Premiere in Quebec we might be able to finaly get Quebec into the fold.

Then again I am sure we have enough things to worry about with out picking at that scab again.

Wow. If you're going to send your troops somewhere, then give them weapons. Dear god.


On a side note: Tim Hortons is the shiznit! I loved that place! Bout the only place worth going to in Canada.... (i kid, i kid ;))

Indeed. IMO, Quebec will never have a referendum again. If it didn't work in the 80's with Levesque in power, all the brouhaha over the "night of long knives," and the separatist movement at its most fevered pitch, then it's never going to work. Therefore, any need to "get Quebec back into the fold" is totally pointless, since there will always be nationalists bitching about being served in English only no matter what the consitution reads. While I'm proud of my French-Canadian heritage, I'm also very proud to be Canadian, even if we send unarmed troops abroad. We know kung fu.

Very well said. Its incredibly frustrating that people complain and complain about our government but won't do anything about it!.