I think its absoultly Stupid.. Dion is a pathletic loser trying to make up for his lame show in the polls
What do you think???
What Do you think of the Liberal NDP Bloq quebec Coalition Government idea?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
I'm not Canadian, so it doesn't really concern me, but what is this idea?TheokhothBasically, Dion ( a french liberal ) has formed a coalition with the other 2 losers in the Canadian election. They are saying to Stephen harper ( the current prime minister ) that together they have 65% of the votes.. and will overpower him... now.. IMPO, if they do take over... Canada will be known as the Dog of the US.... which... well.. I won't stand for... Harper is smarter, and better then the 3 of them combined... and i hope he pulls ahead.
The voter's decistion should be upheld. A coalition government is not a good idea.
It's not taking away the choice of government. The only people that voted for Harper were in the riding of Calgary-Southwest. We elect MPs, not PMs. The House of Commons has lost faith in the ability of the Prime Minister to govern, and it is entirely within the rules for a coalition government to be formed if the no-confidence vote passes on Dec. 8. It's up to the Governor General, but it is entirely lawful.bluezyYes we vote for MPs but we also vote for the MPs of the person we want as Prime Minister and we did vote him in.This coalition isn't are choice and would do very worse then the government we have now.You wanna know why because its made up of 3 parties with different views.
It's either a coalition government or we go back to the polls 2 months after the last election and spend another 30 million dollars. Personally, I would chose the coalition.300 million, not 30 million.
redstorm72
[QUOTE="bluezy"]It's not taking away the choice of government. The only people that voted for Harper were in the riding of Calgary-Southwest. We elect MPs, not PMs. The House of Commons has lost faith in the ability of the Prime Minister to govern, and it is entirely within the rules for a coalition government to be formed if the no-confidence vote passes on Dec. 8. It's up to the Governor General, but it is entirely lawful.Gun-UnitYes we vote for MPs but we also vote for the MPs of the person we want as Prime Minister and we did vote him in.This coalition isn't are choice and would do very worse then the government we have now.You wanna know why because its made up of 3 parties with different views. its actually a coalition of the liberals and ndp with the bloc supporting votes, not ideology, as harper would have Canadians believe. Harper is a hypocrite as he has pandered to the bloc a few times in the past to try to down the Martin gov't and to pass legislation as a minority gov't, he doesn't mention that but it is the samething, as the bloc were not in a coalition with the tories but aided them by voting their way.
[QUOTE="Gun-Unit"][QUOTE="bluezy"]It's not taking away the choice of government. The only people that voted for Harper were in the riding of Calgary-Southwest. We elect MPs, not PMs. The House of Commons has lost faith in the ability of the Prime Minister to govern, and it is entirely within the rules for a coalition government to be formed if the no-confidence vote passes on Dec. 8. It's up to the Governor General, but it is entirely lawful.obsolete2k1Yes we vote for MPs but we also vote for the MPs of the person we want as Prime Minister and we did vote him in.This coalition isn't are choice and would do very worse then the government we have now.You wanna know why because its made up of 3 parties with different views. its actually a coalition of the liberals and ndp with the bloc supporting votes, not ideology, as harper would have Canadians believe. Harper is a hypocrite as he has pandered to the bloc a few times in the past to try to down the Martin gov't and to pass legislation as a minority gov't, he doesn't mention that but it is the samething, as the bloc were not in a coalition with the tories but aided them by voting their way. That is totally different there is nothing wrong with trying to defeat a government together in the end it would come back to us for the vote.Now this coalition on the other hand is a sign deal that Dion would be the leader of all 3 parties for a period of 18 months and might not go to the polls without are opinion on the matter.
[QUOTE="bluezy"]It's not taking away the choice of government. The only people that voted for Harper were in the riding of Calgary-Southwest. We elect MPs, not PMs. The House of Commons has lost faith in the ability of the Prime Minister to govern, and it is entirely within the rules for a coalition government to be formed if the no-confidence vote passes on Dec. 8. It's up to the Governor General, but it is entirely lawful.Gun-UnitYes we vote for MPs but we also vote for the MPs of the person we want as Prime Minister and we did vote him in.This coalition isn't are choice and would do very worse then the government we have now.You wanna know why because its made up of 3 parties with different views.I think we would do worse with a Conservative government, but that's just our conflicting political views. As obsolete said, it's the Libs and NDP together, with the Bloc supporting. The Bloc would not receive any cabinet positions. And I think a coalition is our best option at the moment. If the no-confidence motion passes next week, nobody will want to go to the polls again, because we will end up with pretty much the same result. Plus, Dion would only be in power until a new Liberal leader is selected in May.
As the Conservatives didn't actually get the majority of Canadian voter support, the left did, ie. liberals and ndp, this coalition will represent the wishes of the majority of Canadians, therefore I support it for that reason. Having a gov't which represents the will of the majority of canadians seems more democratic than having a gov't which does not, such as the current one.obsolete2k1No it isn't because they are different parties with different views of subjects.It is not the wishes because i did not vote for a coalition nor did i want one.I'd tell you its not my wishes and am changing my votes and iam sure many others will to.
I think we would do worse with a Conservative government, but that's just our conflicting political views. As obsolete said, it's the Libs and NDP together, with the Bloc supporting. The Bloc would not receive any cabinet positions. And I think a coalition is our best option at the moment. If the no-confidence motion passes next week, nobody will want to go to the polls again, because we will end up with pretty much the same result. Plus, Dion would only be in power until a new Liberal leader is selected in May.bluezyYes but the guy that has a good chance at becoming leader of the liberals does not support the coalition also.It don't really matter if bloc has cabinet positions they still gotta go by blocs wishes otherwise Conservatives would still have power.
The last thing canada needs is a leader like dion. and jack layton may as well be a communist.. they lost they should get over it.
Besides the government has other things to worry like the economy...
[QUOTE="bluezy"]It's not taking away the choice of government. The only people that voted for Harper were in the riding of Calgary-Southwest. We elect MPs, not PMs. The House of Commons has lost faith in the ability of the Prime Minister to govern, and it is entirely within the rules for a coalition government to be formed if the no-confidence vote passes on Dec. 8. It's up to the Governor General, but it is entirely lawful.Gun-UnitYes we vote for MPs but we also vote for the MPs of the person we want as Prime Minister and we did vote him in.This coalition isn't are choice and would do very worse then the government we have now.You wanna know why because its made up of 3 parties with different views. Technically, what Canada needs right now is bipartisanship, and working with people "across the aisle". Harper has not only shown that he is absolutely unwilling to be bipartisan, he's proven he's greedy and power-hungry by trying to take away funding for all the other political parties. Technically more people voted in favour of those within the coalition than those not within it. Everyone has known this was possible during Minority governments, but no one figured anyone would pull the risk of doing a coalition to take the government. You could argue that when the Progressive Conservative party merged with the Canadian Alliance party to become the Conservative party of Canada, it wasn't what either of their voters wanted, but it happened. :o The new coalition is basically the Liberals with more power given to the NDP to push bits and pieces of their agenda, and the Bloc get a say on whether any legislation passes(which is bullcrap, and the dealbreaker for me IMHO). I don't LIKE the coalition, but I can hardly fathom it'll be immediately worse than the current Conservative govt. My only worries are that (1) the separatists will be given way too much power, and they'll have a surge of support in the near future, and (2) the recession will be as long as it's projected to be and the blame will unjustly fall upon the coalition(which would be funny, considering the Conservatives are somewhat unjustly being unseated, as the opposition hasn't done anything about the Conservative's shady actions up until this coalition talk) come the 18 month minimum length, and the Conservatives will win a majority with the Bloc as the official opposition. That would frighten me so much that I would leave Canada.
[QUOTE="quader_ac400"]Besides the government has other things to worry like the economy...bluezyWhich Harper's doing nothing about, by the way. he cant do anything until the united states do something with there economy they are way to big a part of our economy. they have to wait for obama to come
[QUOTE="quader_ac400"]Besides the government has other things to worry like the economy...bluezyWhich Harper's doing nothing about, by the way. Actually he has done a fair amount like the free trade agreement for example which will bring more money to Canada,ya liberals or NDP won't bring that up.If convertives were so bad with economy why is Alberta doing so good and Sask now doing good.
Technically, what Canada needs right now is bipartisanship, and working with people "across the aisle". Harper has not only shown that he is absolutely unwilling to be bipartisan, he's proven he's greedy and power-hungry by trying to take away funding for all the other political parties. Technically more people voted in favour of those within the coalition than those not within it. Everyone has known this was possible during Minority governments, but no one figured anyone would pull the risk of doing a coalition to take the government. You could argue that when the Progressive Conservative party merged with the Canadian Alliance party to become the Conservative party of Canada, it wasn't what either of their voters wanted, but it happened. :o The new coalition is basically the Liberals with more power given to the NDP to push bits and pieces of their agenda, and the Bloc get a say on whether any legislation passes(which is bullcrap, and the dealbreaker for me IMHO). I don't LIKE the coalition, but I can hardly fathom it'll be immediately worse than the current Conservative govt. My only worries are that (1) the separatists will be given way too much power, and they'll have a surge of support in the near future, and (2) the recession will be as long as it's projected to be and the blame will unjustly fall upon the coalition(which would be funny, considering the Conservatives are somewhat unjustly being unseated, as the opposition hasn't done anything about the Conservative's shady actions up until this coalition talk) come the 18 month minimum length, and the Conservatives will win a majority with the Bloc as the official opposition. That would frighten me so much that I would leave Canada.LockedgeThe difference again is PC and Alliance gain no power out of it they just became a party with one view,its a totally different case,this on the other hand will gain power to those parties to over rule government and this coalition is a problem because we have no clue want will happen out of this because they are not emerging and will still have there different views.
Actually he has done a fair amount like the free trade agreement for example which will bring more money to Canada,ya liberals or NDP won't bring that up.If convertives were so bad with economy why is Alberta doing so good and Sask now doing good.Gun-UnitFree trade agreement? You mean the one from 1993? And the fact that Alberta is doing well has nothing to do with how Stephen Harper runs the country. Alberta is doing well because of their ridiculous amount of industry, things like oil and coal.
[QUOTE="Gun-Unit"]Actually he has done a fair amount like the free trade agreement for example which will bring more money to Canada,ya liberals or NDP won't bring that up.If convertives were so bad with economy why is Alberta doing so good and Sask now doing good.bluezyFree trade agreement? You mean the one from 1993? And the fact that Alberta is doing well has nothing to do with how Stephen Harper runs the country. Alberta is doing well because of their ridiculous amount of industry, things like oil and coal.I forget with what country it was with but it was in south america and will bring millions to canada this happened not long ago.Not really look at Sask ruled by NDP before now,now its booming.Harper has not been given a term of full power to give him the chance to show what he can do.He can only do so much and only bring some things to the table that other parties might accept.
[QUOTE="bluezy"][QUOTE="quader_ac400"]Besides the government has other things to worry like the economy...Gun-UnitWhich Harper's doing nothing about, by the way. Actually he has done a fair amount like the free trade agreement for example which will bring more money to Canada,ya liberals or NDP won't bring that up.If convertives were so bad with economy why is Alberta doing so good and Sask now doing good. Are you talking about Harper's cop-out softwood lumber "victory" where Canada got the shaft really bad. I mean, there was the USA, stealing money from us through illegal border tariffs, and causing a hemorrhage of job losses, just because our dollar was cheaper than theirs and our wood was cheaper to import than USA's. We went to NAFTA, WTO, and the U.S. Court of International Trade and all three ruled in favour of Canada when we challenged the USA's illegal actions, and yet the USA continuously dismissed the rulings. Harper sold out and got a really crappy deal for the forestry industry(which wasn't very happy with the deal at all, but agreed to it anyways because getting a slice of bread rather than a full course meal is better than getting nothing at all, and being stolen from in the process). Alberta and Saskatchewan have oil, of COURSE they're going to be doing well(even with the price of oil barrels so low right now). Did the Conservatives magically create those oil reserves under layers and layers of rock and dirt?
[QUOTE="Gun-Unit"][QUOTE="bluezy"]Which Harper's doing nothing about, by the way.LockedgeActually he has done a fair amount like the free trade agreement for example which will bring more money to Canada,ya liberals or NDP won't bring that up.If convertives were so bad with economy why is Alberta doing so good and Sask now doing good. Are you talking about Harper's cop-out softwood lumber "victory" where Canada got the shaft really bad. I mean, there was the USA, stealing money from us through illegal border tariffs, and causing a hemorrhage of job losses, just because our dollar was cheaper than theirs and our wood was cheaper to import than USA's. We went to NAFTA, WTO, and the U.S. Court of International Trade and all three ruled in favour of Canada when we challenged the USA's illegal actions, and yet the USA continuously dismissed the rulings. Harper sold out and got a really crappy deal for the forestry industry(which wasn't very happy with the deal at all, but agreed to it anyways because getting a slice of bread rather than a full course meal is better than getting nothing at all, and being stolen from in the process). Alberta and Saskatchewan have oil, of COURSE they're going to be doing well(even with the price of oil barrels so low right now). Did the Conservatives magically create those oil reserves under layers and layers of rock and dirt?http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2008/11/21/apec-advance.html?ref=rss
Saying Harper isn't trying to help the ecomey is just lies.
I forget with what country it was with but it was in south america and will bring millions to canada this happened not long ago.Not really look at Sask ruled by NDP before now,now its booming.Harper has not been given a term of full power to give him the chance to show what he can do.He can only do so much and only bring some things to the table that other parties might accept.Gun-UnitThe only reason to suggest that Saskatchewan is booming is due to industry, dominated by agriculture and, you guessed it, oil. In the last 12 years, their population has hardly increased. You know why Harper will never get a full term? Because the things that his party comes up with are unpopular, such as taking away public funding of political parties. That's why he's getting run out of office. He has (unofficially until monday) lost the confidence of Parliament. We've seen what he can do, and we don't like it enough to give him a majority. And if we don't like what he does with a minority government, imagine what he would pass with a majority.
[QUOTE="Gun-Unit"]I forget with what country it was with but it was in south america and will bring millions to canada this happened not long ago.Not really look at Sask ruled by NDP before now,now its booming.Harper has not been given a term of full power to give him the chance to show what he can do.He can only do so much and only bring some things to the table that other parties might accept.bluezyThe only reason to suggest that Saskatchewan is booming is due to industry, dominated by agriculture and, you guessed it, oil. In the last 12 years, their population has hardly increased. You know why Harper will never get a full term? Because the things that his party comes up with are unpopular, such as taking away public funding of political parties. That's why he's getting run out of office. He has (unofficially until monday) lost the confidence of Parliament. We've seen what he can do, and we don't like it enough to give him a majority. And if we don't like what he does with a minority government, imagine what he would pass with a majority. So who cares vote for the party you want,this coalition is very wrong and worse in my eyes then the government we have.
[QUOTE="Lockedge"]Technically, what Canada needs right now is bipartisanship, and working with people "across the aisle". Harper has not only shown that he is absolutely unwilling to be bipartisan, he's proven he's greedy and power-hungry by trying to take away funding for all the other political parties. Technically more people voted in favour of those within the coalition than those not within it. Everyone has known this was possible during Minority governments, but no one figured anyone would pull the risk of doing a coalition to take the government. You could argue that when the Progressive Conservative party merged with the Canadian Alliance party to become the Conservative party of Canada, it wasn't what either of their voters wanted, but it happened. :o The new coalition is basically the Liberals with more power given to the NDP to push bits and pieces of their agenda, and the Bloc get a say on whether any legislation passes(which is bullcrap, and the dealbreaker for me IMHO). I don't LIKE the coalition, but I can hardly fathom it'll be immediately worse than the current Conservative govt. My only worries are that (1) the separatists will be given way too much power, and they'll have a surge of support in the near future, and (2) the recession will be as long as it's projected to be and the blame will unjustly fall upon the coalition(which would be funny, considering the Conservatives are somewhat unjustly being unseated, as the opposition hasn't done anything about the Conservative's shady actions up until this coalition talk) come the 18 month minimum length, and the Conservatives will win a majority with the Bloc as the official opposition. That would frighten me so much that I would leave Canada.Gun-UnitThe difference again is PC and Alliance gain no power out of it they just became a party with one view,its a totally different case,this on the other hand will gain power to those parties to over rule government and this coalition is a problem because we have no clue want will happen out of this because they are not emerging and will still have there different views. What will happen is there will be a cabinet of mostly Liberals with NDP support. Like I said, a Liberal government with increased NDP influence, except the bloc gets veto power. How hard is that to understand? The bloc and NDP are leftist, and the Liberals are centrist. There are many things they all agree on, and just because they don't agree on everything doesn't mean that will be a problem. In the USA Obama didn't surround himself with people who thought just like him, he surrounded himself with people who have different stances on politics, because that's bipartisanship, and that is what we need right now. We need unity. Tonight, with Harper's televised statement, i'm positive he pissed off many people from Quebec when he generalized the BQ as separatists. Do they have that agenda? yes. I don't like it, but that's part of their platform. You know what though? The vast majority of Quebec has NO desire to separate, and only voted in the BQ because they've given folks of that province results; more than any other political party has as of late. Harper spoke about unity, yet made divisive remarks, and has made no such unifying political actions to reach across the aisle. The fact is that a 100% conservative agenda in a minority government is both (1) not acceptable, and (2) not going to stand up the the opposition. harper wants 100% and the Coalition see that as a bad thing for Canada's future. I agree with them, although i don't believe they need to switch over the reign of power. I think they could just bully Harper around within his minority govt until he realizes he's not going to get anywhere without their help.
So who cares vote for the party you want,this coalition is very wrong and worse in my eyes then the government we have.Gun-UnitSo you have nothing to counter with? Oh well, at least you tried. This coalition is quite lawful, it's within the rules. I'm going to bed, but if you'd like to continue with this, feel free to PM me.
Are you talking about Harper's cop-out softwood lumber "victory" where Canada got the shaft really bad. I mean, there was the USA, stealing money from us through illegal border tariffs, and causing a hemorrhage of job losses, just because our dollar was cheaper than theirs and our wood was cheaper to import than USA's. We went to NAFTA, WTO, and the U.S. Court of International Trade and all three ruled in favour of Canada when we challenged the USA's illegal actions, and yet the USA continuously dismissed the rulings. Harper sold out and got a really crappy deal for the forestry industry(which wasn't very happy with the deal at all, but agreed to it anyways because getting a slice of bread rather than a full course meal is better than getting nothing at all, and being stolen from in the process). Alberta and Saskatchewan have oil, of COURSE they're going to be doing well(even with the price of oil barrels so low right now). Did the Conservatives magically create those oil reserves under layers and layers of rock and dirt?http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2008/11/21/apec-advance.html?ref=rss[QUOTE="Lockedge"][QUOTE="Gun-Unit"] Actually he has done a fair amount like the free trade agreement for example which will bring more money to Canada,ya liberals or NDP won't bring that up.If convertives were so bad with economy why is Alberta doing so good and Sask now doing good.Gun-Unit
Saying Harper isn't trying to help the ecomey is just lies.
That was a solid step towards getting back to decency, but getting reamed by our largest trading partner with the softwood scandal was like your best friend stealing $2000 from you, and then you go up to him and ask if you could borrow $20.[QUOTE="Gun-Unit"]So who cares vote for the party you want,this coalition is very wrong and worse in my eyes then the government we have.bluezySo you have nothing to counter with? Oh well, at least you tried. This coalition is quite lawful, it's within the rules. I'm going to bed, but if you'd like to continue with this, feel free to PM me. Nope i could go on forever but i gotta go to bed also and this was going off my point that we should have the say and vote in what happens.
That was a solid step towards getting back to decency, but getting reamed by our largest trading partner with the softwood scandal was like your best friend stealing $2000 from you, and then you go up to him and ask if you could borrow $20.LockedgeAtlest they made a deal which the liberals couldn;t because they were to busy stealing are own taxes.This has gone off my point i could bring more points up but iam tired and the whole point i was trying to bring up is we should have the vote and say not liberals or ndp.We could argue are views all day its stupid that can be saved for the polls.
[QUOTE="bluezy"][QUOTE="Gun-Unit"]I forget with what country it was with but it was in south america and will bring millions to canada this happened not long ago.Not really look at Sask ruled by NDP before now,now its booming.Harper has not been given a term of full power to give him the chance to show what he can do.He can only do so much and only bring some things to the table that other parties might accept.Gun-UnitThe only reason to suggest that Saskatchewan is booming is due to industry, dominated by agriculture and, you guessed it, oil. In the last 12 years, their population has hardly increased. You know why Harper will never get a full term? Because the things that his party comes up with are unpopular, such as taking away public funding of political parties. That's why he's getting run out of office. He has (unofficially until monday) lost the confidence of Parliament. We've seen what he can do, and we don't like it enough to give him a majority. And if we don't like what he does with a minority government, imagine what he would pass with a majority. So who cares vote for the party you want,this coalition is very wrong and worse in my eyes then the government we have. People DID vote, and this coalition represents all those votes. Besides, I can't imagine the number of seats NDP would have won from both Conservatives and Liberals had that stupid "vote for the largest opposition" mentality been used. People voted for Liberals, even though they supported the NDP, because they thought the liberals were the only one to stand a chance. Had this mentality not happened, then the NDP would likely, if I recall correctly, be at least 8 seats larger. Besides, the Liberals and NDP have, combined, more votes than the Conservatives...by 931,983 votes to be exact. So if you say this isn't what people voted for, you're right, it's not exactly what people voted for, but whether we go by popular vote, seat count, etc, this is all legal, and I'd wager mostly supported by those who voted for their respective parties. The only ones crying foul here are the Cons.
I'm not Canadian and I only know very little about this, but I don't like this Dion guy. I'm sure many of OT's Canadian's users are aware of his "Green Shift" program to fight global warming. I'm not really sure about the details, but I think he was gonna place additional taxes on everything. Now, I already disagree with diverting funds to fighting something that has little scientific backing and probably isn't a real threat if it is true. However, (again, this is mainly for non-Canadians who probably aren't aware of this) it turns out that he was LYING. The "Green Shift" was in reality a socialistic redistribution of wealth. There was no environmental incentive behind it. Again, I'm not sure exactly how that would work out, but it's pretty despicable that he would deceive people like that. EDIT: Why won't Glitchspot keep my paragraphs when I quick reply?AlternatingCapsThats all the liberals do. its all a money grab... Lol Welcome to canadian politics
A government with the communist NDP the sepratists and an idiot like dion running the country canadas going straight for the $hitter. quader_ac400You could be right, but I doubt it would be absolutely terrible. It would be bad, but not as atrocious as the likely conservative majority would be afterward. The Conservatives have attempted to pass so many abysmal and ridiculous bills with sneaky wording, and only the opposition has been there to prevent them from eliminating all the progress Canada has made over the past decades. Gay marriage and benefits? Gone. Abortion? Repealed. Women's rights? Diminished and heavily restricted. Education? Diminished. Social programs like day-care, extracurricular programs in low-income neighbourhoods, federal scholarships, etc. would be either eliminated or diminished to the point where they won't be effective at all. I'm not saying the Liberals/NDP/Bloc are much better, especially with the thoughts of bailout packages, and taxing gas even more(which would increase prices on everything that we buy), but I'd rather be a little more poor than legally disadvantaged and treated like a second-class citizen.
People may not have been voting for Harper during the election, but it became quite clear that they were voting against Dion. Yet it is Dion we will have as PM? And then we're going to have our next PM appointed? One can't just go by raw totals of "votes for the left" and say a coalition of socialists and separatists is more representative of the way Canada voted. A vote for the NDP (and the Green Party) was a vote taken away from the Liberals; many who voted NDP did so because they don't feel the Liberals represent them and don't want them to. The left wing isn't monolithic.
The Liberals and NDP (114 seats) don't have the edge over the Conservatives (143 seats) without the Bloc (49 seats). Yes, the Bloc, which got more seats than the NDP while having less popular support across Canada (only 10% because they only represent one province.) This puts the unpopular, unrepresentative Bloc in a very advantageous position to make demands. Goodness knows, we pander to Quebec enough, but now we can expect far more of that.
It amazes me that the Libs-NDP are depending on a party that has throughout history been dedicated to the destruction of Canada, and yet liberals can still attempt to justify this power grab from a miserably failed leader who has already announced his defeat. Sure it's legal. But what's legal isn't always what's good, right, or desirable.
There is no basis upon which to justify this anti-democratic move. The party with the largest percentage of the vote and largest number of seats has always formed government in over 100 years of Canadian history. The will of the people cannot be overturned in a democratic society on any sort of excuse or grounds, especially not weak, consequentialist hopes of "progress". Living in a democracy has its advantages, but the price of it is that you have got to accept the will of the people even when you disagree with their decision. You can't override it because you think they've got it wrong. You can't run roughshod over democracy in the name of progress or security.
I'm pretty sure the adage goes "Country first", not "Party first". And you will never convince me that compromising Canada's democratic principles can ever be for the good of the country.
[QUOTE="AlternatingCaps"]I'm not Canadian and I only know very little about this, but I don't like this Dion guy. I'm sure many of OT's Canadian's users are aware of his "Green Shift" program to fight global warming. I'm not really sure about the details, but I think he was gonna place additional taxes on everything. Now, I already disagree with diverting funds to fighting something that has little scientific backing and probably isn't a real threat if it is true. However, (again, this is mainly for non-Canadians who probably aren't aware of this) it turns out that he was LYING. The "Green Shift" was in reality a socialistic redistribution of wealth. There was no environmental incentive behind it. Again, I'm not sure exactly how that would work out, but it's pretty despicable that he would deceive people like that. EDIT: Why won't Glitchspot keep my paragraphs when I quick reply?quader_ac400Thats all the liberals do. its all a money grab... Lol Welcome to canadian politics Yep :roll:, well that and get canada out of massive debts due to conservative's overspending.
Yep :roll:, well that and get canada out of massive debts due to conservative's overspending.htekemeraldIf you think the coalition's massive bailouts and increased spending on environmental and social programs as well as bloated government is going to get canada out of debt, you're in for a shocker. We'd end with a far larger debt than was predicted under the Conservatives. You can't criticise Conservatives for cutting back and overspending at the same time, you know. It just doesn't make logical sense to blame them for everything.
People may not have been voting for Harper during the election, but it became quite clear that they were voting against Dion. Yet it is Dion we will have as PM? And then we're going to have our next PM appointed? One can't just go by raw totals of "votes for the left" and say a coalition of socialists and separatists is more representative of the way Canada voted. A vote for the NDP (and the Green Party) was a vote taken away from the Liberals; many who voted NDP did so because they don't feel the Liberals represent them and don't want them to. The left wing isn't monolithic.
The Liberals and NDP (114 seats) don't have the edge over the Conservatives (143 seats) without the Bloc (49 seats). Yes, the Bloc, which got more seats than the NDP while having less popular support across Canada (only 10% because they only represent one province.) This puts the unpopular, unrepresentative Bloc in a very advantageous position to make demands. Goodness knows, we pander to Quebec enough, but now we can expect far more of that.
It amazes me that the Libs-NDP are depending on a party that has throughout history been dedicated to the destruction of Canada, and yet liberals can still attempt to justify this power grab from a miserably failed leader who has already announced his defeat. Sure it's legal. But what's legal isn't always what's good, right, or desirable.
There is no basis upon which to justify this anti-democratic move. The party with the largest percentage of the vote and largest number of seats has always formed government in over 100 years of Canadian history. The will of the people cannot be overturned in a democratic society on any sort of excuse or grounds, especially not weak, consequentialist hopes of "progress". Living in a democracy has its advantages, but the price of it is that you have got to accept the will of the people even when you disagree with their decision. You can't override it because you think they've got it wrong. You can't run roughshod over democracy in the name of progress or security.
I'm pretty sure the adage goes "Country first", not "Party first". And you will never convince me that compromising Canada's democratic principles can ever be for the good of the country.
clicketyclick
I think you have those "reasons for voting green/NDP" absolutely wrong, but I won't even go there. I also won't argue many voted against the Liberals because of Dion and his Green Shift(but I will say that the green shift wasn't such a bad idea, and were it to be implemented right now with low gas prices across the country, I don't think it would be any worse than what the Conservative's approach is. The Green Shift was mocked and twisted and contorted to make the average Canadian confused about it, and then the rest of the parties slagged it with mistruths. But I digress...). I won't disagree that the Bloc having more power is detrimental to Canada, and it's a shame to see the NDP and Liberals, who have staunchly opposed ties to the BQ in the past, joining up with Duceppe to overtake the Conservatives.
It's stupid and uncalled for, especially when they could just say no to everything the Conservatives tried to pass until Harper and co. started listening. Instead, they've said yes to everything until Harper threatened to take away funding from them(which is about as dirty a ploy as any I can recall in Canadian politics history), where now they'e uniting. Ridiculous. They attack the Conservatives' inaction, yet they promoted it.
Yet, in a time of economic recession, where people are being laid off left and right, do we want a political party in power that honestly could care less about the individual person, unless they're a head of a corporation. In a time of economic uncertainty, the Conservatives are trying to axe pay equity, which would hurt half our population's income in order to pad the wallets of the businesses. In the start of a recession, he's worrying about the deficit instead of explicitly plotting out what he will do to guide Canada through the coming months, and what he'll do to help Canadians through those months. Maintaining as small a deficit as possible will not help the auto-workers put food on their table. Here's a PM who has stated before that he wants to look into helping the Auto sector out, but Ontario's premier Daulton McGuinty hasn't heard a word from the feds, and have begun taking matters into their own hands.
Here's a PM who just tonight blanketed all Quebeceurs who voted BQ in the last election as separatists, which is unfair, divisive and stupid sincepeople of Quebec really had no other option because none of the other parties have a good track record of getting things done in Quebec(of course, there's the argument that Quebec gets too much support from the federal govt, and I agree with that, but the Liberals have failed monumentally over there lately, andno other party has shown gains there either).
I don't like how the Liberal leadership race will be appointing our new PM if this coalition runs the course. I don't like that because I don't have a say. In the election, I voted NDP because I know that even though they don't have much power, they're efficient in using it to get good, realistic things done. The only bright side of this coalition for me would be the possibility of Canada implementing a "cap and share" carbon plan due to the infusion of NDP influence in the cabinet, but the rest of the deal stinks.
I'd much rather Harper and co "lead" the country and the opposition bully the conservatives into being bipartisan, which Harper has thus far shown he is 100% against doing. Then everyone would be happy, methinks.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment