|
The Canadian politics thread (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Orko |
| quote: |
Tough new green plan targets oil sands
Regulations, which also apply to coal-fired power plants, would force future projects to store greenhouse-gas emissions underground
link to the rest of the article |
The federal government again only says something after a report that bashes their enviro plans. Last week they were blasted for only paying 'lip service' to the environment and not actually doing anything to help protect it. Sure enough, they come out with a 'new' plan this week. Somebody needs to plot this stuff!
IMO the biggest problem with the oil sands is not the CO2 creation, but the use of water for the process. The sands projects use an incredible amount of fresh water, which is then held in toxic ponds.
We need to concentrate on conservation, and not just global warming. We have such a large repository of natural resources, that some people just seem to think they will never run out. |
|
|
| sixtysix |
| quote: | Originally posted by Yohan
None taken :)
I guess the basis of my rant is that already, we are being told what we can and cannot do by the govt unnecessarily.
I read it somewhere that if there is so many laws that a citizen cannot remember all of them, then there are too many laws.
Simple common sense exercised by every individual citizen in a society would mean so many laws are not necessarily. Unfortunately, humanity is dumb I suppose.
My philosophy about law is that a person should be able to do whatever he or she wants, or within a group by mutual consent as long as they are not harming others that don't want to be harmed.
Also, a law has to be enforceable regularly and effectively.
So, the car emissions law makes sense because an individual can harm others and others cannot avoid cars with too much emissions, and the law can be effectively enforced (if the govt chose to)
But the smoking in restaurant law I disagree with, because an individual can make a choice whether to eat in a restaurant that permits smoking or not. If a restaurant wants business from non smokers, they'd choose non smoking.
So, this child in car smoking law, yes, it can harm others, but I fail to see how this law can be effectively enforced.
Another reason is that once there are so many laws, the concept of law loses weight as people become no longer scared by the law.
I really don't think it's necessary for the govt to tell me what I already know to use common sense to not smoke in cars with a kid in it. (On flipside, if the rationale behind smoking free restaurant is for public health reasons, does this mean next law will be no one can smoke in cars with other passengers for health reasons?) |
I think i've found a fellow libertarian in our midst :) Truth be told with the exception of the conservative party's views on drugs, they are pushing a pretty strong libertarian agenda. It's just a shame that the conservatives in America have seemingly mixed religion into the mix with conservative ideals. Which in turn gives Canadian conservatives a bad image.
you've hit the nail dead on. |
|
|
| Yohan |
| quote: | Originally posted by sixtysix
I think i've found a fellow libertarian in our midst :) Truth be told with the exception of the conservative party's views on drugs, they are pushing a pretty strong libertarian agenda. It's just a shame that the conservatives in America have seemingly mixed religion into the mix with conservative ideals. Which in turn gives Canadian conservatives a bad image.
you've hit the nail dead on. |
More centrist than libertarian ;) |
|
|
| smuncky |
| quote: | Originally posted by Yohan
More centrist than libertarian ;) |
at first i read librarian. then i thought wtf and re-read the sentence. it made more sense the 2nd time :) |
|
|
| MarkT |
http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/345503
| quote: |
PMO's power threatens democracy, Gomery says
Mar 13, 2008 10:18 AM
Richard Brennan
Ottawa BureaU
OTTAWA – The growing power among unelected personnel in the Prime Minister's Office is a threat to democracy, retired Justice John Gomery says.
Gomery told a parliamentary committee today centralized power in the PMO is a "danger to Canadian democracy" and paves the way to political interference in public administration.
He said there is growing gulf between the executive, the Prime Minister and cabinet, and Parliament, giving less voice to MPs.
Gomery headed up the commission that investigated the Liberal sponsorship scandal, which resulted in two reports.
The first, filed in November 2005, found millions of sponsorship dollars were funnelled to Liberal-friendly advertising agencies. The second report offered guidelines on how to fix government and restore accountability.
Gomery said the Conservative government has all but ignored the second report, much to his chagrin.
"I am disappointed. I find it hard to swallow," he told the Commons government operations committee, which is reviewing the Conservative's handling of his report.
"I gave them two years, I thought it would give them the time to do something." |
less voice to MPs is CLEAR in the CPC trying to kill McTeague's RESP bill (regardless of how "good" the bill is or not...it passed via usual parliamentary proceedure and the CPC is playing games to kill it). |
|
|
| MarkT |
I guess the CPC will now act, since the press has jumped on this story and it's now proving to be good press for the Liberals.
yet another example that if you get into trouble outside of Canada, you're on your own. the CPC position of "commit a crime elsewhere and we won't help you" is perhaps defensible if proper charges were filed and a fair trial resulted.
maybe this woman was in on the scheme...maybe not. the gov't should be working to ensure that an expeidient, fair trial occurs.
[quote]
Paul Martin visits jailed Canadian in Mexico
'She said he was the nicest man,' friend says, amid call for more help from Tory government
Mar 13, 2008 04:30 AM
Susan Delacourt
Ottawa Bureau
OTTAWA–The Canadian woman imprisoned in Mexico and caught in a legal nightmare, got a visit yesterday from former prime minister Paul Martin, who has decided to use his international statesman's status to try to win her release.
And now Brenda Martin, her family and supporters are asking anew why the current Conservative government hasn't gone to the same lengths as Paul Martin and other Liberals who have thrown themselves into this cause.
The outcry has been growing daily about whether Prime Minister Stephen Harper's government has done enough to help the Canadian citizen, who was recently put on a suicide watch because of her deepening despair at her plight.
"She said he (Paul Martin) was the nicest man. He was so kind to her. He hugged her," said Debra Tieleman, the friend who has been almost single-handedly waging the campaign to get the Trenton woman out of the Mexican prison, where she's been for more than two years without any charges formally laid.
Tieleman spoke to her friend after the former prime minister had left her yesterday afternoon.
He told the distraught prisoner that he was making no promises, but he also assured her he would keep pressing her case wherever he could. He has raised the matter with Mexico's vice-minister of foreign affairs and other Mexican government officials.
"To Brenda, because nobody from our government has ever gone to see her, outside the embassy, she's always felt very forgotten by the Canadian government," Tieleman said.
"To have the former prime minister come down to see her ... I think was really something for her. She really was crying."
Foreign Affairs Minister Maxime Bernier sent a diplomatic note to Mexico this week, lamenting how slowly the case was moving through the Mexican system.
For Brenda Martin and her advocates, though, that note is not strong enough – they wanted a formal, diplomatic note of protest and want Canada to consider issuing a travel advisory about Mexico because of repeated stories of dubious legal dealings down there.
Northumberland-Quinte West Conservative MP Rick Norlock said he met last night with Harper to discuss Brenda Martin's case.
"The Prime Minister is as concerned as we are," Norlock said. "The diplomatic note has gone to Mexico and the Prime Minister is considering several options though I cannot say what he is going to do."
Brenda Martin's mother, Marjorie Bletcher, wept yesterday when told that Paul Martin was leaving meetings in Mexico City to fly to Guadalajara and visit her daughter.
He was in the country for a conference to promote the so-called L-20 international group he's been trying to found to bring leaders of major countries together – a sort of expansion of the G-8 summits.
"I can't believe it. He has nothing to gain from helping my daughter," Bletcher said. "I've had more response from the Liberals than I ever had from the Conservatives."
Immediately after seeing Brenda Martin, the former prime minister met with the prison's director, to tell her he was concerned about conditions in the cell and about the prisoner's frail health.
Brenda Martin has been in prison since February 2006 in connection with a Mexican crackdown on a huge online investment scheme run by her former boss.
She was a cook in Richard Waage's household, and Waage, serving 10 years in a U.S. federal prison, has signed a sworn statement that exonerates her of any link to the scheme.
Paul Martin was not giving interviews yesterday about his intervention in the case, for fear of appearing as though he was grandstanding. But Tieleman was told the former prime minister was quite affected by the 45-minute meeting, in which the woman cried and told him how much she wanted to go home.
"It would be impossible not to feel deeply for Brenda. She was crying, frail and distraught. He gave her a hug and did what he could to comfort her," said Jim Pimblett, an aide who is travelling with Martin in Mexico this week. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
less voice to MPs is CLEAR in the CPC trying to kill McTeague's RESP bill (regardless of how "good" the bill is or not...it passed via usual parliamentary proceedure and the CPC is playing games to kill it). |
They're trying to kill it because a combination of ill-conceived tax cuts and increased spending has resulted in them running continually smaller surpluses... if this bill comes into effect it is quite likely that the conservatives will have to put forward the first deficit budget in a decade or raise taxes (right before their own legislation requires them to hold an election). Looks like someone was alseep at the wheel. |
|
|
| MarkT |
yeah, there seems to be a two-fold consequence to the bill that irks the CPC. One, as you say, is that it could force them to run a deficit...which is political suicide after years of surpluses. Two, it's taking power out of the CPC hands, and we know what a control freak Harper and the CPC have been.
The trend of turning every issue not supported by opposition parties into a confidence motion is proof of how this minority gov't acts as if it has a majority mandate from the people.
the arrogance of the CPC is staggering. first was a "demand" that th Senate kill the bill. The Senate to which the CPC has shown nothing but contempt, lol. newsflash...the Senate doesn't answer to Parliament.
Even more arrogant is sidestepping the process by which the bill passed in Parliament and resorting to legislation to make this a confidence motion.
Conservative criticism of the courts was that judges shouldn't be making law, that Parliamentary debate was the way to address issues not clearly covered by existing law. i.e. advocacy for letting MPs do what they were elected to do...legislate.
well, this bill, whatever anyone thinks of it, DID pass through Parliament. Three readings, as per proceedure, then off to the Senate for ratification. The CPC can't accept not getting its way and has now resorted to killing it using their typical "this is a confidence matter" tactic?
I agree the bill is not the most responsible measure at this time and that one solution is to amend it to provide a lower contribution threshold...but I am glad that it's further highlighted the arrogance, hypocrisy and ineptitude of the CPC gov't. |
|
|
| Jayx1 |
| I am a libertarian myself and this countries needs more of them. We are slowly drifting into a police nanny state and everyone seems to be asleep at the wheel. |
|
|
| activate |
| quote: | Originally posted by Yohan
Am I the only guy extremely amused by lack of balls by the Liberal party?
Every chance they have to bring down the Conservatives and force an election, they back out. Latest vote on the budget, most Liberals abstain, allowing the budget to pass.
The Bloc is pretty much voting against the Conservatives, and so is the NDP. Actually, the NDP is having so much fun taking potshots at Liberals, and I think winning a lot of votes from the more left leaning Liberals on issues like environment, social programs, even Afghanistan.
The Liberals are claiming to be waiting for the right moment and when they are ready to bring down the Conservatives. I'm wondering when that will ever be, as every month goes by, more the Conservatives solidify their hold on the government, and the Canadian public to get used to that Harper isn't the ultra right wing nutjob that the Liberals tried to paint him as.
On other note, so called NAFTAgate in which a leak from Canadian govt implicated Obama who is running on protectionist agenda on economics but apparently told the Canadians that it's all rhetoric might do some damage. Obama may have lost Ohio nomination in this issue.
Will be interesting how this plays out. On other hand, renegotiating NAFTA will kill a lot of Canadian economy...
Well, at least Afghanistan is a go until 2011... |
I suspect there may be a strategy there. The conservatives seem to be doing a pretty good job of turning voters against them... if that's the case, why not let them continue to do so and improve the chances of taking more seats or better yet a majority??
That being said... I'm a card carrying member of the liberal party, and i think dion has no place at the helm. still kind of baffled as to how he ended up there in the first place. hopefully one day Gerrard Kennedy will head the liberal party. This would be a better country if he did. |
|
|
| Yohan |
| quote: | Originally posted by activate
I suspect there may be a strategy there. The conservatives seem to be doing a pretty good job of turning voters against them... if that's the case, why not let them continue to do so and improve the chances of taking more seats or better yet a majority??
|
polls have the conservaties and the liberals at neck to neck...
then again, it's the polls |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by MarkT
|
I think it's pretty safe to say the Conservatives are making everything that they fear losing on a Confidence Matter, not because they are trying to strong arm but because they really do want an election. The CPC has been slipping in the poles, probably will fall lower; however, they have a boat-load of money whereas the Liberals do not and the public is still iffy on Dion. From a CPC perspective, it's better to go to the poles now and get a new mandate staying close to the same number of seats then to wait until their own legislation dictates the next election MUST be and risk falling from power or ending up with a smaller minority (especially since they can outspend the Liberals right now). If not for the fixed election legislation they probably would have dropped a writ already; however, the optics of bringing in fixed elections and then completely ignoring your own legislation to call a politically expediant election pre-maturely would have a very detrimental effect on their election fortunes. Time and time again the electorate has punished those who call pre-mature elections by ousting them from office... that's why the CPC won't man up and drop the writ. They're really hoping to get defeated so then they can portray the opposition as the bad guys foisting an election on the Canadian people. |
|
|
|
|
