apollo19

I was just wondering if a Quebecer could tell us what the French-Canadian response would be to a Conservative-led minority functioning with the Bloc? Would the BQ even go along with it (providing they lowered federal taxes, which would allow provinces to raise them)? This could have been true even in this parliament with them holding a majority. I think we all know the angle the LPC would take in English Canada, that is they would paint the CPC as "working with seperatists", but I'm not so sure that would fly anymore. McGuinty will probably popup in the campaign sometime with his proven fiscal imbalance, which may woo people here to vote a certain way. Is a Conservative-BQ "alliance" possible?

I honestly think that unless one of those paths is taken, Canada won't exist in the same way in 10 years. Canada is currently limping along, and it wont take much to knock it over completely. With increasing regionalization of votes, I really dont see any other solution but to change the way the Feds work -- and no party is really preparing to open the Pandora's Box of constitutional change.

from: http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStories I believe the Ontario numbers were 35% for both the LPC and CPC. Although we can all probably expect the LPC to pickup a few points, I think that if the election is held before the New Year, the opposition parties could expect to do much better, rather then letting the Liberals choosing when the election would be.

The only numbers that really matter are the Ontario ones, as we all know the BQ will pickup in Quebec. The CPC will probably add a few more 905 seats under it's belt, but I don't think it will be enough to be a minority government -- the Liberals will probably beat them by single digit seat counts. Tied at 38% in Ontario, I don't think that will last. They will probably get around 35%, which would add ~10 seats to their total. Any predictions for who will be resigning after the next election?

I just saw Chretien's news conference, and a few things stood out for me: -he was reflecting on his "achievements" -he explained how he should have the same fate as Martin, as everyone in cabinet (except those in direct contact with adscam) knew the same -Gomery picked on him and not Martin, as well as not inviting witnesses with positive testimoney -he was comparing his "balls" (dual meaning with Gomery ) to Trudeau's when he said Trudeau was nervous about him using the Clarity Act, but he (Chretien) wasn't I think things will go on in spite of the report, and we will have the election Martin said. That said, with regards to predictions of the affect on the voters, I think all opposition parties will gain seats, although I don't want to guess as to the extent.

Most of the guns come by the way of organized crime, and then they are siphoned down to the your average joe street gang. This is heavily intertwined with the drug trade, and unless the government takes a stand against that, the gun violence will continue to rise as drug use/smuggling continues to rise.

from: http://www.canada.com/national/story.html?...90-8cf4bdb36487 The story also mentions how for every percentage point drop in income tax rates, it costs the feds $1billion lost in revenue. This seems contrary to the Star article which said the Liberals would be going against the right. I think this is Martin's true centre-right side coming out finally, and it should be interesting to see two partys offering to cut income taxes, and one advocating more social spending in the next election. Hopefully the Conservatives can offer a comprehensive policy, and we will have a real election with all parties offering different views, focusing more on economics rather then social issues.

I meant that the BQ is in 40s in polling, they will definately hold atleast their 54 seats. The BQ/CPC will probably coordinate so as to land the Gomery report in the middle of the election, just to bring back the issue without focusing on it in the first weeks of the campaign. One thing which many people have overlooked is the age of Paul Martin -- he is 67 already. If anyone remembers back to the recent British election, Michael Howard said he was too old to lead a party at the age of 67, which he would be in the next election (he is 63 now). One would think that if Martin doesn't get a majority with this election, he will be gone. Harper will probably be around for a while, especially if Martin leaves.

Ontario is only one of 4 provinces which I could foresee as an independent nation -- the others being Quebec, Alberta and BC. The rest of Canada, although this may seem a bit harsh, just cannot create their own wealth (although Saskatchewan has oil, there is really no industry there). However, as long as there is a Canada in any way, shape, or form, Ontario will always be there... it seems to be the caretaker of the federation.

I'd like to see all drugs legalized, just so that people have more personal freedom with these things -- however, it should be banned from being displayed in public areas. I don't care if people want to shootup in their apartment, but taking it to a shared common is just wrong. This approach would also make it easier for police to ticket people in plain sight, and stop some revenues of organized crime.

I found this excerpt from: http://www.canada.com/national/story.html?...85-b368361f6f60 One would think that all the polling firms would just ask a simple, non-leading question, in hopes of getting semi-accurate results, which unfortunately hasn't been happening. I think that these poll numbers are probably right, and they do have a larger sample base. Even as a Liberal supporter, I find the media always trying to bash the Conservatives, which I find to be unfair. If the numbers keep up like this, the election will probably be after the first Gomery report, with the Bloc in the 40's and the Conservatives near 30%. It seems that with Cadman no longer with us, the Conservatives and Bloc, with Kilgour and O'Brian, will probably topple the government with or without the NDP, as they now have the numbers.

I believe this has to do with a nuclear plant in New Brunswick. It reached the end of its lifespan, and they were presented two choices: a) reoutfit it at a large cost, or b ) clean it up and shut it down at a large cost The Feds got involved with it if i remember correctly

I think that one thing that should be done to help these people is to reform the welfare system, as well as creating more welfare housing for those truly poor people (the people who are covered in cardboard when you step over them on the street during winter in Toronto). I think welfare should have a time limit on it, and that should adjust according to current market conditions. The "affordable housing" should also be tied to that, and if the people fail to try to fix their situations with the opportunity they are given, they should be evicted and tossed back on the street.

For the Liberals, #1. I'm opposed to the SSM issue, as I dont agree with changing an age-old definition of marriage. #2. I dont like the national daycare program, as it does nothing for many people, and is merely an invasion of the market. #3. Kyoto should only have been signed if it could accommodate China/the US, otherwise it is a pointless waste of money. The main reason I would vote Liberal is to know that there will always be the incentive to do better, as if you break above the middle-incomes you will be set.

I think Hilary has a very good chance of getting the nod for the Democrats, but it will be interesting to see if Giuliani runs for the republicans. Between those two, I'm not sure who would be able to win it, as they both are good candidates.

This is fairly true, for some reason I was watching CBC at 4am a few days ago and they had several decent programs. I guess they bury the stuff for 20-somethings late at night so the old people dont find out what goes on.

A New Democrat party member applauding the New Democrat leader.. what a surprise Many cities are happy that they got more money. I would just like to ask you why you think social housing and welfare, etc, are issues of concern for the 'average working Canadian'.

A bit old, but from http://www.economist.com/world/na/displayS...tory_id=4198655 I think we can all agree, whether conservative/liberal/ndp, that young people's education is a good thing to improve upon, and Bush has done a great job of doing that. Also of interest is this story, which compares the European education to US/Asia, and how improving Americans education now will help in the future to improve competitiveness.

It is good news for everyone, yes. However I am not so sure about the German election, Schroeder might pick up a bit as we get closer to the election. from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4227232.stm Sadly, he can always score political points by turning to the Liberals special -- being anti-american.

Its all just political point scoring -- spend the money where the votes are, and screw the rest.

People going off to college and suddenly transforming, becoming "liberal", shows that their parents did not raise them properly in the first place. If people do not have their own morals, then they will do whatever they want. As an athiest, personally I agree that the bible has some historical info in it. But it was written by people who, if they saw a comet in the sky, would probably run for their life for fear of their god smiting them down. Science explains lots of things and is constantly changing with new theories, while religion stays the same, even if the new science is 100% provable. I'm surprised that more religious people dont become like the Amish.

The good thing about living in a competitive society is that businesses and people must adapt to meet conditions -- in this case, reducing their dependence on oil and either using less of it or switching to alternative modes of transport. The governments shouldn't change their taxes on gas/diesel because in the end the industry and consumers will figure out their own way to solve the problem.

The problem is that a public broadcaster with a budget of over $1billion, provided annually by the feds, has no place in a competitive industry -- I am not saying to shut th CBC down, just spin it off into a private company. All the major Canadian networks (CTV, Canwest, CHUM which is CityTV/others) provide the best programming they can, which the Canadian viewers want to see, so as to get more viewers. If those programs happen to not be filmed in Canada, then what is the problem with it? Whenever the feds get involved in a social issue like "Canadian Culture" or "Canadian Unity", they tend to overindulge financially in making sure their objectives are met.

This is probably the starting of the Liberals media campaign, and we will see it likely pick up a lot in Sept-Oct once parliament resumes. On a side note about "Liberal press", I found the following article interesting: http://www.canada.com/national/story.html?...22-de3ceb7ba164 So right there you have a fairly narrow audience for the CBC, which I think undoubtbly leans a bit towards the government on matters. If the Tories had a policy for privatizing the CBC, I think it would strike chords with some Canadians who really dont care about it.

The thing which seems so stupid about the whole situation to me is why didnt they just have buses prepared and ready to get people out either before the storm, or stocking them up in a neighbouring unaffected state (Texas maybe), then send the convoy in when Katrina left. Positioning buses and National Guard units around the "danger zone" could not have been that hard..