Alta4ever

How exactly are they doing this? I believe the senate is part of our government, and if you are going to argue that they are unelected then maybe just maybe you should have supported Harper when her called for the rest of canada to adopt the model of electing senators in waiting like Alberta does, and lobbied the liberal senators to pass the senate reform bill that died in.....wait for it the senate.

the railway was there long before nf entered confederation. The railway wasn't built for any one province it was built to retain territory to stop its loss to the US.

Funny how attitudes change when the roles are reversed. Bet your wishing the Liberals and NDP had supported the Tories when they brought forward the term limit legislation on senators, and used Alberta Senate elections as a possible model for the rest of the country. Maybe the Liberals and the NDP will support it the next time it is brought up. Maybe you should vote CPC in the next election since they are the only party who has tried to bring forward senate reform.

If a bill does not pass the senate it does not become law, the senate has the constitutional authority to kill bills. It has never been a post-partisan body that could only send suggestions back to the HoC, it has held more power then that since its inception in 1867. The Senate has been a partisan body since the introduction of political parties in the British Parliamentary system. The senate has never been just what you assert it to be it's legislative authority is so much more as pointed out by Toad Brother . as Tod Brother sais "The BNA Act clearly makes the Senate part of the legislative process, giving it powers of Advise and Consent just like the House of Commons."

It isn't redundant it points out how the house of commons failed to act.

Lets post the rest of the paragraph.

Here it is expressly Defined under Legislative Power in the BNA Act Notice the pural on Houses. http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/Const/2.html I think those were the points you were getting at Toadbrother.

You really have no clue.

Does this scare anyone else too? I hope constitutional matters aren't any part of the curriculum because you would be failing both as a student and teacher.

Why should I, you stated what he said was untrue, you disprove him, otherwise it must be fact.

Who are you? As I said prove it back up your points with quotable proof.

So disprove it.

A restriction is a quantifier not an absolute.

Do you read the news? http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/second-reading/brian-topp/contradictions-and-explanations/article1513178/

No you claimed unmitigated. Meaning without qualification or exception; absolute.

Unlike the liberal thinking (I suspect and you can correct me on this punked),that punked and others understand that you can't be all things to everyone.

But you do not have the right to claim it has been done, since ottawa is still mulling it over. You seem to have a real problem distinguishing between speculation and fact. As you have proven in this thread (and others) you believe that nicky's speculation is fact.

So since the government is thinking about doing something, gives you the to claim they have made a final decision? Disingenuous.

The Globe and Mail article title "Ottawa mulls closing some embassies in Africa" that you linked to. Your thread title "Ottawa to Close 4 Embassies in Africa". Do you see a difference? I'll bold it for you, since you don't seem to pick up on these things. As morris said and what I was agreeing to in regard to you "no points for partisan hackery".

.

You said we, as if you have a personal stake or make business decisions about the topic. I don't think you do, i think you are being disingenuous. Considering you can't even acknowledge that companies base foreign investment decisions on their risk assessment of the region.

its getting kind of typical isn't morris.

No, no you did not.

We, we who? What Multinational Company's Corporate Board of Directors, do you currently sit on? Do you own voting shares where you personally vote at the AGM of that company that does business in Nigeria? You never did answer this, we who, who are you speaking for?

That would be a logical proposition, but don't worry it isn't lost on everyone.