Martin Odber

wow.. you really need to take a good look at the programs you are talking about. The "programs" do not even BEGIN to address the needs of those they look after. Like everything else they are bandaid solutions designed to allow society to turn a blind eye and "feel good." Sir, a successful program ..in my esteem, would be one that accomplishes its goal. Prison rehabilitation systems, have such a high rate of recidivism that its more of a revolving door time out chair than anything else. Currently the rate of recidivism is about 80%. Considering it costs approximately $250/day to keep someone incarcerated how does our rehabilitation systems consistent failures to rehabilitate even find acceptance in taxpayers eyes. If any private business failed to accomplish its goal 8 out of 10 times, consistently, how long would it survive? You would think our government would be busting its ass trying out new things, ANYTHING that would improve those odds, but nope, because your taxes, are paying the bill, not theirs. Am I correct? Are MP's and MPP's not taxed? Ontario Works, record of "getting people off the system" is incredibly poor if you do not accept being "off the system" for less than two years as successful. Successful (with regards to Ontario Works) in my eyes would be re-educating an applicant in such a way that when they left the system they had a 80% chance or better of becoming upwardly socially mobile and not returning to the system in less than five years if ever. Consider this.. if an average single person on social assistance receives approx $500 per month (how much is rent in your area?) for most of their lives (studies indicate that poverty is generational) would it really be that outlandish to have the person taught an in demand life skill that would prevent them from returning to the social assistance system? It costs on average $250/day ($7.500/month) to keep a person in jail.. when society has a person utterly in their control, there is NO POSSIBLE WAY to rehabilitate them so they have greater than a 20% chance of not returning? Are you quite certain of this? Are we really looking for an answer that can give these people a future outside the bars? If we paid each low risk offender $3000 per month to stay out of jail we'd be ahead $3500 per month.. and no this is not the answer, but it does point out the irresponsible way things are currently being handled. Our government, is not designed or mandated to deal with the roots of the issues, in order to resolve them. Our government, like those in the past as far as the mind can see, focus's on bandaid solutions that give "feel good" results to those that eagerly turn a blind eye. The only way that I can see that we will EVER .. have a government that will diligently and responsibly work towards finding solutions to the challenges that face our society, is to put you, and every other Canadian voter, in direct control of the persons that claim to represent us. I feel very confident that some individuals will continue to wash their hands of the injustice's that burden our people and say "damn liberals" "damn conservatives" "damn NDP" "damn parents" "damn kids" however some people, really would like to find the answers and resolve the issues. When Canadians each personally bear the weight of the rewards and consequences via their voting choices on the issues, and do not have the luxury of scapegoat government representatives to blame, perhaps then we will begin to take the issues seriously and solve them. It is not what our differences that make us a people, it is what we share in common. regards, Martin www.canadianreferendumparty.com

I do agree Michelle that the more we share in common with others, such as language, the easier it is to accept. Especially when it comes to language as it is such a basic and seemingly insurmountable barrier at times. Even so, good hearted people, and heartless bastards (lack of a better word), come with every skin color and background. If we are to discriminate on who we let in, let it be on that basis. We do not choose where or to whom we are born, we just try to make the best of it. Again I agree Michelle, while individuals often demonstrate compassion, systems rarely do. That is a very good reason to have people holding the reigns of the systems that govern them. Thank you for your straightforwardness. It is not our differences that make us a people, it is the things we share in common. regards, Martin Odber www.canadianreferendumparty.com

Oleg, seniority, does not matter. It did not matter one bit to our predecessors when they arrived here and found Natives that had been here much longer. It doesn't matter one bit more now. I have long felt one of Canada's greatest strengths, lies in our ties with multiculturalism. Understanding, tolerance, acceptance, communication, melding go along way towards peace and uniting peoples. Seeing another person as a person, you yourself being recognized as a person, that is where your true power is. The danger, if there is one, would be to fail to welcome these persons integrating them into our society as equals, but instead leave them in groups where they identify with their past, rather than our future. Us and them, spells danger, we, spells hope for us all. It is not our differences that make us strong, it is what we share in common. regards, Martin www.canadianreferendumparty.com

Our public schools are a mess. Do the things we teach in public school ensure that graduates are ready to make their way in today's world or do they just go through the motions. They are hardly the most advanced in today's world, we are lucky if we are even mildly competitive, why else would we need to brain drain other countries via immigration? We live in a world that is leaping into this thing called globalization. If we were really on our toes, we would be leaping towards the new Microsoft schools which are leading edge technology. What is likely is that Canada will be the last country to embrace new technologies. We should, and could, be the first. Don't blame the teachers when our children come up short. Our teachers, work for school boards, who work for the Canadian government, who supposedly works for us. Ours as in yours and mine, our oldthink is what holds our children back, and ours, is the responsibility. Have we pushed to ensure that every single child that leaves mandatory schooling is ready and capable to support themselves in a competitive successful fashion within our society? I don't think so. I think that we just go through the motions of sending them to school with the blind notion that "someone else" will look after it, and then shrug helplessly when they don't. Our public school's success or failure, is our responsibility. How do our public schools outcomes, measure against the worlds most successful public schools? What are they doing that we are not? What steps need to be taken to ensure that ours are the top rated? Do we even know? Do we even really care? We could have a referendum to see how many Canadians support putting the required resources into our public school system to make it one of the best in the world. Our public school system process's the largest group of young Canadians, why leave it set up to fail them? warm regards, Martin Odber www.canadianreferendumparty.com

The question of immigration is not one easily answered. If anything, it only breeds more questions. Most Canadians, are descended from immigrants, if not directly an immigrant, so the issue touches the hearts and lives of us all if we immediately recognize it or not. One of the questions that easily comes to mind is sustainability. Canada, has a larger land mass than say the United States, while we have approximately 30 million Canadians, and the United States has about 300 million Americans. In terms of land usage it might appear that we can support alot more persons. Will Canada as a nation benefit if we can raise our population significantly? How, why? If Canada would benefit in a significant way from increasing our population, are there ways to do it beyond immigration? Another question might be that of our culture. We are by definition multicultural, yet as a group we do have so far some common ties. Even so, we have seen ( for example when our Canadian Mounted Police were asked to change their policies to allow the wearing of turbans, or when persons of a specific religious background wished their children to be allowed to carry "ceremonial daggers" on school property) where some cultural aspects were contrary to, or possibly dangerous to other Canadians. When persons immigrate to Canada, they do not necessarily abandon their cultural ways, to adopt those of Canada or existing Canadians. When enough persons believing a certain way group together to act politically they can certainly act lawfully to change Canada's laws, and or culture, perhaps for the better, perhaps not. So when considering immigration and numbers, affects or effects on our culture, are a consideration. Often we take in immigrants to protect them from their own governments. I feel this likely has the greatest reasoning, as one of the things considered typical of Canadians, is often compassion. That being said, when it comes to immigrating on the basis of importing brains, I feel less compassionate. I feel that if Canada wants a more highly skilled workforce we should be growing it here at home, via educational programs that encourage Canadians that are able, to pursue careers in the needed area's. This may help ensure that persons in positions of power, were raised to look at things from a Canadian perspective. I do say may. Just having been born and raised in Canada is no guarantee that a person will have Canadian perspectives or interests, it just increases the likelihood. Ultimately, I feel that the consequences of any decision on the subject of immigration, will be borne in one way or another, by every single Canadian, including future generations. For this reason alone I do not feel that such a weighty decision should be in the hands of a select few whose reasoning is their own. I do feel that such a decision should be squarely placed in the hands of every existing Canadian, those who must bear the consequences or rewards, are those who should make the decision. In that light, again, a referendum would be the most responsible decision possible. So that the outcome is not "my choice" or "your choice" but "our choice." It is not our differences that make us a people, it is what we share in common. warm regards, Martin Odber www.canadianreferendumparty.com

Jerry, You are absolutely right that referendums do not have current value in the house. However if said referendum controlled the vote of your MP or MPP on any given matter, the combined votes of MP's or MPP's would hold sway in parliament. If a party existed whose sole objective was to gather and forward the majority votes of their constituents as their own, every member of that party elected would be one more step towards a responsible accountable government with no personal agenda's. I believe this could be a viable example of "direct democracy" regards, Martin www.canadianreferendumparty.com

I am of the mind that the experts are likely the wisest to consult. I am also of the mind that NO politician is an expert on all situations. Therefore would it not be agreeable to arrange to have our experts on any given field present the options to the public, the people of Canada decide which option, and our elected representative mandated to vote our choice in parliament. regards, Martin www.canadianreferendumparty.com

Personally I feel our schools are business's. Like most business's they are geared to acquiring and maintaining funding. They attempt to provide education based on what is funded, in the most financially feasible manner. Teachers, are often victims struggling to provide quality education while grossly underfunded. A great deal is often sacrificed to meet budget objectives. It is not uncommon to learn that our children are "slipping through the cracks" of the systems in place. The expected place for a child to have the best chance is often in a privately funded school. The more heavily funded the private school the more likely the child will receive a globally competitive high quality education. Something to note? Historically, in tribal times the rites of passage to adulthood were granted to a societies youth when they were fully equipped to look after themselves in the world they lived in without that societies help. For example, when a youth was able to kill big game on their own and provide for themselves, then only would they be considered a societal equal. Nowadays, mandatory schooling ends in Canada at Grade 12, and sometimes before in the wake of dropouts. A grade twelve education however DOES NOT ensure that a child has the means to achieve gainful employment. In fact a grade twelve education in our society barely qualifies our children to push a broom. To be even mildly competitive a youth on average needs some sort of university diploma, and this they currently MUST achieve on their own, via incurring debt or other. Are we as a society doing our youth the justice our forebears did us? Not even! Possible solutions? * adapting our current educational system to ENSURE that each and every child receive additional training in some trade that while it may not be their highest potential reached, will ensure that when they leave mandatory schooling they ALL have a marketable financially sustaining trade whereby to support themselves. If the child then decides I don't want this trade I want to go on to learn something else, that option is open, but at the very least, they won't leave high school to stagnate. * another solution might be for Canadians to begin seeing our success's or failures as a nation rather than as individuals. To ask our educators, what will it take for our average child to be globally competitive, self sustaining and upwardly mobile in today's society.. and then implement these things into our mandatory educational systems *the most feasible answer, would be to open a referendum on this polling all Canadians, and acting on what we all feel is the most viable solution considering the alternatives rather than leaving it to a few businessmen to decide whats right for us all, and then crying when its just more of the same old same old bandaid solutions we are used to regards, Martin www.canadianreferendumparty.com

The faces/parties change but does the situation? Possible solutions from a personal perspective? * change the creation of money from created as debt to created as surplus as done in our past about 60 years ago when we brought in all universal social programs * collect the tabs owed by those on corporate welfare, I understand it amounts to trillions in unpaid taxes * rather than leave the solutions to politicians and merely gripe about their choices, poll the Canadian people via referendum and let the Canadian people ourselves determine what option(s) best suit our needs in that area www.canadianreferendumparty.com regards, Martin

Poverty, such as this, in one of the richest countries in the world? Is it because our representatives cannot find a better way or because the majority of Canadians find it profitable and acceptable not to address it? Do the majority of Canadians agree that its OK for people in our country to starve? do you? Do the majority of Canadians feel its OK for big companies to withhold technology that is greener, or more advanced, until they have made every last bit of profit they can on oil? do you? Do the majority of Canadians feel its OK for politicians to tell us things are so tight they must close our hospitals, and then give themselves raises? do you? My Countrymen and women, I think we could all go on all day about the social ills that plague us. As our government system stands, I seriously don't see any real change in the foreseeable future only more of the same, do you? As I see it, the only way Canadians are going to get our politicians to pursue and address things the way the average Canadian wants them done, is going to be to make our elected representatives a) find out what options WE want chosen, and b ) forward Canadian voters choices as their own. Somewhere long ago I heard that its not enough to acknowledge the problem, one must create and offer possible solutions. The problem is not any given representative, the problem is with the representatives not being legally bound to collect and represent the direct wishes of those they serve, the voters, the Canadian people. To that end, this is the solution. * a party mandated to anonymously, securely, gather the voters opinions on the issues facing our leaders and establish / recognize majority votes on those issues by the constituents affected. * a party mandated to take those majority votes and forward them as their own * a party with no goals of its own save forwarding the collective will of its constituents This, addresses the root of the issues, not the symptoms, and until we recognize this and act on it, the names will change, but the issues will remain the same. "It is not our differences that make us a people, it is what we share in common." regards, Martin Odber www.canadianreferendumparty.com putting the average Canadian, directly in charge of solving the issues

The single transferable vote is a viable option only when applied directly to the issues themselves. In life, we each use a form of stv when choosing from available options on a daily basis. This however is very different when applied to choosing persons to represent us. Especially in a system where the elected are so poorly controlled by the voters, are rarely held accountable, are in office for extended periods, and are subject to pressures from "party paradigm's" "party whip objectives" "large contributor interests" and a variety of other impediments. I agree that our government elections system needs tweaking however. As a counterproposal I would offer the following: * a party mandated to anonymously, securely, gather the voters opinions on the issues facing our leaders and establish / recognize majority votes on those issues by the constituents affected. * a party mandated to take those majority votes and forward them as their own * a party with no goals of its own save forwarding the collective will of its constituents This, addresses the root of the issues, not the symptoms, and until we recognize this and act on it, the names will change, but the issues will remain the same. www.canadianreferendumparty.com "It is not our differences that make us a people, it is what we share in common." regards, Martin Odber

I do not believe that it is fair to blame Mr Mulroney or any other politician who has abused their power. Party paradigms, party whips, sacrificing one issue to hopefully buy another, personal objectives, pressures from the big businessmen who funded your campaign, the futility of a pendulum system where you do something and the next person unravels it, the list of things that can corrupt our representatives is near endless. Mr Mulroney is not the root of this issue, Mr Mulroney is yet another scapegoat of the system itself. Today you talk about him, yesterday it was someone else, tomorrow it will be yet another. Its useless to address the symptoms, how long until we learn that to affect change we must address the roots? www.canadianreferendumparty.com * a party mandated to anonymously, securely, gather the voters opinions on the issues facing our leaders and establish / recognize majority votes on those issues by the constituents affected. * a party mandated to take those majority votes and forward them as their own * a party with no goals of its own save forwarding the collective will of its constituents This, addresses the root of the issues, not the symptoms, and until we recognize this and act on it, the names will change, but the issues will remain the same. "It is not our differences that make us a people, it is what we share in common." regards, Martin Odber