JWayne625

What democracy? We now have a minority elite group of individual's writing law in this country, and none of them have ever been elected to their positions, they were appointed by self-serving politicians who want to see their agenda implemented without debate so they simply sit back and allow their appointed minions (Supreme Court Justices) make the calls and then the politicians just sit back and say, " We have no choice, the Court has ruled." That my friend is not democracy. We have a situation right now in BC where the court has ruled that it is up to the Province to determine whether autistic children are entitled to treatment based on the astronomical costs of implementing treatment across Canada. I would suggest the same could be said for the language issue in Canada. When Canadian politicians declared Canada to be a bilingual country, the second language was only to be provided where numbers warranted it, but that has now progressed to a point whereby it's an entitlement, regardless of the costs associated, or whether numbers warrant it. No politician or bureaucrat has ever revealed what this initiative is costing the taxpayer's of Canada, and likely never will, because if they did, I'm sure the costs would dwarf any costs associated with treating autistic children. In the case of my city for example, last year had to lay off police and fire personnel due to budgeting restrictions, but we are now in the process of tramslating all of our by-laws into French, All meetings must provide instant translation services, so the city was forced to hire a staff of translators, and all of our street and traffic signs are in the process of being replaced with bilingual signs, for what? According to the latest census only 1.69% of our population claims French as their mother-tongue. This was all brought about when an individual from another city came to our and deliberately got himself a parking ticket written only in English, he took it to court and we are reaping the financial consequences of ruling from unelected and unaccountable judges.

I would suggest that just about every Liberal sitting in this government has ties of some kind to either sponsorship, or soe other scheme we haven't found out about yet, and that includes our PM. Let's at least be honest with ourselves here, one might be honest and innocent upon entering into politics but they learn to get over it pretty quick, after they learn that they really have no say other than what the leader tells them.

I live in New Brunswick, not 20 miles from where that little Waddel boy was mauled to death by 3 Rottweilers, and I agree that something needs to be done, I'm just not sure what. Banning certain breeds sounds good on the eurface, but then there are occasions where other breeds also bite. Do we just keep adding to the list of banned dog breeds or do we develop a regulations for all dog breeds. I do not believe in allowing a dog to have one bite. To me that one bite is too many. I am very intimidated by dogs, and not just the dogs being talked about, because I am a dog bite victim. All I remember is that it was a small short haired white dog, with black spots, as I recall about the height of a small poodle. I do remember that I suffered an asthema attack and was rushed to hospital and spent a couple of days in an oxygen tent. I have been frightened of snarling dogs ever since and size does not matter. Maybe a though would be to require all dog owners to license their dogs, and as a condition of licensing provide proof of insurance coverage. $1 Million of coverage is the amount being talked about in many circles, dogs must be on leashes no more than 2 meters in length, and when on their own property restricted to that property. Of course some type of provisions would have to be made to assure that deliveries could be made without fear that the dog amy become protective and attack a stranger on the property. I know that when my boys delivered papers we had to call a certain neighbour so that their paper could be delivered, otherwise the dog would attack. I went through that myself when I had a paper-route, especially on collection day. Insurance coverage would put the onus on the owner to make sure they were covered in case their dog attacked some individual and would show some sort of committment to that ownership. In the city where I live it is getting quite impossible to sit in the city square due to some undesirables with their pitbulls, and Rotweilers. Many of these individuals are also conducting business while they are hanging around the square. What is the feeling?

Like it or not people the U.S. is our largest trading partner and that is not likely to change considering that many corporations in Canada have their ownership controlled from south of the border. I may not like George Bush or his stance on either Iraq or foisting his interpretation of government on Middle Eastern countries. These people have their own culture and are not about to switch to a Western style of doing business. These people have been fighting forever and all the interference in the world is not going to change that, and neither is sending our troops into harm's way. Every day U.S. and British troops are getting killed, but what does George Bush care, it's not his kids over there getting shot at. Parrish is supposed to representing the best interests of Canada as a Parliamentarian. As such she does not have the right to shoot off her mouth and insult the President of a country who in many cases provides for our livelihoods. We enjoy Billion's per year in revenue through trade with the United States, and that trade is being put in jeopardy by someone who's big mouth is doing nothing to improve that situation. Chretien damaged that relationship enough, and we are finally rid of him, but now we have another loud mouth. I just think that if we ever hope to influence our neighbour's we cannot continue to childishly insult them. I know myself how eager I would be to do business with someone who continually insulted me, and it would be a long time before I was inclined to look at mending some fences. We may not necessarily agree with their stance on the MIddle East, but since nothing is forcing us to participate , why throw insults, they do nothing but hurt us, not them.

It blows me away that people like that lady who just returned to Vancouver after being taken hostage in Iraq, would even go to Iraq in the first place. Why would anyone be stupid enough to put themselves in harm's way like that? One would think that enough people have been taken hostage in Iraq with some even beheaded, that it would send a message that visitors are not welcome, regardless of your reasons for being there. The types of people within Iraq that are seizing these hostages are not fussy who they grab up, nor does it seem to matter what the heritage of these people is. I don't feel one bit sorry for anyone who would knowingly put themselves at risk in a country htta shows so little value on human life.

How about because he's an idiot, who somehow sees himself as a World Leader. The truth be known he is anything but a World Leader. He's like that cartoon figure who keeps drawing the line in the sand, and playing that stupid game of," If you cross this line, you'll be sorry," but then they cross the line and the line simply get's moved, and the same phrase is repeated. He has no credibliity whatsoever. France criticized the U.S. and Britain for invading Iraq, and where are French troops now? Invading the Gold Coast. The French are a bunch of gutless wonders. They simply stood aside during the war and allowed Germany to march in virtually without firing a shot. If it wern't for British, Canadian, and U.S. troops they would now be goose-stepping and flying a swaztika instead of the Fleur-de-leis. France, Russia and Germany are mad at Britain and the USA because they were getting rich off circumventing the sanctions imposed by the UN, by making little side deals for oil.

That's great news for the shipbuilding industry that the feds are going to build these ships in Canada. I just wondering if they will be built in Canada or Quebec? There is a difference, since the Quebec government even refers to themselves as a country, plenty of our tax money has already gone into that black hole, with plenty more to come with the committment to pump money into Bombardier. The feds paid the Irving's $55 Million to close the most modern shipyard in Canada, and now they say they are going to have these ships built in Canada. Most shipyards in Canada are not equipped to build ship, only to do refits. If they are going to actually build them they are going to need major upgrades which your taxmoney already paid for with the expansion of Saint John Shipbuilding just before the Frigate Program. Do you want to pay again to expand another facility? I sure don't, especially since there is already a shipyard capable of building these ships, and plenty of experienced, unemployed shipbuilder's do do the job.

Stoker; you should have said the other blackhole known as Quebec, because that's where Ottawa loves to waste money. Someday they will wake up and realize that regardless of how much money they pump into Quebec it will never be enough to keep those whiners quiet.

We had up until about 4 years ago the most modern ship yard in Canada in Saint John, New Brunswick, owned by the Irving Empire, and it was also one of the most modern in North America. The Irving's have since bought up most of the shipbuilding facilities in Atlantic Canada, and mothballed Saint John Shipbuilding. Saint John Shipbuilding had a powerful union, maybe that is why the Irvings decided to close this facility and move the equipment to their other operations in Atlantic Canada, where they can dictate their own terms to the employees. We don't build our own ships because our federal government has for wahtever reason decided that they won't subsidize the shipbuilding industry, and without it the industry cannot compete on a world wide scale. Most other shipbuilding countries subsidize their shipbuilding industry, our feds say we can't because it violates certain agreements. It certainly hasn't stopped them from subsidizing the aerospace industry by giving loan guarantees to Bombardier. Sorry, I forgot that industry is in Quebec, so the same rules don't apply.

I think a church or any other chartible group has the right to point out certain facts which could influence the way some people vote. An issue that comes to mind is the fact that it was 14 years ago that the federal government under the P.C.'s made a committment to eliminate child poverty in Canada. Today child poverty is worse than it was back then, and getting worse every year. Under the strict guidelines imposed on the charitible organization I am involved with (food bank), it would violate those terms if we were to point out that certain candidates or parties are doing nothing to eleviate this problem, if the same Revenue Canada Agent were to use the same interpretation as has happened in this case. I think both churches and other chartible organizations have an obligation to keep issues in front of the people, so that people have a clear understanding of the issues and how certain candidates or parties have or are dealing with those issues, before they place their votes. Some politicians would love to be able to keep certain issues from surfacing, especially at election time. I'm quite sure if that same Bishop were giving acolades as to the favourable accomplishments of this candidate or his/her Party, nothing would have been said, but since the comments were negative this Agent felt the need to intervene. If their Agent, Revenue Canada can threaten someone into not talking about how certain candidates handled or ignored issues, it is to the politician's advantage to have that done. Is that being political, or is that simply informing the public? I feel that as long as we are not campaigning to vote against a specific individual candidate or Party, and are simply informing the public , that is not involving ourselves in political activity. Free speech allows one to inform others as to facts, unless of course one is living in a country like China, Cuba, North Korea, or some other totalitarian country where people are not allowed to speak out, and the people are too afraid of the consequences to do so.

The NDP has certainly lost their footing. As they attempt to move closer to centre, they lose their traditional support. Labour does not seem to be supporting them anymore, and since it was labour who helped form this Party, they seem to have lost their relavence. Layton would support the devil himself to avoid another election. I think he knows that if Canadian's go to the polls any time soon the NDP will in all likelihood lose what little support they have right now. I used to vote NDP but that was when they actually supported Canadian values, not corporate values.

I don't believe that any initiative that gives special status to Quebec is helpful in a struggle to keep Canada as "One Country." Special deals for this Province or that Province will only serve to further weaken an already weak federation. There is no guarantee that even if we keep giving and giving to Quebec that they will ever stop whining, and that they won't take it and leave anyway. What we need is a central government that treats all Provinces exactly alike, otherwise at some point you will have no central government and no country. I always thought Atlantic Canada would be much better off as part of the New England States, at least we would have at least equal representation at the federal level with other States. As it stands now, we really have nothing in common with Quebec or Ontario, and since Ottawa acts as if Canada consists of only those two Provinces we largely have no say in what happens. If we are truly a country that wants to treat all of our citizens alike then we first have to have equal representation from each Province and territory like they have south of the border. If that were the case in Canada we would not have basically two Provinces calling all of the shots.

Ottawa told the shipbuilding industry that they don't involve themselves in subsidizing industry because it violates trade laws, and as a consequence of that thousnads of skilled shipbuilding workers are now unemployed with no prospects for employment. Now they are now talking about subsidizing the aerospace industry, specifically Bombardier. We are in the process of an inquiry led by Justice Gomery into the last sponsorship program they conducted in Quebec, is this but just another sponsorship deal? When is it going to be time to finally say enough, to Quebec?

Democracy, What democracy? We have a government ripe with corruption, and now they want in invoke Parliamentary Privilege so they don't have to answer any questions. The types of questions we as ordinary Canadian's can be forced to testify to, or face contempt charges, and possibly wind up behind bars, as they should. It was Martin himself that assured the people of Canada that we would know who was pulling the political strings behind the sponsorship scandal before he called an election, then he called one anyway after going through the motions of appointing Justice Gomery to head up an Inquiry. Now we find out that this corruption goes right to the top, no wonder he didn't want to wait until all of the dirt came out before calling and election. They now want to invoke Parliamentary Privilege, so that they will not have to answer any questions on the subject.. Justince Gomery said; Gomery said Monday.If Justice Gomery doesn't know, I do. politicians are just like a thief who has gotten caught with his hand in the cookie jar, so to speak, and now doesn't want to admit that not only he but other high ranking Liberal Politician's were involved from the start up to their necks, but they also don't want to do the time for this criminal act either. As the old saying goes, "If they can't do the time, don't do the crime.", it's quite simple. If Martin and his bunch thinks that this is going to go away, they are sadly mistaken, and just maybe people will second guess themselves before thy put an X beside a Liberal Candidate's name, when this minority government falls.

All forms of child pornography should be censored. When the Supreme Court rules that there is somehow artistic merit in child pornography those particular justices should be removed from the bench, immediately and permanently. Anyone who could find anything artistic about child pornography is one sick individual, and certainly does not deserve to be sitting in judgement on a society with morals.

brianw; A little off subject but; For those who are hockey fans, assault with a weapon should be assault no matter what the weapon (car, bat, club, fists, etc.., whether it's on the ice or off. Assault is assault, and should be prosecuted. Only females know how to play hockey with skill today, males have turned the game into bloodsport, and have the audacity to call it a skillful game. Skill left when the gloves came off.Sorry for changing the subject.

I agree with you, but I am just as worried about the pot-heads who are also driving while stoned. According to Health Canada: This is a drug that our government is talking about decriminalizing. I go along with the police on this matter. We first need to determine that it's use while driving is made illegal, and mandatory testing for it's use be implemented similar to a breathilizer demand for alcohol impaired drivers, since many ingest both similtaniously. I also worry about those who are out there behind the wheel on other drugs as well in the various classes that also impair one's ability to drive. like Hallucinogens (LSD, PCP), Narcotic Analgesics(Codeine, Morphine, Dilaudid,and the one promoted as a treatment for Heroin addiction, Methadone), Sedatives-Hyponotics (Alcohol, Seconal), Tranquillizers (Valium, Librium), Stimulants (Cocaine, Ritalin), And many others within those classes too numerous to mention. Many of these drugs are being used with impunity by those behind the wheel, endangering the lives of our loved ones. When accidents happen police should have the authority to demand testing for impairment, regardless of whether some of these Right's activists like it or not. Driving is dangerous enough, but it can be made much safer if people were aware that they are subject to testing. Of course it won't stop it all, but it would sure go a long way to improving the safety on our roads.

New Brunswick obviously does not need the extra money Lord is seeking because just about a year ago he had money coming out of his ears, when he decided to create a whole new bureaucracy, with the announcement that he was creating an Office of Official Languages Commissioner. This service was already being provided for at federal expense, through the Official Languages Commission in Ottawa. In fact there was already a satellite office of this Commission in Moncton, New Brunswick directly paid for by Ottawa. We now have a separate bureaucracy in Fredericton, NB with our own little language policeman in Mr. Carrier, and the whole bureaucracy that surrounds that new Commission. Lord has run out of patronage positions to appoint all of his friends to so he is now making them up as he goes along. If Lord can find money like that to throw around he obviously does not need part of that $5.4 billion they are seeking. He will just find somewhere else to p--- it away. Make him first be accountable for every penny he already gets and wastes, before adding to that amount. His latest hair-brained proposal is to supply all Middle School Student's in the Province with lap-top computers. School authorities have advised against it, in fact they cited the fact that they presently do not have enough textbooks for all of the students, let alone supply them with lap-tops. Many of these kids already come out of school not knowing a basic fundamental like being able to count back change without a cash register telling them how much they should give back to the customer. They need training in the basics before they need a lap-top to carry around, and be responsible for. Schools are already full of broken down desktop computers with neither the parts nor the technicians to fix them.

Her allegations were not limited to just the Canada Health Act, they also included his recommendations to do away with Old Age Security Pensions and raising the retirement age to 67 years of age. The reason I say that is because one of the statements made by Martin during the election camapign was his support for abolishing the mandatory retirement age of 65 years of age. When I mentioned my fear to a Liberal friend, that the next step would be the raising of the age at which a person could qualify for OAS, my Liberal friend said that would never happen with the Liberals. Now we hear that Martin had proposed that very thing, but he took it even further by also recommending doing away with OAS period. This man is scarier than I thought! Of course Scot Reid and other sitting Liberal's are going to attempt denying these allegations, they are sitting in the House of Commons in a minority situation. They certainly don't want to be going back to the electorate any time soon, especially with these kinds of facts floating around. I was never a fan of Tequila Sheila's but in these matters I believe her, simply because Martin is looking for any ways he can find to cut federal expenses, which in turn will allow him room to give even more tax breaks to his corporate, and influential friend's in this country. Let's be honest here, Martin is there for the Martin types of this world and all of the other corporate welfare bums. If these revelations were not true, you can bet that Martin would be threatening to bring liable suits against her before she had time to blink. During the CTV interview I just watched on CTV.ca, she commented that she has documentation to back up every one of the statements made in her book.

It makes little difference what he promises or doesn't promise to talk about, if it is an International Conference of any kind, our federal Government should be represented by federally elected politicians, not by Premier's, Especially not by the Premier of Quebec, a Province who thinks of themselves as a nation, and who sends separatist's to represent them in Ottawa for the sole purpose of working towards the break-up of Canada.

What are you talking about, becoming (unethical parasites on our society), they always have been both, you just wern't paying attention. The only things these multinational corporations care about is how much money they can get from the the various governments of the world so they don't have to spend their own money, cheap labour, and maximizing their profits, and they could care less who they have to exploit to get there. Why do you think they have been lobbying for free trade? These agreements are there to protect corporate profits, by allowing them to move their manufacturing operations to third world countries where they can take advantage of disadvantaged cheap labour, export those products back into Canada, and the USA duty free, and sell those products for the same selling prices as if they were manufactured in North America, where livable wages are required to be paid. Our stupidity is that we still continue to purchase these products, at highly inflated prices, and these corporations laugh all the way to their nearest tax-free haven where they don't have to pay taxes on the money. The only remedy against these parasites is to start paying attention to labels, and once determining that the product is made in some third world country simply leave it on the shelf, and purchase only article made in North America, or Canada if you like. I went shopping today for a fleece lined sweater and happened to window shop at Old Navy. One type of sweater was labelled as made in Sri Lanka, the other in Bangladesh, I left without buying either. I think I will just make my old sweater do for at least another year. If people would just stop buying these products, these manufacturer's will have no choice but to either move their factories back to North America or go bankrupt. Their bankruptsy certainly won't hurt somebody like me, but it will hurt those who have mega dollars invested in those companies. These people understand only one thing, loss of profits. Once they start hurting in the old pocketbook, they wiill pay attention. Let's face it people in Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka are not the people who are buying these products, we are, and if we stop buying they may just wake up and smarten up. Here's to waking them up!

He's not even playing T.Douglas, he's so afraid of having to face the electorarte any time soon and losing the little support he did get, that he'll do anything to keep Martine in power, even if that anything is turning into that defacto Liberal. As far as I'm concerned Layton is no more NDP than I am, he's way to far right wing.

Never voted Liberal. I just found that I couldn't in good conscience support a party or Leader who has misappropriated millions of taxpayer's dollars and lied about it. Why would anyone in their right mind vote for a bunch of thieves and liars? Even Chretien himself saw nothing wrong with this misapprropriation of funds as long as Quebec stayed within Canada. His main concern wasn't Canada, it was losing his federal riding seat and thus his right to hold onto power if Quebec was to separate. I'm sure many of his fellow Quebec power barons were afraid of the same thing.

Simply because the choice made by referendum is binding on everyone, hence a level playing field. If the marketplace is left to decide there ceases to be a choice anymore, if your competitor across the street opens on Sundays, you have to follow suit or lose market share. Do you really think that most stores are open on Sundays because it adds to their profits? In New Brunswick for example many smaller retailers have already spoken to the issue including owner's of Canadian Tire franchises. These owner/operators have stated that their choice to remain closed on Sundays, but if WalMart, Zellers and Sears open their doors on Sundays they simply have no choice, either open or sacrifice market share to their competitors. They simply cannot afford to give up market share, even if Sunday openings increases their costs of doing business. My wife works in retail grocery as a Front End Manager (Head Cashier) she and the store manager also maintain that their preference is to remain closed on Sundays, but when Sobeys and Superstore open their doors on Sunday there is absolutely no choice but to open as well. The store still brings in virtually the same receipts, but since operating cost have gone up through wages, payroll taxes, and increased electricity expenses, the profits decline. Why? Because the people that shop on Sundays no longer shop on Saturday, Monday or Tuesday. Nova Scotia's decision at least allows the people to choose to live a more family friendly lifestyle, instead of having commercialism shoved at them 7 days per week. This decision still allows people the ability to pick up necessities like prescriptions, and milk and bread purchases, as well as allowing small tourist destinations the right to open some tourist specialty shops on both Sundays and other Holidays. Large retail corporations given their druther's would have no competion at all, because they would be open 24/7.

That's pretty bold of McGuinty, It's scary when a leader has an ego that large. Instead of patting himself on the back, maybe he should let the voter's speak if he thinks he's that good.