Rob1963

I agree Caesar

My preditions: Libs - 120 Cons - 110 Bloc - 50 NDP - 28

My prediction is: Libs - 120 Cons - 110 Bloc - 50 NDP - 28

I see this is asking if you are finance minister for your Province, My wish list is based on Federal minister

I'm no economist, and some of the things being mentioned, I think, are not in the Finance Minister's portfolio but my spending priorities would be something like: SPENDING PRIORITIES: 1. Health care would be paramount 2. Education 3. Agriculture 4. Environment 5. Military BUDGETARY PRIORITIES: 1. No tax increases 2. Surplus budget (no deficit) 3. Debt reduction This being said, with more thought, I may change some of this. Instead of tax cuts, I would rather see Tax incentives and grants to encourage participation in government priorities (Ie: energy savings, healthy lifestyles, etc.)

as for the service fee for those who go to the ER with out an emergency(I assume that is the same as Outpatients), what about those who have no family Doctor? And do you want to encourage people to wait until a possibly easily treated condition becomes a full-blown emergency which will likely cost the Health Care system more to fix than it may have if it were caught earlier?

Nova Scotia Progressive Conservative Still unsure about my vote in this election! But Not Conservative

I agree, August1991.

I got: Layton = 100 Martin = 100 Harper = 69 Duceppe = 62 Not really surprised, except that Martin was 100 and that Jack Layton was 100 also. Does the quiz always give a 100 or can the top choice be less (ie: top choice =90)? I have taken the test a few times over the past few years (based on the leaders in 2000 election) and Joe Clark was consistently my number one pick (not sure if it was 100, but always on top). To me, it confirms that the "new" conservatives are a lot less "Progressive" than my beliefs are.

Willy, you ask ...why go there? Because, right or wrong... good or bad, it is a major part of Canada's identity. It is a major policy area. Argus, I doubt, you would find many, let alone a majority of, Liberal Party members who disagree with major areas in their policy. Maybe they do, but I doubt it. I'm not sure if I understand whether you agree with Official Bilingualism as it is currently set up or not. If the Conservative Party does not, They should not be afraid to state their position and support it during an election (or anytime for that matter).

Argus, Here in Nova Scotia, there are several ridings with substantial francophone populations which vote Tory and NDP. West Nova is a good example with a large francophone population which traditionally alternates between a Liberal and a Tory member. If there was a Tory running this time, it would be their turn. None-the-less, I think I read many comments here from (I assume) Conservative Party supporters who support what Mr. Reid said. That is fine, let's have a debate in this election on the matter. But of course, Harper feels it won't sell to the public, so he says what he thinks Canadians want to hear, despite what his Party supports. Can you trust a leader, or a Party, for that matter, which puts out a platform which goes against the thinking of a majority of it's membership? Are they saying what they think we want to hear, and if they are elected, will they be able to implement their platform? They go out of their way to say that they are a progressive Party, but what happens when an issue that hasn't come up in this election, comes up and we have elected the Conservatives? Do you trust them to handle it the way you want it handled? (Remember, Same-sex marriage wasn't an issue in 2000, neither was the Iraq War, national security, and a host of other items).

Actually, Macdonald was a "Liberal Conservative"

Peter MacKay, definitely. Oop's, I guess he's Alliance, er, Conservative

What about the Gals?

sounds like one of Scott Brison's proposals during his leadership campaign.

and now the merged party is dead, I believe (There is no Union Nationale anymore is there).

He has totally ignored rural Canada, the food basket for the cities.

Yes, the PC Party of Canada will be making news in the next little while.

I didn't think it would be all that unusual to not renew a Governor General's mandate. On second thought, when is her term up? If it is just before an election, it seems to me that it would be extended for a year or so.

I'm sure that if you seperate out any one of a host of lifestyle choices you can get similar statistics. ie smokers, drinkers, drug addicts, junk food addicts, speed demons... are you going to demonize everyone one by one? Come on. And who was talking about promiscuity? Promiscuity is 'practised' by all groups of people - STD's are not exclusive to Homosexuals - What gives you the right to say that homosexuality is right or wrong? Perverse or not? - smoking also costs the healthcare system a lot (I would venture a lot more than homosexually related STD's) - Who is giving Homosexuality society's blessing? I say live and let live.

What is THAT if not a completely neanderthal, bigoted post!!! Where do you get the stats to say that a homosexual lifestyle cuts the average lifespan in half. Are you saying that if it weren't for homosexuals, the average lifespan would be 140 or so? Or are you saying that the average lifestyle of a homosexual is 35 or so? Either way, completely idiotic. By the way, I hope the (I guess I won't go there...) Idiotic, neanderthal, bigoted, Canadian Alliance, er... Conservative Party

That's because Canadians are generally centrist. And it assumes we only have the three choices. If we were more, say, conservative there would be more 'conservative' parties and they would be the second choice of other conservative-minded voters. ie: A party - extreme conservative B party - not so extreme conservative c party - centrist d party - liberal e party - extreme liberal A & B Party voters will vote for one another leaving the rest voting for three parties. I know this is over-simplified but I think it gets the point across that voters will Generally get what they want.

Preferential voting encourages candidates (and the elected Rep) to reflect the voter's concerns. It encourages compromise and consensus more than PR. PR tends to encourage reflection of Party interests and more extreme and uncompromising views. If Canadians are generally centrist, then their government would be generally centrist with either PR or Preferential voting. FPTP does so to a lesser extent.

Craig, I don't think you have to change the constitution to change our form of voting. However, I don't think PR is the best way to go. I think a preferential system would be better suited to our country... - It would keep the same electoral districts (with PR you will need either... more MP's - we have enough now, or larger ridings - if you want to keep the same number of MP's) - the elected MP would be representative of and responsible to the riding they were elected from (much like now) - much closer to the way we vote now, less confusing change over

You guys sound like David Orchard fans.