Search the Community

On Jan. 31, B.C. will decriminalise personal-use quantities of heroin, fentanyl, methamphetamine, cocaine and MDMA. Starting at the end of the month, possessing less than 2.5 grams of those drugs will no longer be illegal. The criminal status of drugs is a federal responsibility, of course, but B.C. successfully obtained a two-year “time-limited exemption” to the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act. According to the province, the emergency measure is intended to “reduce the barriers and stigma” related to drug addiction in a bid to curb the province’s sky-high rates of overdose fatalities. From articles I read in The Globe and Mail, National Post, CBC. Do you agree with such approach? This type of model is in Portugal with some results. Portugal decriminalised the public and private use, acquisition, and possession of all drugs in 2000; adopting an approach focused on public health rather than public-order priorities. ---> Aside from the stigma part, it most likely also costs more money to do the paperwork and host people for minor infractions, constantly the same customers probably. In the same time, is it possible this approach provides a gateway towards more criminality? Time will tell, I guess.

My family has been in the oil and gas business for almost 80 years and neither my father nor uncles think the Nexen deal was a good one for Canada. They say if China was so desperate for oil they would have settled for 49% and Canada was dead erong to give controlling interest to the Chinese. Would we have made the same deal with the Russians? So why would take such a risk with China? This basically gave Canada's self-sufficiency a bullet to the head because in 20 years or so Canadian oil will be going to China and we'll be importing American oil! Canada should never be dependent on foreign countries - any foreign country for oil. We saw the bribery taking place with the Chinese on the lumber deal, and I wonder if the same may have influenced such a bad decision on the Nexen deal?

Canada has signed many international treaties that accept migration and immigration of all people to be a right and not a privilege. Almost all of our ancestors were immigrants. Yet now we look down upon today's immigrants and deny them the same opportunities our great grandparents had. I think this is a bit shameful and unethical. Even if they create a temporary tax burden, I think skilled and educated immigrants should be granted admission and given one year to prove themselves - sort of "probationary immigration" I guess I would call it. If after one year they cannot be self-sustaining and productive to society, and able to speak English or France, they can be shown the door. My guess is that 80% of these immigrants have value to Canada - even if it is taking the unwanted jobs the rest of us reject. Canada cannot grow to its maximum potential without more people. Just my opinion.

That Wrong Harper vs that Wrong System?​ By Exegesisme On the topic "End the Harper Government: My views on Canada's democracy" (1), I said that "The whole political system is encouraging corruption, any party in power can not avoid." The word corruption here mainly means political corruption, which means political wrong doing for political specific benefits of a party. First, I see that Harper made a lot of political wrong doings under the present political system, however, I see he actually did one good thing, which the other two parties are saying that is wrong as part of each strategy for the ongoing election. That good thing is to postpone the retirement age from 65 to 67, this is a policy of all fast aging nations should take. However, in the ongoing election, both the liberal(2) and the NDP(3) are promised overthrowing this policy once they take the power. So, what I see is that the present political system encourages the political corruption for partisan political benefits. I am trying to overhaul the whole political system to get the issues fixed beyond to contemn each wrong doing of each political party. (4), (5). I am also exploring new political possibility(6) and new political philosophy(7). I hope more people standing with me to get the job done. I can not get the job done along without your support. I also hope that all MPs of all parties of Canada in coming time realize the long persisted issues and try to fix them together. Reference (1) http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/topic/24947-end-the-harper-government-my-views-on-canadas-democracy/ (2) https://www.liberal.ca/policy-resolutions/10-pensions-age-security-canada-pension-plan/ "WHEREAS the qualifying age for eligibility for old age security benefits was raised to age 67 from age 65 thereby creating a domino effect impacting on the above economic and social objectives;"​ "BE IT RESOLVED that the Old Age Security Benefits eligibility revert to age 65 to facilitate the voluntary exit of older Canadians from this market into alternative part time employment and or retirement;" (3) http://www.ndp.ca/issues "As Prime Minister, Tom will cancel the Conservative decision to raise the retirement age — bringing it back down to 65." (4) http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/topic/24828-8-weaknesses-of-federal-political-system-and-reform/ (5) ​http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/topic/24942-my-criticisms-and-reforming-suggestions-for-the-canadian-political-party-system/ (6) ​http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/topic/24853-canada-needs-direct-election-of-the-prime-minister/ (7) http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/topic/24876-political-philosophy-for-human-future-1-definition/