cybercoma Posted February 27, 2011 Report Share Posted February 27, 2011 Mulroney had his other ways to get his Quebec ridings, if I recall correctly. It's impossible to compare the current political climate to the one pre-Bloc Quebecois. It was far easier for governments to get majorities without those 60 or so seats being taken up by a regional party w/ only 10% of the popular vote.imho, the Bloc ought not exist in the House of Commons, but rather the Senate. If there was proper and equal regional representation at the Senate level, in order to balance out the (somewhat) popular representation in the House, then they would not be needed in the House. It would be the Senators that would take a second look at legislation and decide whether or not it meets regional needs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Bandelot Posted February 27, 2011 Report Share Posted February 27, 2011 (edited) Does the Harper government want such a thing? I too think it's an insane notion. (Unless the "mandatory minimum" is roughly nothing, and remains dependent on the circumstances. ) Yes they do, the infamous bill S-10. Even if the mandatory minimum sentence was very short, once you are convicted and serve time in prison, when released you're an ex-con. And that is like a life sentence, regardless. Therefore the decision to impose a prison sentence must be carried out, not by the command of bureaucrats, but by somone who is WISE. Edited February 27, 2011 by Sir Bandelot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted February 27, 2011 Report Share Posted February 27, 2011 imho, the Bloc ought not exist in the House of Commons, but rather the Senate.Why should they exist as a party even in the Senate? If the Senators speak for regions there's no need for a traitorous party. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Molly Posted February 27, 2011 Report Share Posted February 27, 2011 Is Ontario really this stupid that they can't distinguish between provincial and federal politics? Mike Harris pushed them towards the Liberals, while Dalton McGuinty pushes them towards the Conservatives? Is that really true? If so, God help us (and I'm an atheist). Unfortunately, yes. (Shocked the heck out of me.) Precious few know who their representatives are, or with which parties they are affiliated, either, and every now and again they will even throw municipal issues into the same pot for good measure, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Bandelot Posted February 27, 2011 Report Share Posted February 27, 2011 Unfortunately, yes. (Shocked the heck out of me.) Precious few know who their representatives are, or with which parties they are affiliated, either, and every now and again they will even throw municipal issues into the same pot for good measure, too. HAHAHAHAHAHA... (demockracy) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bloodyminded Posted February 27, 2011 Report Share Posted February 27, 2011 Yes they do, the infamous bill S-10. Even if the mandatory minimum sentence was very short, once you are convicted and serve time in prison, when released you're an ex-con. And that is like a life sentence, regardless. Therefore the decision to impose a prison sentence must be carried out, not by the command of bureaucrats, but by somone who is WISE. You're right, I'm not quite sure how I missed this. It's a fairly lunatic measure, which refuses to take anything into account (except for "aggravating factors" that bolsters its own argument for itself). That isn't justice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted February 27, 2011 Report Share Posted February 27, 2011 This poll though kind of puts a damper on things for the Conservatives, doesn't it? http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2011/02/23/ekos-poll.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted February 27, 2011 Report Share Posted February 27, 2011 Scariest two words in Canadian Politics - CONSERVATIVE MAJORITY Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted February 27, 2011 Report Share Posted February 27, 2011 You're right, I'm not quite sure how I missed this. It's a fairly lunatic measure, which refuses to take anything into account (except for "aggravating factors" that bolsters its own argument for itself). That isn't justice. Don't worry too much......from the bill itself, here is its purpose: Bill S-10 seeks to amend the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act1 (CDSA) to provide for minimum penalties for serious drug offences, such as dealing drugs for organized crime purposes or when a weapon or violence is involved. Currently, there are no mandatory minimum penalties under the CDSA. The bill also increases the maximum penalty for cannabis (marihuana) production and reschedules certain substances from Schedule III of the Act to Schedule I.The bill contains an exception that allows courts not to impose a mandatory sentence if an offender successfully completes a Drug Treatment Court (DTC) program or a treatment program, under subsection 720(2) of the Criminal Code, that is approved by a province and under the supervision of a court. These programs are designed to assist certain individuals who are charged with drug-related offences (should they meet certain eligibility criteria) to overcome their drug addictions and avoid future conflict with the law. The DTC program involves a mix of judicial supervision, social services support, incentives for refraining from drug use, and sanctions for failure to comply with the orders of the court. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted February 27, 2011 Report Share Posted February 27, 2011 Why should they exist as a party even in the Senate? If the Senators speak for regions there's no need for a traitorous party. The point I'm clumsily trying to make is that if the Senate did its job, the Bloc would be moot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted February 27, 2011 Report Share Posted February 27, 2011 The point I'm clumsily trying to make is that if the Senate did its job, the Bloc would be moot. That point doesn't make sense. The Commons is the house of the people's representatives. The Senate is the place of regional representation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted February 27, 2011 Report Share Posted February 27, 2011 That point doesn't make sense. The Commons is the house of the people's representatives. The Senate is the place of regional representation. And the Bloc is.... wait for it.... A party of regional representation IN THE COMMONS! *dramatic music* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted February 27, 2011 Report Share Posted February 27, 2011 And the Bloc is.... wait for it.... A party of regional representation IN THE COMMONS! *dramatic music* Perhaps Harper can ask his mentor MORONey back to take a bow for that little error in judgement too, eh... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted February 27, 2011 Report Share Posted February 27, 2011 (edited) Perhaps Harper can ask his mentor MORONey back to take a bow for that little error in judgement too, eh... I know others do it, but I would like to believe you're above the name-calling game. As right as you are. Edited February 27, 2011 by cybercoma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted February 27, 2011 Report Share Posted February 27, 2011 A party of regional representation IN THE COMMONS! *dramatic music* But they represent their constituents. I'm not saying they don't have a place in the Senate (though, as I think Senators should be chose the Order of Canada Recipients are, thy probably wouldn't) but I'm saying that they definitely have as much of a place in the Commons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted February 27, 2011 Report Share Posted February 27, 2011 But they represent their constituents. I'm not saying they don't have a place in the Senate (though, as I think Senators should be chose the Order of Canada Recipients are, thy probably wouldn't) but I'm saying that they definitely have as much of a place in the Commons.I'm not saying they don't have a place in the Commons, but their place would be redundant if the Senate was actually effective. The people of Quebec could actually elect representatives able to sit in government, while having Senators looking out for their regional interests. Of course, you could argue the BQ is not about looking out for Quebec's regional interests; they're actually working towards separating. As a separatist party, they have no reason to look out for regional intersets because they have no interest in working within the existing system. Instead, their goal is to leave Canada and overturn the current system. It has been 10 years since the last referendum, though, so Quebec separatism seems to have been put on the backburner. They ought to make strides for Senate reform, so the regions can be properly represented. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted February 27, 2011 Report Share Posted February 27, 2011 I know others do it, but I would like to believe you're above the name-calling game. As right as you are. Moi? I'm not "above" anything, I'm BEYOND anything (being an ALIEN and all)... Which would certainly includes a little added "drama" like - "A party of regional representation IN THE COMMONS! *dramatic music*" - as an example... When lyin' Brian let's Canada be taken to the cleaners by a guy with alzheimers, like ol' Ronny Reagan was; is there anything else to call him than a MORON (lyin' Brian "MORONey" for short)? I'm NOT beyond repeating myself though if something is TRUE... Ergo I repeat... Scariest two words in Canadian Politics - CONSERVATIVE MAJORITY Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted February 28, 2011 Report Share Posted February 28, 2011 (edited) This poll though kind of puts a damper on things for the Conservatives, doesn't it? http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2011/02/23/ekos-poll.html Yah that poll looks like an out lier. ARS just released a poll of 7000 Canadians taken the sametime as that Ekos poll which has the Cons at 39 the Liberals at 26 and the NDP at 18. 7000 is a whole lot of responses over a week. I don't know though maybe the Ekos poll which is different then every other poll this week is picking up a trend although I doubt it. Edited February 28, 2011 by punked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted February 28, 2011 Report Share Posted February 28, 2011 Yah that poll looks like an out lier. ARS just released a poll of 7000 Canadians taken the sametime as that Ekos poll which has the Cons at 39 the Liberals at 26 and the NDP at 18. 7000 is a whole lot of responses over a week. I don't know though maybe the Ekos poll which is different then every other poll this week is picking up a trend although I doubt it. Yeah, this is probably the 1 time out of 20 when polls are out to lunch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punked Posted February 28, 2011 Report Share Posted February 28, 2011 Yeah, this is probably the 1 time out of 20 when polls are out to lunch. That is what it looks like I guess the next week will tell but it looks like we are moving to the same stale mate we have been in the last 5 years. Strong Conservative minority with 10-15 seats shifting places between all the parties to give us the same set we have had a need for all 3 opposition parties to bring down the government. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted February 28, 2011 Report Share Posted February 28, 2011 (edited) Deleted. Edited February 28, 2011 by jbg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted February 28, 2011 Report Share Posted February 28, 2011 Perhaps Harper can ask his mentor MORONey back to take a bow for that little error in judgement too, eh... Meech? Charlottetown? Airbus? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Posc Student Posted February 28, 2011 Report Share Posted February 28, 2011 (edited) Harper has done nothing in the last 5 years as prime minister, if he left now he'd have no legacy. Mulroney was the best prime minister in recent times. Edited March 2, 2011 by Posc Student Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted February 28, 2011 Report Share Posted February 28, 2011 Harper has done nothing in the last 5 years as premier, if he left now he'd have no legacy. Mulroney was the best Prime Minister in recent times. I think scandal-free, damage free government is a huge accomplishment. Think Sponsorship, the OLA, the Charter of No Rights, the destruction reorganization of the military, immigration "reform" or 1965 or "one Jew is too many" King. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWiz Posted February 28, 2011 Report Share Posted February 28, 2011 Harper has done nothing in the last 5 years as premier, if he left now he'd have no legacy. Mulroney was the best Prime Minister in recent times. You WIN funniest post of the week honors... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.