43% of Albertan's and 36% of the West

[rbacon]

So just to complete your profile as a lunatic Liberal, do or any of your friends really believe that Canada in any way is a DEMOCRACY. YUK YUK YUK YUK. No wonder they no longer teach Canadian history in school too many of you idiots flunked it big time. And folks like you have the balls and unmitaigated gall to laugh at Americans who know nothing about Canada. My God all the ignoramuses live right here in Canada.

[rbacon]

Sparsqawker when will you acknowledge a problem with a Democratic Deficit in Canada when 9 out of 10 Provinces are calling for Independence from the Slave Ship Liberal and we are all picking up the Shotguns we did not register to start taking back our Rights? Were do they find these Loonie Lefties.

[Riverwind]

Sparsqawker when will you acknowledge a problem with a Democratic Deficit in Canada when 9 out of 10 Provinces are calling for Independence from the Slave Ship Liberal and we are all picking up the Shotguns we did not register to start taking back our Rights? Were do they find these Loonie Lefties.

Get your facts right. some fringe groups in every province are calling for separation. However, Quebec is the only place where the separatists actually won elections - remember polls mean nothing until voting day.

Second, what about the democratic deficit inside Alberta! You keep ignoring that point (probably because it undermines your arguments). 30% of Albertans have had no representation in the Alberta legislature for 30 years! What are you going to do to fix that democratic deficit? You probably won't admit it but the truth is you don't really care about democracy - you just want a dictorship that will only ever allow people that follow your political prejudices into power. God forbid if Albertans ever elected an NDP gov't. I am willing to bet that if that happened you start a party calling for the separation of Lethbridge from Alberta.

That is why separation is an unacceptable in a civilized political discourse. There no room for compromise and negotiation in a separatist's mind: they want exactly what they want and are willing the blow up the country to get it.

[kimmy]

Status quo. You know. A busted electoral system that has created the lowest voter turnouts in the democratic world. The "democratic deficit™." A ridiculous senate whose primary role is to provide patronage jobs. A corrupt, inefficient civil service that serves as make-work for Francophones. Grants and contracts awarded without transparency. You know. Stuff that everybody from Preston Manning to Jack Layton has pointed to as needing reform.

1) The US has a much lower voter turnout than Canada. Does that mean their electoral system is busted? Australia has among the highest voter turn outs yet they have exactly the same system as here. Poor voter turn-out is a measure of the venality of the citizens not the health of the political institutions.

uh, I had to look up venality... but having done so, I'm not sure why you'd say that.

The most striking thing about the American results you provided was the gap betwen the voting-age population, and the number actually registered to vote. Voter registration has been a controversial issue in the United States for some time. I think it's entirely fair to question whether their electoral might be busted, based on the large number of voting-age citizens who aren't registered and the controversy surrounding the issue. Is comparing ourselves to the United States a good measure of how we're doing? Some would suggest that when it comes to elections, that's setting the bar pretty low.

Just guessing, but I suspect Australia's high voter turnout might have something to do with the fine for not voting.

If I'm not mistaken, the past 4 Canadian federal elections have each set new record lows in voter turnout percentage. The 2004 election barely cracked 60%.

2) California, like Ontario and Alberta put more money into the federal pot is US. In addition, it has the same gripes about a federal gov't that advocates policies that a majority of Californians oppose. California even has its own separatist parties (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/californiansecessionistparty/). However, you do not see any credible politician in California talking about secession as a viable options because Americans understand that talk of separation has no place in civilized political discourse.

Are any credible politicians in Ontario or Alberta talking about secession?

3) The Canadian civil service is among least corrupt in the world (see http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781359.html)

This index sounds like little more than a self-esteem test for bureaucrats:

The index defines corruption as the abuse of public office for private gain, and measures the degree to which corruption is perceived to exist among a country's public officials and politicians. It is a composite index, drawing on 17 surveys from 13 independent institutions, which gathered the opinions of business people and country analysts.

Hardly convincing methodology, from the sound of it. Not that it matters: I don't think Canadians give a crap how their institutions rank in comparison to Austria, Luxembourg, and Germany.

I will further point out that the description "the abuse of public office for private gain" does not include (as far as I can tell) the two issues which have become such contentious issues in this country:

-the abuse of public office for political gain.

-the abuse of public office for the benefit of friends, relatives, and associates.

Defining corruption as "the abuse of public office for private gain" would exclude (for instance) the legendary CF-18 maintainance contract that caused such furore in Manitoba and beyond... because that wasn't private gain, it was political opportunism. Nor would the description include funnelling seemingly endless public money into projects in Quebec. Nor would it include the preferential awarding of government contracts to government-friendly firms. Or using HRDC grants and incentives to encourage businesses to relocate from opposition-held ridings into government-held ridings. Or appointing party cronies to the senate and ambassadorships and consulting jobs.

How about the civil service language policy? Argus has written some excellent messages on the subject, describing how jobs can arbitrarily be reclassified to French Essential at the whim of supervisors to exclude candidates.

None of this would fall under your official definition of corruption, but all of it contributes to the widespread and growing cynicism that Canadians feel toward their institutions.

4) Every modern democracy has problems with 'inefficient' bureaucracies that 'lack transparency'. Many large corporations have these problem too. It is not a particularly Canadian problem nor is it going to be solved by separation.

Nor is pretending that the malaise and cynicism that has gripped this country isn't real going to solve anything. People have become so sick and tired of listening to our Prime Ministers utter empty promises and broad, vague generalities about these issues that they've come to believe

And, why wouldn't Albertans dabble with separatism? After all, it seems to have been quite lucrative for Quebec. And, far from terrorism, it's completely harmless. In fact, it would have no consequences at all. Even if Alberta sent a full slate of separatist MPs to Ottawa next election, there'd be no consequence. Our 28 MPs are too small a number to matter, no matter which party they're from. Really, what would it hurt to send 28 separatists to Ottawa?

Would public discourse in the commons be any more appalling than it already is? No. Would regional frictions be any worse than they already are? No.

It is of no consequence. We'd still have a Liberal government. The country wouldn't break up. Parliament would stumble along just as it has for the past year.

Have you ever seen the movie "Groundhog Day", starring Bill Murray? It's about a weatherman who is cursed to live February 2nd over and over again. Whatever he accomplishes in his day will be wiped clean at 6:00am and he's sent back 24 hours earlier to repeat February 2nd all over again. As he realizes his fate, he becomes quite anti-social... punching people who annoy him, committing robberies, stealing a car and driving it off a cliff, committing suicide in a variety of ways... whatever amused him, because he knew that whatever he did, it didn't matter. Whatever he did, he'd still wake up at 6:00am, February 2nd cursed to do it all again.

And it is exactly so with regard to Albertans and federal elections. Whether we sent a full slate of Liberals, Conservatives, separatists, Scientologists, mental retards, or a mixture of all of them, it doesn't make any difference. Canada will go on exactly the same regardless. So supporting separatists can't be likened to terrorism, because terrorism is destructive and violent. Supporting separatism, for Alberta at least, has no possibility of achieving anything at all.

-k

[Guest eureka]

Most of those things, Kimmy, do fall under the heading of corruption. You make the mistake of all "Right Wingers" of thinking that everything is aboutmoney. Personal gain is more than that.

In Groundhog Day, Bill Murray did not exactly remain unchanged. He learned and grew from his repetitive days.

Sending Separatist MPs to Ottawa would be a lot more harmful than you suggest. It would disrupt government as does the Bloc. It would also be an echo of the separatist political power within Alberta.

You also seem to believe that Question Period is government. It is not and is only a small part of Parliament. In Britain, for example, there is the same circus. There, though, the standards of oratory are much higher since it is still an important part of public office there. And the insults are much more colourful.

I will take our question period over American style debate. That consists of cozy and quiet meetings to divide up the tax pot and benefits to friends and relatives and financial backers.

[Tawasakm]

Australia has among the highest voter turn outs yet they have exactly the same system as here.

Actually no. We vote for our senate. The Canadian way seems incomprehensible to me.

Just guessing, but I suspect Australia's high voter turnout might have something to do with the fine for not voting.

Ten points to Kimmy. Voting is compulsory in Australia.

[kimmy]

Most of those things, Kimmy, do fall under the heading of corruption. You make the mistake of all "Right Wingers" of thinking that everything is aboutmoney. Personal gain is more than that.

Sure it is, but I remain unconvinced that the "Transparency International" survey contains a substantive methodology, or a definition of corruption which would encompass the government activities that Canadians (not just westerners) find most nauseating. If you look at the things I mentioned in my last message, I think you'll find that not only are few of them at all secret, most of them have been justified using the excuse of protecting national unity.

In Groundhog Day, Bill Murray did not exactly remain unchanged. He learned and grew from his repetitive days.

But his misadventures were an integral part of his evolution.

Sending Separatist MPs to Ottawa would be a lot more harmful than you suggest. It would disrupt government as does the Bloc.

Government's already disrupted. The difference between Quebec separatists and Alberta separatists would be that Quebec separatists have sufficient numbers to make their presence felt; Albertan separatists wouldn't, even if such a thing were sent to Ottawa.

It would also be an echo of the separatist political power within Alberta.

There is no separatist political power in Alberta; there's only cynicism and dissatisfaction. Separatism has gained some support in Alberta not because any significant number of Albertans sincerely want to leave Canada, but because many people see it as the most blunt message they could deliver.

You also seem to believe that Question Period is government.

Of course not. But no other aspect of federal government would be significantly different either.

I will take our question period over American style debate. That consists of cozy and quiet meetings to divide up the tax pot and benefits to friends and relatives and financial backers.

But, as I keep asking, is just being better than the Americans good enough? You yourself have contended on many occassions just how low a standard that really is.

-k

[kimmy]

If your poll figures actually signal a true strong desire for change then there is no reason why the four western premiers could get together and put together proposals for changing the federation. They could even go so far as to put the proposals to a vote in their provinces on these changes. Or better yet. Alberta could start by instituting some serious political reforms like PR at the provincial level.

Why must electoral reform be launched from Alberta? BC has studied and voted on electoral reforms, and the federal NDP has aggressively advocated for electoral reform; the Liberals have had no response to either.

What about senate reform? Alberta has been aggressively advocating for senate reform for many years, and offered ideas such as "Triple E". Alberta has provided lists of elected senate nominees to the federal government; these lists have been used as toilet paper by the Prime Minister. The notion of electing senate nominees was rejected as a patchwork solution, but there was never any dialogue on what might be a more substantive solution. The notion of triple-E was rejected as unacceptible to Ontario and Quebec, but there's never been any dialogue on what might be a more acceptible compromise.

You criticize people for turning to separatism rather than working on reforms. But when people in "the regions" have taken the initiative in advancing these issues for national discussion, they've been met with total indifference.

-k

[Guest eureka]

I was referring to your scenario. That would reflect "Separatist" power in Alberta. Otherwise, I agree with you about Alberta "separatism."

Question Period is not that significant a part of Parliament. It is a chance to embarrass the government - or Cabinet and to make public some issues that might be swept under the table. It is not where the work of Parliament is done. Ot can, though force the agenda of the real work. It does more to engage the public than anything else and is thus, an important part of democratic process. American style "democracies" have nothing like it which is why the skullduggery is so easy to hide in those.

Is better than the Americans food enough? Not at all although many who post here would think better must be near perfection. It is just that it is as good as it gets in this imperfect world to date. There could be real improvements and I have suggested some measures that I would think improvement. The trouble with those is that they are mostly invisible to the public and are part of the real work of Pariamentary government.

Those who can only shout "Democratic Deficit" without knowing what democracy or government is about would not be satisfied with even perfection unless Ted Morton or Bernard Landry told them to believe.

[kimmy]

I was referring to your scenario. That would reflect "Separatist" power in Alberta. Otherwise, I agree with you about Alberta "separatism."

Perhaps it would just reflect profound frustration.

Question Period is not that significant a part of Parliament. It is a chance to embarrass the government - or Cabinet and to make public some issues that might be swept under the table. It is not where the work of Parliament is done. Ot can, though force the agenda of the real work. It does more to engage the public than anything else and is thus, an important part of democratic process. American style "democracies" have nothing like it which is why the skullduggery is so easy to hide in those.

There could be real improvements and I have suggested some measures that I would think improvement. The trouble with those is that they are mostly invisible to the public and are part of the real work of Pariamentary government.

But it is not the process which has created such cynicism, it is the results. No matter how imperceptible your changes were, they would help if they prevented some of the negative outcomes that continue to churn stomachs from coast to coast.

People are not crying out for more decorum in Question Period, they are crying out against actions that seem to run counter to fundamental notions of fairness. Could any amount of Question Period shenanigans have created the kind of utter disgust and disillusionment that the CF-18 maintainence contract did? I strongly think not.

Why does every Prime Minister come from Quebec? Why does every prominent civil servant have a name like Marc-Andre or Jean-Paul? Why do federal grants and programs and contracts seem to be so heavily biased towards Quebec? Why do auto-manufacturers get a carte-blanche exemption to Kyoto emissions, while key industries in other regions don't? Why do issues from "the regions" always fall well behind Quebec sovereignty as priorities in Ottawa? Why do patronage appointments and improper contracting procedures continue? These are the sorts of things that people wonder about, and contribute to the growing cynicism toward the federal government. It's an end to this sort of result that people want to see, not more decorum in Question Period.

-kimmy

[rbacon]

The Front Page of the National Post to-day carried this story. http://www.canada.com/national/nationalpos...17-61d12836e4f9

[Black Dog]

Um...the poll data contradicts the thread title.

The question was "Do you think Western Canadians should begin to explore the idea of forming their own country." Respondents are not being asked whether the West should “separate": they are being asked whether they should begin to explore the idea of forming their own country. There’s a considerable difference between “separating” and “beginning to explore the idea” of separating. In other words, the question's mealy-mouthed, indecisive phrasing indicates it is designed to elicit a high positive response rate. Put even more plainly, the poll itself is good for grabbing headlines and that's about it.

[crazymf]

Headlines is what politics is all about. It puts the idea into peoples heads and makes the idea acceptable. What is it, say a lie 100 times and it becomes truth? Something like that.

[Black Dog]

Headlines is what politics is all about. It puts the idea into peoples heads and makes the idea acceptable. What is it, say a lie 100 times and it becomes truth? Something like that.

Propaganda.....

The planned use of propaganda and other psychological actions having the primary purpose of influencing the opinions, emotions, attitudes, and behavior of hostile foreign groups in such a way as to support the achievement of national objectives.

So you conced the statistical validity of this poll is on par with something from the pages of Cosmo?

[kimmy]

Um...the poll data contradicts the thread title.

The question was "Do you think Western Canadians should begin to explore the idea of forming their own country." Respondents are not being asked whether the West should “separate": they are being asked whether they should begin to explore the idea of forming their own country. There’s a considerable difference between “separating” and “beginning to explore the idea” of separating. In other words, the question's mealy-mouthed, indecisive phrasing indicates it is designed to elicit a high positive response rate. Put even more plainly, the poll itself is good for grabbing headlines and that's about it.

Still, the mere fact that such a rate of respondents are willing to even "explore" the idea is an indication of what I've been arguing all along. Dissatisfaction with federalism is high in the west, even if "hard separatist" sentiment is not.

In other words, expect another shipment of "Canada Kicks Ass" t-shirts to be heading our way soon. What size would you like?

-k

[crazymf]

Headlines is what politics is all about. It puts the idea into peoples heads and makes the idea acceptable. What is it, say a lie 100 times and it becomes truth? Something like that.

Propaganda.....

The planned use of propaganda and other psychological actions having the primary purpose of influencing the opinions, emotions, attitudes, and behavior of hostile foreign groups in such a way as to support the achievement of national objectives.

So you conced the statistical validity of this poll is on par with something from the pages of Cosmo?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Not concede, but merely agree. Talk is cheap. We can all talk separation, but actually doing it is a different ball game.

[Black Dog]

Not concede, but merely agree. Talk is cheap. We can all talk separation, but actually doing it is a different ball game.

Right, but the reality is, contray to what this bogus poll says, separation isn't really on the radar screen here. The Separation Party of Alberta didn't even get 5,000 votes in the last election.

I think the vast majority of Albertans consider themselves Canadians first and foremost.

[crazymf]

Not concede, but merely agree. Talk is cheap. We can all talk separation, but actually doing it is a different ball game.

Right, but the reality is, contray to what this bogus poll says, separation isn't really on the radar screen here. The Separation Party of Alberta didn't even get 5,000 votes in the last election.

I think the vast majority of Albertans consider themselves Canadians first and foremost.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Of course. That's the way it's been for our lifetimes, Canadian. I suspect an emerging contradiction here as we talk about staunch conservative rednecks thinking liberal thoughts such as separatism. My head is getting hot as we speak.....overload....

[Black Dog]

Of course. That's the way it's been for our lifetimes, Canadian. I suspect an emerging contradiction here as we talk about staunch conservative rednecks thinking liberal thoughts such as separatism. My head is getting hot as we speak.....overload....

How is separatism (which is rooted in nationalism, a decidedly illiberal concept) liberal? No, separatism is perfectly in line with the attitudes espoused by the Alberta's pseudoconservatives, an attitude that can be summed up by the phrase "ME! ME! ME! ME! ME! ME! ME!"

[August1991]

How is separatism (which is rooted in nationalism, a decidedly illiberal concept) liberal? No, separatism is perfectly in line with the attitudes espoused by the Alberta's pseudoconservatives, an attitude that can be summed up by the phrase "ME! ME! ME! ME! ME! ME! ME!"

What could be more liberal than viewing social questions though the lens of individualism?

I have always been vaguely amused by the irony of (English) Canadians who denounce (Quebec) separatists for being narrow-minded and self-centred yet feel high-minded defending Canadian sovereignty against the United States.

If a large number of people in Alberta don't want their government issuing marriage certificates to two men, or they are not happy with how the government uses the money they give to it, then I would be surprised if those people did not start to think of alternative arrangements.

Political separatism is primarily about setting up a different government arrangement. Hugo and I and others haved had endless debates about whether government is coercion or not. It is, but the contract is not perpetual.

By and large, Canadians get the provincial governments they want. Canadians do not get the federal government they want.

I think this poll result shows that.

[Riverwind]

By and large, Canadians get the provincial governments they want.  Canadians do not get the federal government they want.

Where do you get that idea from? Most provincial gov't are elected by less that 50% of vote. That tells me that the majority of people are stuck with provincial gov'ts that they do not want. The difference is the provinces have played the 'blame the feds' game for so long that people have absorbed this propaganda as truth. If you removed the feds as a convenient whipping boy you would see exactly the same animosity directed at the provincial gov'ts.

[August1991]

Most provincial gov't are elected by less that 50% of vote. That tells me that the majority of people are stuck with provincial gov'ts that they do not want.

Democracy is hardly about vote percentages. But I'll take that idea as a starting point. No provincial government in Canada has consistently ignored a large minority of people, and certainly not a minority that is easy to identify. If a provincial government did this, the opposition would easily change policies and win an election. Indeed, this happens constantly in provincial politics.

This does not happen in Canadian federal politics for the simple reason that the issue of Quebec sovereignty dominates. Canadian federal politics are fundamentally regionalized. With the arrival of the BQ, the problem has become more acute.

One consequence is that westerners feel alienated, and this poll shows that.

[Riverwind]

No provincial government in Canada has consistently ignored a large minority of people, and certainly not a minority that is easy to identify.  If a provincial government did this, the opposition would easily change policies and win an election.  Indeed, this happens constantly in provincial politics.

The only difference is in provincial politics people are willing to vote for 'big tent' opposition parties even if these parties do not always represent their interests. These parties serve as the basis for co-operation and compromise between groups that sometimes have opposing objectives (e.g. environmentalists and unions within the NDP).

What is missing at the Federal level is a big tent opposition party which can be an alternative to the Liberals. Such a party cannot exist until Quebequers start electing federalists other than Liberals (whether it is a renewed tory party or an ADQ spin off). Personally, I think it is unfair to blame Ontario and Ottawa for western alienation when it is really caused by Quebec nationalists that elect obstructionist parties like the BQ. Furthermore, some of the blame has to be shared by Western conservatives who make no effort to form a common cause with Quebec nationalists, instead, they push social conservative policies that make them seem like aliens from the point of view of an average Quebequer.

[Guest eureka]

Do you hold, then, August, that the government represents much of Western Quebec? I have to think your tongue is stuck securely in your cheek.

Much of Quebec is as alienated with more reason from the Provincial government as is the supposed alienation from the federal government. In Ontario, the North West region is alienated from the Provincial government also. The same can be said of parts of other provinces that are neglected, or, in the case of Quebec, treated as an alien race.

[B. Max]

New poll from the adler on line show.

If you are a person living in Western Canada, can you see yourself voting for separating your province from Canada?

I would vote for separation of my province from Canada. 70.93 %

I would only vote for that if it included at least two western provinces. 6.90 %

I would vote for it if it included all of Western Canada. 15.72 %

I would never vote to separate from Canada. 6.45 %

I wonder how much longer ottawa's song and dance man in alberta will be be able to deny reality.