Most Canadians say Canada is Broken

[Dougie93]

Don't blame Upper Canada for the asymmetrical dictatorship from Toronto, 50 seats for the Elites of the Iron Triangle, we can't vote them out anymore than the West can.

The Orangemen of Upper Canada are Loyalists still.

 

[cougar]

Yes, the country is broken and nobody cares.

In this political forum alone there are 5-6 people writing only and about 60% of the posts are from Dougie93 who doesn't even live in Canada or like Canada.

What a broken place!

[Dougie93]

3 minutes ago, cougar said:

Yes, the country is broken and nobody cares.

In this political forum alone there are 5-6 people writing only and about 60% of the posts are from Dougie93 who doesn't even live in Canada or like Canada.

What a broken place!

I love Wellington County Upper Canada, and that is where I am right now.

I am not bound to any particular fealty to Canadian Confederation and never was.  Confederation is not a country, merely an agreement.

My family came to British North America in 1757, long before Confederation.

I defend and uphold the Glorious Revolution of 1688, the story of my people, Canadian and American both.

 

[Dougie93]

What do you even post about, you people without a history?

Greta Thunberg?

Donald Trump?

Being Woke?

You don't even know who you are, you don't know the story of your people.

You can hate me all you like, but I know where I come from.

[Abies]

On 9/9/2019 at 10:42 AM, cougar said:

What are the things you want to see done ?

If you ask me, the less of the "doing" the better.

Get rid of section 33.

[Dougie93]

2 minutes ago, Abies said:

Get rid of section 33.

It's never gonna happen, they can't open the constitution up again, they barely kept things from falling apart in 82', and it's not the same Canada now, things are falling apart as it is.   Section 33 is in there to protect the provinces from Ottawa, they'll never agree to take it out, it was required to get them to sign off in the first place.

 

Edited November 21, 2019 by Dougie93

[Abies]

Of course, I was only saying so in reference if the government ignored the rules. 

[Dougie93]

Just now, Abies said:

Of course, I was only saying so in reference if the government ignored the rules. 

Section 33 is the rules.  Section 33 was demanded by the provinces, to constrain Ottawa, Section 33 is not separate from the Charter, it is a Charter right, it's simply a states right.

[Abies]

Just now, Dougie93 said:

Section 33 is the rules.  Section 33 was demanded by the provinces, to constrain Ottawa, Section 33 is not separate from the Charter, it is a Charter right, it's simply a states right.

I realize that, I did not say it as a serious thing. 

[Dougie93]

Just now, Abies said:

I realize that, I did not say it as a serious thing. 

Think carefully if you even want it taken out, because it is the last line of defense for the provinces against the Feds running amok.

Look at this crazy government we have now, I wouldn't give up Section 33 in the face of these totalitarian kooks.

[SpankyMcFarland]

When did the Cabinet last matter? This concentration of power in the PMO has been going on for decades. 

[Dougie93]

1 minute ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

When did the Cabinet last matter? This concentration of power in the PMO has been going on for decades. 

But only because of Canadian crony culture, where in Canada are things not run by cronies and sycophants?

The MP's have the power to take the PM down anytime, they simply don't, because they are sycophants by nature.

Canadians are raised to be sycophants, from grade one to university, Canadians are weaned on being conformists.

 

[Dougie93]

Frankly, if it wasn't for the Elite Consensus,  Section 33 could be used by the provinces more.

For example provinces could refuse to take the waves of refugees Ottawa is ramming down their throats by invoking it.

The Elite Consensus rules at the provincial level as well, so that's why that doesn't happen.

The flaw in Canada's democracy is that there is no democracy, there is simply the rule of the Elites and you can never vote them out.

[Cannucklehead]

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/www.cbc.ca/amp/1.4817751

Pierre Trudeau, who was then prime minister, argued against the idea of a notwithstanding clause but faced opposition from provinces that wanted a way to override some charter guarantees.

Finally, on the night of Nov. 4, 1981, then-justice minister Jean Chrétien and Saskatchewan's then-attorney general Roy Romanow hammered out the so-called "Kitchen Accord" — a compromise that included an entrenched charter of rights along with notwithstanding provisions.

Following some more tweaking (all without Quebec's participation), the federal government and nine provinces (Quebec refused to go along) signed the constitutional accord on Nov. 5, 1981 — an accord that included a notwithstanding clause. 

 

Interesting.  

[Dougie93]

IIRC, It was Alberta and Saskatchewan who were the holdouts. Section 33 was put in to appease the West.

[eyeball]

17 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

When did the Cabinet last matter? This concentration of power in the PMO has been going on for decades. 

That's why it's always funny listening to conservatives like Ivison and Argus complaining about things that need changing.

Living and being governed at the whim of our right-wing betters is a tradition that goes back centuries.  So too is the way conservatives cluster around the right-wing as if it were theirs.  

Edited November 21, 2019 by eyeball

[Argus]

20 hours ago, Abies said:

Get rid of section 33.

Because it's caused so much damage so far, right?

We will never get rid of section 33 as long as we have activist judges who believe their own personal ideological beliefs and values are more important than law.

[Argus]

20 hours ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

When did the Cabinet last matter? This concentration of power in the PMO has been going on for decades. 

But getting worse. As MacDougal points out, even Harper had a number of strong, capable ministers while Trudeau has what?

Justin Trudeau has appointed his new cabinet. These days, cabinets are an excuse to hire 30-some chauffeurs and offer a bump in pay to the gilded few, not a vehicle for collaborative government.

If that’s too much cynicism for your morning coffee, go back through the records from 2015 to 2019 and list out all of the critical ministerial interventions. See, you’re already done after Chrystia Freeland. Sure, Jody Wilson-Raybould also stands out, but for our purposes she’s the wrong kind of example. Even the recently departed Ralph Goodale – an Ottawa fixture for decades – barely made a dent in the nation’s proceedings. It was the Justin Trudeau show from start to finish.

https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/columnists/mcdougall-the-sad-truth-is-that-justin-trudeaus-new-cabinet-doesnt-matter

[SpankyMcFarland]

5 minutes ago, Argus said:

But getting worse. As MacDougal points out, even Harper had a number of strong, capable ministers while Trudeau has what?

Justin Trudeau has appointed his new cabinet. These days, cabinets are an excuse to hire 30-some chauffeurs and offer a bump in pay to the gilded few, not a vehicle for collaborative government.

If that’s too much cynicism for your morning coffee, go back through the records from 2015 to 2019 and list out all of the critical ministerial interventions. See, you’re already done after Chrystia Freeland. Sure, Jody Wilson-Raybould also stands out, but for our purposes she’s the wrong kind of example. Even the recently departed Ralph Goodale – an Ottawa fixture for decades – barely made a dent in the nation’s proceedings. It was the Justin Trudeau show from start to finish.

https://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/columnists/mcdougall-the-sad-truth-is-that-justin-trudeaus-new-cabinet-doesnt-matter

This is like discussion of the debt in the US, a perpetual matter of concern for the party out of power. Harper and his PMO were notorious for micromanaging ussues. The other day, his old bud Flanagan remarked how Scheer isn’t feared enough within the party like Harper was. 

Edited November 21, 2019 by SpankyMcFarland

[Argus]

1 hour ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

This is like discussion of the debt in the US, a perpetual matter of concern for the party out of power. Harper and his PMO were notorious for micromanaging ussues. The other day, his old bud Flanagan remarked how Scheer isn’t feared enough within the party like Harper was. 

Harper was notorious among a horrified media and opposition for undemocratically centralizing power in the PMO, which Trudeau does to even greater degree and no great criticism or concern among the same people. His ministers are nobodies with no power or authority.

[SpankyMcFarland]

3 minutes ago, Argus said:

Harper was notorious among a horrified media and opposition for undemocratically centralizing power in the PMO, which Trudeau does to even greater degree and no great criticism or concern among the same people. His ministers are nobodies with no power or authority.

I have been hearing this complaint for thirty years. Nothing prevents it in the British system so it just gets worse. Freeland has been excellent by any standard, getting CETA done and NAFTA almost there. She’s as capable as any minister in Harper’s team and would make a good PM. Philpott was highly competent and her departure on a point of principle was a big loss. 

[Abies]

1 hour ago, Argus said:

Because it's caused so much damage so far, right?

We will never get rid of section 33 as long as we have activist judges who believe their own personal ideological beliefs and values are more important than law.

I would say politicians removing rights is far more serious than a Judge striking down a law for being unconstitutional. 

[Argus]

17 hours ago, Abies said:

I would say politicians removing rights is far more serious than a Judge striking down a law for being unconstitutional. 

So you don't think being able to vote for the people who make our laws is a democratic right?

[Dougie93]

Angus is essentially correct,  the Liberals have loaded up the judiciary with left wing activist judges, the Charter is a poison pill which enables rather than constrains them.

As a result the laws in Canada are become ever more bizarre and totalitarian all the time.

[DrYouth]

On ‎9‎/‎7‎/‎2019 at 7:46 AM, Argus said:

Sixty one percent of Canadians feel the country is broken, and they have no confidence on current mainstream politicians. They long for a 'strong leader' and don't much care if he or she breaks rules to get things done. This is a sentiment rising throughout the world as people tire of the simpering phoneys who infest modern democratic politics.

The good news for Trudeau in this is that none of the leaders facing him can even be remotely considered 'strong', and certainly not Andrew Scheer.

The majority of Canadians think politicians aren’t concerned with people like them and experts don’t understand them. They say society is “broken” and the economy is rigged in favour of elites.That’s according to the findings of a new Ipsos poll, which shows that populist attitudes — as well as nativist (or anti-immigrant) sentiments — have gained new ground in Canada.

https://globalnews.ca/news/5860959/canadians-society-politics-ipsos-poll/

I spent some time in South Africa recently...

That country is broken.

Canada is among the least broken countries in existence right now.

That's not to say it doesn't have flaws and problems... but the whining about our country being broken is about the only thing broken about our country.