Emergency Act commission

[Aristides]

4 hours ago, ExFlyer said:

"Only 26% want to continue as a monarchy for generations to come."

Thinking of Canada’s constitution, would you prefer that Canada remains a monarchy or has an elected head of state?

Monarchy - 21%

Elected head of state (Republic) - 49%

No preference - 31%

"Only 21% of Canadians say that, thinking of Canada’s constitution, they would prefer for the country to remain a monarchy,"

https://www.canadian-republic.ca/polls

Ya, I'm not sure I would give too much credibility to a poll commissioned by a group favouring a republic.

What powers would you give this elected head of state?

Edited October 17, 2022 by Aristides

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, Army Guy said:

Shit eyeball i don't know whether to salute or shit myself, Canadians are not patriotic in any terms, there just along for the ride.

Rights wingers certainly claim to be more patriotic and are bleating the loudest about the loss of Canada to our enemies - which I not assume are not right wing.

All without a shot having been fired in response. It's kinda weird. 

[blackbird]

Canadians should get their act together before they lose their freedom and become a totalitarian state.  Turn to Jesus Christ and his word, the Bible, repent, and be born again.  Then understand God appointed a monarch as head of state.  It is part of the democratic system and helps ensure freedom and democracy.  The King is not there by accident and our system developed over a long history of struggles.  We don't want to lose it because of uneducated people who don't understand how it works and just want to throw it out for the sake of change.

[myata]

6 hours ago, Contrarian said:

Would like to hear his take on the poll above. 

Talk shows don't matter because change is not possible. The system was made, from the outset so that there will be no essential change. Ever. If there's one true essence of Canada this is it. Oblivisci mutatio.

[myata]

11 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

RCMP Commissioner wields the authority of the monarch against the Cabinet

Right. And that's why we routinely see them investigated and at times, even convicted. Sure, you've seen that - only which branch of the multiverse was it? Eyes or paper, the eternal conundrum.

There are no independent institutions in this country. Everything whispers and rubs everything else. This is how the system was made two centuries ago to avoid every, any possibility of a genuine change.

Edited October 17, 2022 by myata

[myata]

11 hours ago, Aristides said:

Whine, whine, whine. Booring

Well I spent honest three minutes of my time and got this. Ignore (not productive).

[West]

4 hours ago, blackbird said:

Canadians should get their act together before they lose their freedom and become a totalitarian state.  Turn to Jesus Christ and his word, the Bible, repent, and be born again.  Then understand God appointed a monarch as head of state.  It is part of the democratic system and helps ensure freedom and democracy.  The King is not there by accident and our system developed over a long history of struggles.  We don't want to lose it because of uneducated people who don't understand how it works and just want to throw it out for the sake of change.

What if the king is a wicked WEF funky?

[myata]

2 minutes ago, West said:

What if the king is a wicked WEF funky?

Or a crazy murderous psycho? Like it never happened gazzilion times back to the future, the eternal quest of this humanity.

[myata]

13 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

the Executive is forbidden from directing the police in Canada

the RCMP Commissioner wields the authority of the monarch against the Cabinet, soon as they break the law

Seriously: why do we like glaring, obvious bullshit so much? A national political cuisine of choice, for sure.

A. PM appoints Commissioner by hand, solely and single-handedly. No checks; balances; reviews or anything in the process.

B. Blah wields blah authority.

C. Add an ombudsfolk for transparency - appointed by who, you thought?

"Cannot be sure if PM can grant themselves privilege" a motto.

Couldn't it (liking and taking as given, the bullshit) be counter-productive, risky even dangerous at some point. Can it?

[Dougie93]

3 hours ago, myata said:

Couldn't it (liking and taking as given, the bullshit) be counter-productive, risky even dangerous at some point. Can it?

I don't think the constitution is the problem per se

rather it is simply the sorts of people that Canadian society produces now

through the education system to the professional managerial class

the culture of absurdly conformist cronyism is deeply entrenched in the population  itself

most Canadians actually seem to desire a Prime Minister to be dictator

[Dougie93]

5 hours ago, myata said:

Right. And that's why we routinely see them investigated and at times, even convicted. Sure, you've seen that - only which branch of the multiverse was it? Eyes or paper, the eternal conundrum.

There are no independent institutions in this country. Everything whispers and rubs everything else. This is how the system was made two centuries ago to avoid every, any possibility of a genuine change.

again, I don't see the problem as being with the system but rather the people

Canadians do not uphold the Westminster Parliamentary system anymore

Canadians have become culturally American, and so vote like Americans

but the American system is based on separation of powers

unlike the Prime Minister, the President has no legislative authority

unlike the Parliament, the Congress has no executive authority

the checks & balances in Canada are reliant upon one upholding an oath to the monarch over the government

but since Canadians don't believe in that anymore, the rule of law in Canada is breaking down

[Dougie93]

4 hours ago, myata said:

Or a crazy murderous psycho? Like it never happened gazzilion times back to the future, the eternal quest of this humanity.

the British people have overthrown Kings without overthrowing monarchy itself

that is in fact how the Westminster Parliament of Canada was founded

William III deposed James II in a counterrevolutionary war, founding Parliamentary Supremacy

the problem in Canada is that if you remove the monarch from the constitution

that would make the Prime Minister an all powerful dictator with unchecked legislative & executive authority

[ExFlyer]

14 hours ago, Army Guy said:

The government did make all the choices, they however did say if you're not vaccinated then you were barred from public spaces, which was not a big deal, you can shop for anything on-line including food and have it delivered, save on gas, or having to deal with VAC extremists, or the rest of the crazy population. and a lot of time most people were working from home anyways.

But that was not enough, they wanted to punish those people, by pushing mandates forcing vaccinations to the population with huge incentives like losing their jobs, or benefits, as always, they went too far, and people pushed back.

I am not aware of them making any major changes, we still do not have a national stock of PPE, medical machines, or a name brand vaccine that is mass produced in Canada. 

long-term care homes is Provincial but the feds could have, say hold back on funding until it was fixed, i mean it was not just a few people that died, it was thousands something that someone should be tracking, i find it funney we track everything during the pandemic, deaths who had shots who didn't, right down to race and ethnic background so everyone that is in a position to make policy has just thrown those out when it means they would have to do some work. That i find sad really. It just another example of how little a life is worth in Canada. 

Some one needs to put on the big boy pants, and make decisions or face consquences, i'm sure Justin has the power to force premiers into doing something  if he was motivated.

There was never any barring from public spaces. There were masking requirements and provincially mandated lock downs but there were certainly no barring from public spaces.  The federal and mostly provincial governments made decisions on public health and safety. Decisions to protect all, not just a select few.

The consequences of not getting vaccinated were those imposed by employers.

I do believe that stocks of PPE were increased and certain medical devices were procured and distributed. Again, much of that is in provincial jurisdiction and local hospital issues. They did approve vaccines. The manufacture of vaccines is a commercial company issue. The US had very limited COVID vaccine manufacturing as did many countries in the world.

Not sure what you are asking of LTC facilities. The deaths were tracked and reported, at least in Ontario they were.

Also, am not sure what you mean by "Some one needs to put on the big boy pants, and make decisions or face consequences,".  Make what decisions? Face what consequences for what?

 

 

 

 

Edited October 17, 2022 by ExFlyer

[ExFlyer]

11 hours ago, Aristides said:

Ya, I'm not sure I would give too much credibility to a poll commissioned by a group favouring a republic.

What powers would you give this elected head of state?

Whatever powers were in the constitution. Such as the powers they have now.

[myata]

3 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

I don't think the constitution is the problem per se

rather it is simply the sorts of people that Canadian society produces now

Wow, could it be said any simpler and to the point? When, where paper was the main problem? If our main problems were some papers wouldn't we be living in a perfect world, or very near.

2 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

the problem in Canada is that if you remove the monarch from

So like an illusion remedy as the rational for indefinite status quo? When the monarch interfered in anything what exactly could they do? No we like to put imaginary dreams ahead and before any reality. That much is pretty clear.

[Aristides]

7 hours ago, West said:

What if the king is a wicked WEF funky?

Worse, he has been an outspoken environmentalist for 50 years, long before it was fashionable.😁

[Aristides]

1 hour ago, ExFlyer said:

Whatever powers were in the constitution. Such as the powers they have now.

So what's the difference? Why go to the expense of putting another politician in the same job? We already have plenty of politicians in Ottawa and you could easily end up with a PM and President from the same party. 

If you get rid of the position and make the PM head of state, you are just removing one of the few checks on a PM's power.

Edited October 17, 2022 by Aristides

[ExFlyer]

28 minutes ago, Aristides said:

So what's the difference? Why go to the expense of putting another politician in the same job? We already have plenty of politicians in Ottawa and you could easily end up with a PM and President from the same party. 

If you get rid of the position and make the PM head of state, you are just removing one of the few checks on a PM's power.

I do not understand your comment.

You questioned a poll about monarchy.

You then asked who would be in power. I said same as now, whatever is in the constitution.

The monarchy is only a figurehead with no constitutional authority. The monarchy is only a ceremonial and historical position.

Getting rid of the monarchy has nothing to do with who we democratically vote for or to lead us.

What do you think the monarchy in Canada is?? Some sort of political patriarch or matriarch? The monarchy is just a homage to our past with no authority.

 

[Army Guy]

13 hours ago, eyeball said:

Rights wingers certainly claim to be more patriotic and are bleating the loudest about the loss of Canada to our enemies - which I not assume are not right wing.

All without a shot having been fired in response. It's kinda weird. 

Funny i did not differentiate between left or right i said "Canadians" are not very patriotic. That being said if you were to measure patriotism one would have to give more to the right side of the spectrum. The left is more concerned about themselves rather than the nation as a whole. But Ya you go girl, keep preaching

[blackbird]

9 hours ago, West said:

What if the king is a wicked WEF funky?

According to our Constitutional Monarchy/Parliamentary democracy, the King does not have any  power in political matters.  The government can simply overrule anything the King says or orders and put him in his place.  If the King becomes too political he risks creating a crisis between the government and the monarchy.

Edited October 17, 2022 by blackbird

[Zeitgeist]

4 minutes ago, blackbird said:

According to our Constitutional Monarchy/Parliamentary democracy, the King does not have any  power in political matters.  The government can simply overrule anything the King says or orders and put him in his place.  If the King becomes too political he risks creating a crisis between the government and the monarchy.

Nevertheless, in a healthy parliamentary democracy, the monarch has ongoing dialogue with the PM, as happened between Queen Elizabeth and Winston Churchill.  Victoria knew PM’s like Gladstone, Disraeli and Palmerston well. They didn’t always get along, but it was always important that there be mutual respect and understanding, the the monarch is the representative family of the people, representing centuries of cultural and political history.  

[TreeBeard]

15 hours ago, Aristides said:

Ya, I'm not sure I would give too much credibility to a poll commissioned by a group favouring a republic.

What powers would you give this elected head of state?

The polling companies are reputable.  What is inherently wrong with commissioning a poll from a reputable company?

[blackbird]

12 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

Nevertheless, in a healthy parliamentary democracy, the monarch has ongoing dialogue with the PM, as happened between Queen Elizabeth and Winston Churchill.  Victoria knew PM’s like Gladstone, Disraeli and Palmerston well. They didn’t always get along, but it was always important that there be mutual respect and understanding, the the monarch is the representative family of the people, representing centuries of cultural and political history.  

That is true, but discussions between the monarch and the PM in their weekly meetings are always in private without cameras or media.  They are only meant to share opinions between the PM and King/Queen.  The PM makes the final decision about what direction government will go.  I don't think the King can require or order anything in politics.

[myata]

37 minutes ago, blackbird said:

That is true, but discussions between the monarch and the PM in their weekly meetings are always in private without cameras or media.  They are only meant to share opinions between the PM and King/Queen.

Sure. That's how it's been two or three centuries back in the times colonial and why change anything if it works (anyhow)? Just stick a new label on it!

While it works - important. Has anyone or anything promised that it would be forever? And by the time you run into real problems with that fun idea you forget everything about what a change is, and means. This is exactly what happened to dinosaurs. By the way.

Edited October 17, 2022 by myata

[WestCanMan]

On 10/14/2022 at 10:16 AM, Boges said:

My bad, it's presumptive that people who repeatedly refused to do what they were told by Law-enforcement would actually be convicted of the crimes they are charged against. 🙄

They weren't doing anything wrong. They were protesting against fascist overreach by our government. One would think that would be appreciated in a western society. We all know what happened when fascism went unchecked in Germany.