Jump to content

Emergency Act Challenged - Over a year after government invoked Emergencies Act, court to hear legal challenge

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Aristides said:


So you are saying May speaks for you.


She doesn't speak for me, my MP does.

Whether you like it or not both do.  That doesn't mean she represents my views, and that's one of the reasons that mps are supposed to stick close to party lines and be cautious about what they say. Only Justin tends to use terms like "canadians want" or "canadians know" etc - he does it on purpose. He certainly doesnt' represent me or my ideals per se but unfortunately as a member of parliament he does get to say he's a representative of Canadians.

So yes - if may is at a press conference and speaks about canadians then she has that right, even tho she may not specifically represent you or me.

You notice that your mp is not officially called "the representative from 'x' riding, but rather the 'member' from  x riding.  The riding chooses which person they will send to represent canada - not just their riding. Otherwise the mp would only vote on matters directly involved with their riding instead of all matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, CdnFox said:

the representative from 'x' riding, but rather the 'member' from  x riding. 

Or another innocent-deliberate trick to avoid accountability? Think: if you are a representative of the people, citizens who is called that and recognized as such, who can make you vote this way and not that, pretty much always?

Who is it, what mysterious being(s) who are above the will of people in this country?

We are in a tight, I'd say very honestly, hopeless spot without much clue how to move forward. There are very few if any, effective mechanisms of checks and controls over the governments and their institutions. And on top of that, even when something vaguely similar happens like the famous "responsibility by election" (because there isn't any other and you have to wait and then keep fingers crossed) it gives absolutely no incentives to the winner to change anything. The system is already perfect, cannot be improved in principle - for them. Where else, in what other democracy in closing on two centuries you are guaranteed a place at the trough no matter what you do?

Just by going a tiny-winy bit more modest than Putin and Un, splitting the mandate to rule unilaterally, without any checks and controls (yes can't deny what we just seen and experienced) between near-identical fractions of the elite you can play this cute game forever! Or you thought so but in fact, on the the North Mexico stop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
    • Most Online

    Newest Member
  • Recent Achievements

    • User earned a badge
      Posting Machine
    • User earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • User went up a rank
    • Videospirit earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Videospirit went up a rank
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Create New...