Airing our dirty laundry to the world?

[para transit fellow]

Who exactly is paying for this trip to India?

[Ryan Coke]

Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov

Umm we better chill out guys or Clifffletcher is going to come in here and ream us out....

What a garbage post.

[Minnie]

Scheer reminds me of the dummies that people use to audition as ventriloquists on America's Got Talent. He just looks like plasticized wood, eyes just as vacant. He's made an ass of himself in the past day or so, trying to gain points against Trudeau's recent heckler, without even checking the woman out, and the vile groups she belongs to. Somebody stick baby in the corner where he belongs.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by Johnny Makarov

Umm we better chill out guys or Clifffletcher is going to come in here and ream us out....

Stop acting like a #### head and Cliff won't have to come in and slap your around.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by zamler

Stop acting like a #### head and Cliff won't have to come in and slap your around.

Nobody is slapping anyone around here. Don’t be childish.

[Weitz]

Sitting government or opposition embarrassing our country (i use the term country loosely these days)... Whats the difference?

[blender]

Originally Posted by Weitz

Sitting government or opposition embarrassing our country (i use the term country loosely these days)... Whats the difference?

Give me a break, please.
It's ok to not be happy with the way the country is being run--that's part of the beauty of living in a liberal democracy, but comments like the above are total rubbish. Same with the previous poster who described Canada as "broken".
I suggest some people need a holiday in sub-Saharan Africa or maybe even America for that matter before spouting off nonsense about what's wrong with Canada.
You don't have to like it all the time but at least have some respect.

[chemgear]

Originally Posted by blender

Give me a break, please.
It's ok to not be happy with the way the country is being run--that's part of the beauty of living in a liberal democracy, but comments like the above are total rubbish. Same with the previous poster who described Canada as "broken".
I suggest some people need a holiday in sub-Saharan Africa or maybe even America for that matter before spouting off nonsense about what's wrong with Canada.
You don't have to like it all the time but at least have some respect.

Isn't that like telling people BC complaining about the forest fire smoke to STFU and go live in Mumbai before opening their mouth?

EDIT: Fallacy of Relative Privation?

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by blender

It's ok to not be happy with the way the country is being run--that's part of the beauty of living in a liberal democracy, but comments like the above are total rubbish. Same with the previous poster who described Canada as "broken".

You seem to have missed the fundamental point of the complaint here. It's not simply an objection to how the country is being run. It's an observation that some of the mechanisms on which the country operates - the separation of powers set out in the 1867 Constitution Act - are no longer operative. Given that that division of legislative authority underpins all the laws in the country, weakening that base does strike at the country's structural integrity, so to speak.

There's a difference between criticizing how someone uses a piece of communally-owned machinery, and criticizing someone for breaking that machinery to suit their own purposes.

[blender]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

You seem to have missed the fundamental point of the complaint here. It's not simply an objection to how the country is being run. It's an observation that some of the mechanisms on which the country operates - the separation of powers set out in the 1867 Constitution Act - are no longer operative. Given that that division of legislative authority underpins all the laws in the country, weakening that base does strike at the country's structural integrity, so to speak.

There's a difference between criticizing how someone uses a piece of communally-owned machinery, and criticizing someone for breaking that machinery to suit their own purposes.

I don't see how anything has fundamentally changed since confederation. Canada has always been a messy place politically, yet the one constant is that it continues to work...somehow. Don't get me wrong, it's far from perfect, but I strongly challenge the notion that anything is broken or has been purposefully broken. Politics by definition is who gets what, where when and how. It's never going to be pretty.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Making vague assertions about how Canada has "always been a messy place politically" does not constitute a response to the specific complaint that legislative authority and the constitutional division of powers is currently on shaky ground.

It's fairly obvious to anyone who is paying attention that certain Provinces have attempted to hamper or prevent construction of federally regulated undertakings, and that the current Federal government has not effectively quashed those little rebellions. As a result there's a great deal of uncertainty as to whether Provinces in effect have seized powers that they should not have, based on the constitution, and whether interprovincial projects can actually be built without provinces trying to extract concessions they're not legally entitled to extract. That - as we've seen - leads to fights and trade disputes between provinces as they try to one-up each other and seek retribution (in similarly illegal ways), which is exactly why we have the constitutional division of powers we do in the first place - to prevent this situation from arising.

In those circumstances, the mechanisms that make Canada work as a country are clearly strained. So, again, it's absolutely not just a complaint about how the country's currently being run.

[blender]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Making vague assertions about how Canada has "always been a messy place politically" does not constitute a response to the specific complaint that legislative authority and the constitutional division of powers is currently on shaky ground.

It's fairly obvious to anyone who is paying attention that certain Provinces have attempted to hamper or prevent construction of federally regulated undertakings, and that the current Federal government has not effectively quashed those little rebellions. As a result there's a great deal of uncertainty as to whether Provinces in effect have seized powers that they should not have, based on the constitution, and whether interprovincial projects can actually be built without provinces trying to extract concessions they're not legally entitled to extract. That - as we've seen - leads to fights and trade disputes between provinces as they try to one-up each other and seek retribution (in similarly illegal ways), which is exactly why we have the constitutional division of powers we do in the first place - to prevent this situation from arising.

In those circumstances, the mechanisms that make Canada work as a country are clearly strained. So, again, it's absolutely not just a complaint about how the country's currently being run.

All due respect because I recognize that you an educated fellow, but I would argue again that the mechanisms that make Canada work as a country have always been strained.

I resent you catagorizing my comments as vague assertions.
The division of powers in this country has always been contentious and there is a long history of judicial challenges as well as constitutional challenges and compromises and disagreements. That is a fact and I'm confident it will remain that way as long as Canada remains.
Another fact that may be considered is that despite this constant tension and push/pull between federal and provincial governments (to say nothing of the relatively recent entry of large municipal governments into the political scene) Canada has maintained a stable and effective regime of governance for 151 years with virtually no significant strife or upheaval.
Seems to me that the proof is in the pudding, so to speak.

[PepsiFree]

“Canada is broken” is sensationalist tripe, plain and simple.

[puckedoff]

^ Would you settle for 'Canada is Broke'?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

“Canada is broken” is sensationalist tripe, plain and simple.

I'm glad thats settled then. We can get back to our endless intra-provincial bickering.

[blankall]

I honestly don't see what the issue is here. In our system the party members represent their constituency. If that constituency votes conservative, then the party member has to represent those voters, regardless of how the party in power operates.

I'd argue that a minority party not only has the right to visit leaders outside of Canada, but has an obligation to do so. We have a parliamentary system that is supposed to reflect a variety of views. If one party feels that their views are not being properly promoted, either outside or inside Canada, they have an obligation to promote those views themselves.

Some people might see this as being "fractured" and a weakness. However, it also reflects a country with a functioning democracy and a variety of political parties that are allowed to operate freely. It's very common for other nations to do the same, particularly in Europe, where the various aligning parties will not only meet, but often form their own umbrella parties, where they exchange strategies and ideas.

BTW I did not vote conservative.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Locke

I'm glad thats settled then. We can get back to our endless intra-provincial bickering.

Because it’s so new.

[White Out 403]

Originally Posted by blankall

I'd argue that a minority party not only has the right to visit leaders outside of Canada, but has an obligation to do so. We have a parliamentary system that is supposed to reflect a variety of views. If one party feels that their views are not being properly promoted, either outside or inside Canada, they have an obligation to promote those views themselves.

This is likely the worst opinion I've read here for days. Congrats.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Because it’s so new.

Again! You're right! Its been happening for so long that its basically part of our culture now, we shouldnt seek to change it because its basically tradition!

You're so wise.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by blender

I resent you catagorizing my comments as vague assertions.

Well, you can resent it if you like, but that sort of rhetoric is non-responsive and dismissive of a complaint that's pretty specific. Waving at it with the back of your hand with statements like that one deserves a (mildly worded) call-out, in my opinion.

The division of powers in this country has always been contentious and there is a long history of judicial challenges as well as constitutional challenges and compromises and disagreements. That is a fact and I'm confident it will remain that way as long as Canada remains.

This is true. However, the important difference is that in the vast majority (if not all) such cases, the dispute is between a provincial government and the federal government. Even where multiple provinces are involved (egg and milk cases, if memory serves), the Federal Government has been intractable and forceful in defending its constitutional jurisdiction. Court challenges to determine where the bright lines are between federal and provincial jurisdiction are fine, provided that it's a real contest of positions between motivated litigators.

This no longer seems to be the case. The Federal Government does not appear to value its own legislative authority enough to defend it in the face of challenges, and as a result, that authority is being flouted even absent any challenge, or where there are court challenges, they're cynical posturing moves without any realistic prospect of success. If you can show me where in the past this climate has existed throughout our history, I'm all ears. It's been about ten years since my first year constitutional law class, so maybe I've forgotten.