Worthy issues for the next election?

"One of the best banking systems in the world" Of course it is very damn best for bankers.

# 2 the Canadian government can borrow only from the bank of Canada and any deals struck with private banks are over, we keep the assets and maybe they'll get out of prison someday.

If we're not going to have a national chat with ourselves about banking soon we might as well not bother about the rest.

Well, at least I now know where you get your silly ideas from.


BTW, there was nothing on that site about boats.

..... And if the Canadian central bank doesn't have the money?... Lemme guess - print more.

That's another reason I support an elected GG. It would make the role more Canadian and accountable to the electorate. Without a GG, who would discipline Parliament? No country in the world has a Parliamentarian as their Head of State.

As for fixed election dates (for Parliament) I have two problems with them:

1. Possible bad timing. If the country is in a situation where we need an active government at the time of a scheduled dissolution there could be serious consequences.

2. With the election date known, campaigning would begin far too early. Look at the US, their election campaigns last over a year!

Eliminate the Senate, and make all the freeloading Senators return every single penny that they never earned.

The problem with eliminating the GG, the Senate - or even fixed election dates, is that it's a kin to putting a band-aid on a gushing wound. One incremental fix by itself will only make the problem WORSE.

Eliminating the GG and/or Senate puts more power into the PMO - which already is the most powerful office in North America (even the President of the US can be impeached, vetoed and held in check - not our PM though!)

A house based on Rep by Pop (stict Rep by Pop) needs to be balanced by a house that is Rep. by Province.

A further balance is needed to ensure that the 2 houses play nice (i.e. the GG)

I would have no problem with a HoC that is rep by pop (with all the inequities that creates) so long as a Senate exists that is equal among the Provinces. (I could care less if it's elected, appointed, what ever - let it be the Provinces house - each province can decide).

A GG (or some such office) would be needed to dissolve Parliment if not working, or veto bills (etc...) - but it should be an elected position - not appointed by the PM. Currently the PM appoints EVERYONE - Senators, the PM, the Judicary - not much in terms of controlling the power of that office, is there.

Election issues, well, I hate the idea of another election again, that really won't decide anything, thus will be another waste of more taxpayer dollars at time where that is the last damned thing we need. I hope that if Iggy provokes this one with his grandstanding, people punish him for it.

I really don't know what the election would be about, except personality. Harper is doing pretty much exactly what the Liberals would be doing for the economy if they were at the helm. Afghanistan might heat up a bit (as our casualties rise again ) but so far there hasn't been much noise about extending our mission thus its hard to say there is an issue. The environment doesn't seem to have the sense of urgency in the media coverage that it did a year or two ago, in large part because the gov't is being dragged along (there seems to be a lack of a focusing issue there). Even in this thread the discussion is more about changes people would like to see in our process that actual issues.

As far as the GG and the Senate go, while I believe that there should be changes, these are things that would have to be constitutional changes. Its been almost 20 years since Mulroney gave up on fixxing Trudeau's screw ups, so the real question is are Canadians ready for new rounds of constitutional wrangling? Honestly I doubt that anything would get solved because of the deeper divisions than we faced 20 years ago. I think the "divide and conquer" strategy employed sucessfully by Chretien to keep power and to push his agenda has strengthened a lot of the divides/animosity between the regions, and that there wouldn't be any agreements, because the different regions all have "pet" issues they want addressed. I actually do feel pretty pessimistic about the future of this federation for that reason: how long can we stay in the holding pattern we are in currently, with those vast ideological differences, before the cracks deepen and tear the country apart?

Agreed with your entire post except this part.

One person, one vote. I don't see why I should have any less say in how my government is run than others just because I have more people living in close proximity than they do.

FYI, most native-born Quebecers can't speak English, and about 8% in Nunavut speak neither english nor French.

If an immigrant knows English but not french, three is little chance of him finding employment in Quebec city. I thik a more rational solution would be what harper had proposed before with regional monolingualism, depending on the majority language in any given local community, and require immigrants to know that language instead. No point studying English if you don't know French in Quebec city looking for employment.

1. How about getting rid of the First Past the Post electoral system. I'm impressed with New Zealand, check this out: --

2. I also support fixed election dates, elected GG and elected small senate.

4. I'd like to see us produce the worlds most rigid and enforced environmental legislation. Doubt this will happen, oil tycoons would whine too much about how it will break their backs, lol, and we all know politicians are in their back pocket.

5. Get rid of everything having to do with the monarchy.

Personally, I think we need to keep our identity as a multi cultural society. I can't agree with anything that degrades the culture in this country. Some think its a burden others think it makes us great. I'm one of the latter. We can't assimilate immigrants by forcing them to conform to our Canadian culture (which really does not exist on its own as it is a composite of all immigrant cultures).

I don't see it as a problem because the senate can't veto bills, and can't create bills - only send them back to parliament. The Senate is to act as a balance to the house - to prevent the "tyranny of the majority" so one province doesn't screw over another one.

One worthy issue for our next election:

Should the justices of the Supreme Court of Canada be elected by the people?

These are the knuckleheads with the real power. How come we don't get to pick them? There is tons of worthy issues obviously, but I've alwayz pondered about this one, not to mention our unelected Senate. Which election is this finally going to come up?

I'd kinda like someone to use our money to support businesses that look to the future, fund scientific advancements, and eliminate the BS inside gov't (it's over-saturated with bureacracy, the criminal code needs an overhaul, ministers' pensions need to be brought in line with the rest of Canadians' pensions, spending a fortune on the GG and LtGs, etc.)

Alley, even the U.S. does not elect their Supreme Court judges. Definitely de-politicize their selection ( for real and not pretend like PM Harper did).

So since the US doesn't elect them, that means that we shouldn't?

I don't want to de-politicize them. I want them to be political and the people to choose them. That why I can vote my guy in.

Worthy canidates would be more appreciated at this time than addressing
any worthy issue.

Jeeeez, Alley, judges are whacko enough as it is (look up Stephen Zinn) without turning them into politicians. Haven't you had enough of campaigning?