^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Posts: 6,331 
Videos: 5
Location: Newfoundland!
Videos: 5
Location: Newfoundland!
March 13th, 2007, 08:32 AM
I'd object to number 1 as well. After all if four provinces say something it's gonna mean more to the government than if one large province says it.
I'd object to number 1 as well. After all if four provinces say something it's gonna mean more to the government than if one large province says it.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Posts: 6,331
Videos: 5
Location: Newfoundland!
Videos: 5
Location: Newfoundland!
March 13th, 2007, 08:50 AM
half of them would suggest becoming a republic again, honestly so many people seem so intent on breaking up canada into tiny bits
half of them would suggest becoming a republic again, honestly so many people seem so intent on breaking up canada into tiny bits
Hawkings former plumber
Posts: 7,935
Location: RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia Drive Apt 911
Location: RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia Drive Apt 911
March 13th, 2007, 09:00 AM
There's no secret to the base of that fabled regional economy nor it's center, it will never be on what's now known as Canadian soil nor will it ever be controlled by what's now known as Canadians. And you can stop using that tired old Quebec lever, Quebec been threatening divorce for three hundred years, when they sober up they always change thier minds.Next you'll offer us peace in the middle east .
Quoting atlanticaparty
Unite the four provinces into one province with one legislature and one provincial government inside Canada. That allows:
1. Atlantic Canada a larger more unified voice with which to speak in Canada
2. A rationalization and better co-ordination of provincial policies
3. Economic union
4. A region commensurate with other regions in Canada
5. Canada to rationalize seats in parliament, ie have the region give up its over-representation
6. A base on which to start building a regional economy
7. A stronger region in the likely event of Quebec separation
1. Atlantic Canada a larger more unified voice with which to speak in Canada
2. A rationalization and better co-ordination of provincial policies
3. Economic union
4. A region commensurate with other regions in Canada
5. Canada to rationalize seats in parliament, ie have the region give up its over-representation
6. A base on which to start building a regional economy
7. A stronger region in the likely event of Quebec separation
There's no secret to the base of that fabled regional economy nor it's center, it will never be on what's now known as Canadian soil nor will it ever be controlled by what's now known as Canadians. And you can stop using that tired old Quebec lever, Quebec been threatening divorce for three hundred years, when they sober up they always change thier minds.Next you'll offer us peace in the middle east .
Mighty Intellect
Posts: 1,961
March 13th, 2007, 01:21 PM
Is there any benefit to Number 3? And what do you mean by that, anyway?
Number 4 is meaningless without an explanation of what you mean.
Number 6 - we kinda have one already
Number 7 is not necessary
Number 2 wouldn't happen anyway. Even by itself, NS can't get its act together. It's still run on a county-by-county basis.
Quoting atlanticaparty
Number 5 contradicts Number 1. Which one do you want? Number 1 suggests a stronger voice, Number 5 would mean a smaller weaker voice. Unite the four provinces into one province with one legislature and one provincial government inside Canada. That allows:
1. Atlantic Canada a larger more unified voice with which to speak in Canada
2. A rationalization and better co-ordination of provincial policies
3. Economic union
4. A region commensurate with other regions in Canada
5. Canada to rationalize seats in parliament, ie have the region give up its over-representation
6. A base on which to start building a regional economy
7. A stronger region in the likely event of Quebec separation
1. Atlantic Canada a larger more unified voice with which to speak in Canada
2. A rationalization and better co-ordination of provincial policies
3. Economic union
4. A region commensurate with other regions in Canada
5. Canada to rationalize seats in parliament, ie have the region give up its over-representation
6. A base on which to start building a regional economy
7. A stronger region in the likely event of Quebec separation
Is there any benefit to Number 3? And what do you mean by that, anyway?
Number 4 is meaningless without an explanation of what you mean.
Number 6 - we kinda have one already
Number 7 is not necessary
Number 2 wouldn't happen anyway. Even by itself, NS can't get its act together. It's still run on a county-by-county basis.
Member
Posts: 63
March 14th, 2007, 09:30 AM
Quoting hermanntrude
One large province will not be hobbled by petty bickering. And the federal government won't be able to play favorites.
I'd object to number 1 as well. After all if four provinces say something it's gonna mean more to the government than if one large province says it.
Member
Posts: 63
March 14th, 2007, 09:44 AM
Quoting TenPenny
Assuming you mean that a few extra seats in parliament means anything. Remember we are only talking at most four seats here. Also remember that parliament is ineffective. We may be over-represented now, but what good has it done us? It is just a way to keep us quiet, like the handouts. It is a big issue with the rest of Canada when we start to discuss regional development and it impedes the discussion. (And remember its just not democratically fair).
Number 5 contradicts Number 1. Which one do you want? Number 1 suggests a stronger voice, Number 5 would mean a smaller weaker voice.
Quote:
Eliminating the inter-provincial trade barriers allowing growth in trade and business. Having one unified regional economy.
Is there any benefit to Number 3? And what do you mean by that, anyway?
Quote:
The region would have 2.4 million, twice the size of Manitoba but still less then Alberta. It would have the stature of a bona-fide region in Canada, like the others (Quebec, Ontario, The West, BC ...) as opposed to four minor provinces.
Number 4 is meaningless without an explanation of what you mean.
Quote:
But this would help.
Number 6 - we kinda have one already
Quote:
Why?
Number 7 is not necessary
Quote:
Lets be optimistic. We also want to see more effective leadership in addition to union, see our other reforms.
Number 2 wouldn't happen anyway. Even by itself, NS can't get its act together. It's still run on a county-by-county basis.
Ponderous Intellect
Posts: 4,205
Location: Saint John N.B.
Location: Saint John N.B.
March 14th, 2007, 11:27 AM
A combined NB/PEI/NS would have many beneficial effects for us..among them , a centralized civil service[costing far less than the total of the present one], a unified justice system and the elimination of some provincial trade barriers. I have an open mind on Atlantica.
A combined NB/PEI/NS would have many beneficial effects for us..among them , a centralized civil service[costing far less than the total of the present one], a unified justice system and the elimination of some provincial trade barriers. I have an open mind on Atlantica.
