Would you support a party that preaches more autonomy for each province?

[Adriatik]

Wait till Harper gets a majority - The feds will shirk some responsibilities - passing the costs on to the lower tier government but at the same time influence greater control over our lives. His tough on crime stance is only the appetizer before the "tough on the middle class" programs start.

What are you talking about?

Aren't you aware of what's going on?

-A month before the election, Harper said that there was nothing wrong with the economy and that we would sustain the crisis.

-After the election, Flaherty said that we may be hit by the economy crisis after all but the effects would be minimal and we would not run a deficit.

-Then Harper tried to destroy the other parties and almost lost power following their legal plan to defeat the government. He's only kept it temporarily by dodging the inevitable. He lied to the Canadian people to scare them into supporting the Cons instead of the Coalition. As it stands, the country is still divided 50/50 on the issue.

-Then, Flaherty said that we will have a deficit after all.

-Then it appears that we were going to have a deficit even without a bailout plan.

Can't you see that Harper and Flaherty have been lying all along?

Canadians by the way are realizing this and at this point, to think that Harper is getting a majority in the next election is simply absurd and delusional.

It's kinda late for Harper to think of a majority in an upcoming election.

We all know that the only reason Harper called the snap election this year is because he knew of the upcoming deficit and wanted to secure his power for another few years, it's as simple as that... I honestly think that in January when parliament resumes, Harper will need a miracle to stay in power. If his government is defeated in January on the budget, the GG will have no choice but to let a coalition take power given these new developments on an eventual deficit. Since we'll be in deficit, we cannot afford another election...

 

[Kreskin]

Harper can thank his lucky stars that the opposition is in a mess. The guy the three parties had full confidence for as Prime Minister two weeks ago has since been exiled to the witness protection program. The newest version of leaders they have confidence in didn't win the confidence of his own party to be leader.

 

[L Gilbert]

"If there existed a political party in Canada that preached ultra-autonomy for the provinces and the decentralization of the federal government, would you vote for it?"
Not at the moment. Harper doesn't seem too interested in sticking Ottawa's nose into provincial business. At least not nearly as much as Martin's Liberals were or Jack Lameton's socialist hordes would be. (This does not affect my opinion that I think BC could be much better off without Ottawa, though.)

 

[L Gilbert]

I was listening to the latest Liberal ass to become leader the other day and I had to laugh. He said that 62% of Canadians didn't vote Con. Well, no shyte, Sherlock. Only 59% of Canadians VOTED (a pretty miserable turnout). This means that even fewer voted Glib. Guess it hasn't occurred to politicians the reason for the low turnouts - them and their incessant BS.

 

[JLM]

Harper can thank his lucky stars that the opposition is in a mess. The guy the three parties had full confidence for as Prime Minister two weeks ago has since been exiled to the witness protection program. The newest version of leaders they have confidence in didn't win the confidence of his own party to be leader.

You're noticing things like I've been noticing for 25 years- what it all boils down to politicians pretty well across the board lack competence, integrity and lack of empathy for the taxpaying (trough filling) public. Of course smart people can get jobs as multi million $ C.E.O.s ripping the public off in less obvious ways (until things like the entire auto industry go on the scrap pile) If you wait long enough the chickens always come home to roost.

 

[Dexter Sinister]

Please explain to me why you think the quarrels would continue after decentralization...

Depends what gets decentralized. The OP set two conditions, increased provincial autonomy, and decentralizing the federal government.

I have no issues with the latter, assuming it means spreading the operations and activities of the federal government more widely. Too much of it is in Ottawa, and staffed by people who know nothing about this country outside of southern Ontario and Quebec. I've met a lot of them, and seen documents from Ottawa that talk about things like "the low level of social development" on the prairies. Ignorance like that is inexcusable.

It's the former I object to. Give the provinces more powers and their leaders will be less and less likely, or even able, to see the national perspective, and we'll see more stupid ideas floating around like the fiscal imbalance and threats to pull out of the equalization program. Balancing powers between two levels of government is a tricky business; getting it wrong, too much power to the constituent units and not enough at the centre, destabililzes the federation.

 

[Zzarchov]

I was listening to the latest Liberal ass to become leader the other day and I had to laugh. He said that 62% of Canadians didn't vote Con. Well, no shyte, Sherlock. Only 59% of Canadians VOTED (a pretty miserable turnout). This means that even fewer voted Glib. Guess it hasn't occurred to politicians the reason for the low turnouts - them and their incessant BS.

To be fair thats really a state on our need for electoral reform when the way to win is to encourage vote splitting among your opponents rather than get the people to support you Ideas.

That isn't a secret, its the whole reason the Reform Party and Tories merged.