High Ho it's off to the polls we go.
- Thread starter Trex
- Start date
Re: Expiration of the Senatorial Clause
It should also be noted that the senatorial clause for Commons seats (i.e., that a province cannot have less House of Commons seats than it has Senate seats) is a temporary measure. As the Canadian population grows, by the very nature of the clause it has an eventual retire date. (By way of example, Prince Edward Island had four honourable senators on the day that the Constitution Act, 1982 was passed—therefore, whatever its population, Prince Edward Island cannot have less than four House of Commons representatives to ensure that its voice is heard. Once its population exceeds 428,880 people, then the clause expires because the national quotient would ensure four representatives notwithstanding the senatorial clause.) The three provinces currently represented completely on-par with the national quotient are Ontario, British Columbia and Alberta.
It should also be noted that the senatorial clause for Commons seats (i.e., that a province cannot have less House of Commons seats than it has Senate seats) is a temporary measure. As the Canadian population grows, by the very nature of the clause it has an eventual retire date. (By way of example, Prince Edward Island had four honourable senators on the day that the Constitution Act, 1982 was passed—therefore, whatever its population, Prince Edward Island cannot have less than four House of Commons representatives to ensure that its voice is heard. Once its population exceeds 428,880 people, then the clause expires because the national quotient would ensure four representatives notwithstanding the senatorial clause.) The three provinces currently represented completely on-par with the national quotient are Ontario, British Columbia and Alberta.
I know. I think I can wipe me own bum, thanks anyway. I don't need Ottawa for that.
So you think (using my example again) that imposing the stupid firearms registry upon good people like farmers and ranchers going about their business because of some nutcase in a university in Montreal is fair. I see.
And to make everyone's vote in Canada equal would be funny. In order to have the 27,000 equal votes in Nunavut actually have a seat in Ottawa, the population/representation numbers would drastically change.
Example:
To enable Nunavut to have a seat in parliament using the equal vote idea and the same ratio of population per seat, Ontario would have to increase its seats to about 440.
If you look at it another way, some 90% of Canada's population lives within 50 miles of the Canada/US border and they have vastly more control over what goes on in Joe Akkilokipok's backyard than Joe Akkilokipok does. I am sure Joe Akkilokipok should just suck it up because it's fair in the minds of those living within 50 miles of the border.:roll:
Not province, region. But, I agree. I also mentioned several times in various threads that partisan politics is nothing but a bane to Canadians. It's stagnating at best and regressive at worst.
Provinces regions. I am fine with either. But at least you have the idea I am trying to portray.
... and absolute power corrupts absolutely, so power in Ottawa should be given to the provinces.
Fish isn't cheap. lol Maybe if we could get them to eat ragweed, dandelions, or something ......
Politicians or seals? I wouldn't oppose the former, but it's cruel for the latter...
And Ottawa can't do anything right. So it's SNAFU in Canada and Canadians are screwed one way or the other.
The provinces have as much power as they should, and are properly and appropriatel subordinate to the federal Government. Canada was never supposed to be led by the provinces—rather, it was supposed to be led by the Government of Canada as they report to the representatives of Canada as a whole, with complementary functions performed by the Legislatures of the Provinces to ease the burden of national government. To place greater emphasis on this state of national being, there are only seventeen classes under which the provincial legislatures are authorised to enact laws:
- Direct taxation within the province to raise provincial revenue;
- Borrowing on the sole credit of the province;
- Creation, tenure, appointment and payment of provincial officials;
- Management and sale of the lands of the province’s Crown property, and the wood and timber thereon;
- Creation, maintenance and management of public prisons;
- Creation, maintenance and management of hospitals, charities and asylums, other than marine hospitals;
- Matters relating to municipal institutions;
- Raising revenue for local or provincial purposes through licensing fees;
- Public works or undertakings (other than for ships, railways, canals, any work that connects the province to any other or which extends beyond provincial borders, ships that travel between any province and a British or foreign power, or any work that the Government of Canada declares to be for the advantage of Canada or more than one province, even if that work is entirely within that province);
- Incorporation of provincial companies;
- Solemnization of marriage;
- Property rights and civil rights;
- Administration of justice;
- Punishments for breaches of provincial laws as legislated above;
- General local issues;
- Non-renewable natural resources;
- Education.
Yeah, and everything in Canada is just perfect. Good job, Ottawa!! YAY!! roflmao
:lol:
Things are absolutely not perfect! (Have you seen who’s prime minister?)
The point is, though, that I think that our existing system could be extremely effective, if Canadians educated themselves about how the system works (the nuances and constitutional conventions inclusive), and everyone seriously engaged themselves in the process. I have to wonder how many Canadians regularly communicate with their House of Commons representative, and their province’s senators—probably far less people than those who simply complain, I would dare to guess.
Having power consolidated and centralised with the national government is an excellent method whereby we can promote common goals and interests amongst Canadians, and foster greater national unity—the provinces are only geographic borders for the ease of administration, in my view; the provinces are (and should be) charged only with the legislation of matters that are strictly local in nature, whereas the national government should be the one concerned with everything else.
Who cares what it was "supposed" to be. If a tire is flat, standing around talking about how the tire "should" be full of air accomplishes nothing. The country is not sustainable on its current course regardless of whether it was supposed to be.
If I was someone new to Canada and wanted to learn about how its politics works, I wouldn't look to the gov't website. I'd try something written in normal English like Wiki. Wiki is easy to find stuff in, gov.ca isn't near as easy.
Nice theory but if they'd stick to standards for things that affect all Canadians as a whole rather than nosing into personal issues and things like that, we'd all be better off. Once they start microgoverning everything they become nothing better than a nuisance and a waste of taxes.