How is it too personal?
Did Steve come up to you and throw sand in your eyes?
People get sick of minority governments after awhile, and push for majority.
We get way more progress from a majority then a minority.
Tories keep chugging along?
- Thread starter crit13
- Start date
How is it too personal?
Did Steve come up to you and throw sand in your eyes?
People get sick of minority governments after awhile, and push for majority.
We get way more progress from a majority then a minority.
Sorry, but that sounds too much like a cop-out.
Keep thinking about it though, I'm sure you'll come up with something.
lol no.
I just like to see if Harper actually does something in the coming year to approve things.
I have 2 disabled children. Daycare spaces are going down, and the cost of daycare is going up. I do receive public funding for 1 child who does go to daycare. Yet, because of the costs going up they only can have 1 teacher with the training necessary to help my child. Therefore, sometimes my child
has to stay at home. The $100 dollar a month child care, does not go far for a specialized babysitter. This is just the tip of the iceberg, and I do not believe in a fend for yourself society when you are disadvantaged.
Off the topic. I'm a contractor, so when I'm not working I can not collect UI because I can not pay into it. The government has to fix this as well.
I don't want a majority government. Conservatives need to clean up their party first before I give them a vote for a majority.
Currently we are not making much progress on the environment, military, working poor, and poor.
Lol.. the problem is not coming up with something, the problem is breaking it all down, without
blasting my kids personal info around. get it.
Under the long administration (1896–1911) of the Liberal Party under Sir Wilfrid Laurier, immigration to the prairie provinces was greatly accelerated. The prairie agricultural empire bloomed. Large-scale development of mines and of hydroelectric resources helped spur the growth of industry and urbanization. Alberta and Saskatchewan were made provinces in 1905. In 1921, Manitoba, Ontario, and Québec were greatly enlarged to take in all territory west of Hudson Bay and south of 60° N and all territory east of Ungava Bay. In February 1931, Norway formally recognized the Canadian title to the Sverdrup group of Arctic islands (now the Queen Elizabeth Islands); Canada thus held sovereignty in the whole Arctic sector north of the Canadian mainland. Newfoundland remained apart from the confederation until after World War II; it became Canada's tenth province in March 1949.
Canadian contributions of manpower and resources were immensely helpful to the Allies when Canada joined the British side in World War I; more than 600,000 Canadians served in Europe, and over 60,000 were killed. The war contributions of Canada and other dominions helped bring about the declaration of equality of the members of the British Commonwealth in the Statute of Westminster of 1931. The wartime struggle over military conscription, however, deepened the cleavage between French Canadians and other Canadians. After the war, the development of air transportation and roads helped weld Canada together, and the nation had sufficient strength to withstand the depression that began in 1929 and the droughts that brought ruin to wheat fields. The farmers developed huge cooperatives, especially in Nova Scotia and the prairie provinces, and also took up radical political doctrines, notably through the Social Credit and the Socialistic Cooperative Commonwealth Federation parties.
Canada was again vitally important in World War II, under the premiership of William Lyon Mackenzie King. More than one million Canadians took part in the Allied war effort, and over 32,000 were killed. The nation emerged from the war with enhanced prestige, actively concerned with world affairs and fully committed to the Atlantic alliance.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/cdnmilitary/
In the 2005 budget, the Liberal government promised a nearly $13-billion boost in military spending for the next five years. The Conservatives' budget in 2006 allocated $1.1 billion to the Canadian military over two years, as part of $5.3 billion in funding coming over the next five years.
As well, during the last week of June 2006, Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced $15 billion in spending on military vehicles, including transport planes, heavy-lift helicopters, troop carrier ships and trucks. The spending will be spread out over several years.
Military expenditure
- Canada's defence budget for 2004: $13 billion.
- Promised budget boost: $12.8 billion over the next five years.
- Today: 62,000 military personnel including 9,500 sailors, 19,500 soldiers, 14,500 air force personnel and 20,000 administrative and support personnel. There are also about 22,000 reservists.
- Second World War: 60,000 men and women enlisted in Canada's armed forces in one month (September 1939) after the declaration of war.
- First World War: More than 600,000 Canadians enlisted to fight in the First World War from 1914-1918.
- Today: There are 30 surface ships, four submarines and 9,500 sailors in Canada's navy.
- Second World War: At the end of the war, Canada had the third-largest fleet in the world, after the U.S. and the U.K. 23 Canadian ships were sunk by German U-Boats in the Battle of St. Lawrence alone.
- First World War: During the course of the First World War, Canada's naval service grew to a force of 9,000 men and 100 ships.
- Today: More than 1,200 members of the Armed Forces are deployed overseas.
- Second World War: More than one million served and approximately 45,000 died.
- First World War: Almost 620,000 Canadians served in First World War and 66,000 died.
- Canada in NATO: Of NATO's 19 member countries, Canada is...First in land area (9,093,507 sq. km), and sixth in total military spending ($13 billion)
I highlighted the operative word in your post. The Liberals were the greatest at making promises. They had some difficulty actually delivering on said promises.
GST
Healthcare
Military
Fiscal Imbalance
Child Care
Kyoto
They sure did because the opposition party voted against many of the promises and were unwilling to cooperatate. Liberals are not to blame.
You have lost what little credibilty you had.
The Liberals had a majority for 10 years. How exactly did the opposition prevent them from passing legislature? Did the Liberals send over overt PM to sit in the opposition seats and then vote against their own bills?
Your post is a desperate attempt to justify the Liberal party's lies.
We have a house of commons in which all parties vote on a bill. The conservatives and DP were unwilling to comprise in the previous government on bills important to Canadians. However, under the current minority government the conservative government wants to force their own election.
Secondly, anyone that disagrees with your posts you personally attack them. Forums are open minded not closed minded. I disapprove! your last post
Last edited:
The opposition is "irrelevant" when it comes to voting bills down in a majority government that the Liberals enjoyed for over 10 years. If you can't even concede that, then there is no hope for you.
Yeah right. Claiming that you lost credibiltiy is a personal attack? lol
You disapproving my last post does not change the fact that your beloved Liberal party is in shambles. Enjoy.
I am with crit here, they had a majority gov. It doesn't matter about the opposition, they could put through whatever they wanted.
You cannot blame the opposition.
You cannot blame the opposition.
But minority governments have trouble pushing forward with progress.
They always bicker.
I think the elections for majorities should be every 4 years instead of every 5.
And the great thing about a democracy is if they become corrupt we boot them!
They always bicker.
I think the elections for majorities should be every 4 years instead of every 5.
And the great thing about a democracy is if they become corrupt we boot them!
It seems that when you know you are in the wrong, you revert to attacking people.
. The opposition was "Relevant" in the house because the liberals did not have a majority in the house.. You need 51% of the house. From june 28th 2004.. to Dec 2006.. the liberals had only 43.8%. of the house seats.
Nice Try.. I got you thinking.
As for me being a beloved liberal, how is that related to this thred> We are talking about how the Tories keep chugging along. ROFL
. The opposition was "Relevant" in the house because the liberals did not have a majority in the house.. You need 51% of the house. From june 28th 2004.. to Dec 2006.. the liberals had only 43.8%. of the house seats.
Nice Try.. I got you thinking.
As for me being a beloved liberal, how is that related to this thred> We are talking about how the Tories keep chugging along. ROFL
Are you kidding me? What happened during the 10 plus years the Liberals had a majority government?
Like I said earlier, you have zero credibility on this matter.
Now now you said 13 years. ROFL. I will not be rude and state "That you have zero creditabilty", you are doing well enough on your own.
After are you started this with
Do you even know anything about politics?
The Liberals were in power for 13 straight years. They also had a majority for more than 10 of those years. Majority means you can pass any piece of legislature you want regardless of what the opposition does.
Your comments are not only false, but are utterly ridiculous to claim that the Liberals were somehow hindered by the opposition.
Do you understand now, or would you like me type s-l-o-w-e-r?
The Liberals were in power for 13 straight years. They also had a majority for more than 10 of those years. Majority means you can pass any piece of legislature you want regardless of what the opposition does.
Your comments are not only false, but are utterly ridiculous to claim that the Liberals were somehow hindered by the opposition.
Do you understand now, or would you like me type s-l-o-w-e-r?
I made my point. The nearly 3 years they were a minority. They did not have power for 13 straight years. lol Try 10. The opposition in the final minority years had the power. How do you think the election was called? HM.. Vote of Non Confidence! They refused to cooperate on most motions to pass a bill, "for or Nor.". that benefited Canadians, that the liberals supported because of the incompetent "Paul Martin". In others words they did not being democracy to the house, illustrating they did not care.
I will not vote for conservative party again, or NDP party, they did not allow the government to truly govern, and nor for a liberal majority majority. I vote for the Representative in my local riding that represents my interests the most.
Last edited:
Wow, Gengap I must speak up! You sure know your politics.
That pettiness that the opposition parties have shown in minority governments is unreal. False accusations amd name calling in the house. I noticed the NDP and conservatives before the last election were terrible, no work could get done and as a result good things did not get through.
That pettiness that the opposition parties have shown in minority governments is unreal. False accusations amd name calling in the house. I noticed the NDP and conservatives before the last election were terrible, no work could get done and as a result good things did not get through.