Canadian Politics - Proroguing? Again?

[Barrister]

I want a clean slate of politicians in Canada. There's no party that doesn't fill me with cynicism and depression. No leaders imho fit to govern.

That, by the way, would be the worst thing possible.  We had a taste of that in 1993 when all these unknown Reformers were elected.  Pretty much every single one of them was a fresh face.  And while there were some really great politicians, there were an awful lot of duds.

All of the parties have a lot of smart and talented people, either as ministers or in the back bench.  "Throw all the bums out" is a purely emotional response.

[Grey Fox]

Gawd, Canadian politics is boring nowadays.

Referring to how the only thing to talk about is whether proroguing Parliament is a big deal or not?

Yes. Remember 2-3 years ago, we had subjects to debate & talk about. Look at us now. Wondering if going on Vacation is ok or not.

[Josephus]

Gawd, Canadian politics is boring nowadays.

I was gonna say.

I remember taking Canadian Politics at Universtiy. The only class I ever took that I only attended a handful of classes.

[crazy canuck]

Gawd, Canadian politics is boring nowadays.

I was gonna say.

I remember taking Canadian Politics at Universtiy. The only class I ever took that I only attended a handful of classes.

It all depends on when you go I guess.  Issues such as the death penalty, abortion, free trade and the separation of Quebec (when the threat was real and not merely a slogan) were all being hotly debated when I was in University.   It was a much more interesting time in Canadian politics. 

[Barrister]

Gawd, Canadian politics is boring nowadays.

I was gonna say.

I remember taking Canadian Politics at Universtiy. The only class I ever took that I only attended a handful of classes.

It all depends on when you go I guess.  Issues such as the death penalty, abortion, free trade and the separation of Quebec (when the threat was real and not merely a slogan) were all being hotly debated when I was in University.   It was a much more interesting time in Canadian politics.

There are still plenty of interesting and lively policy issues to discuss.  Separation / constitutional reform is still a live issue.  Global warming / CO2 is a huge issue.  Defeicits are back, and so is the question of how to deal with them (together with how to deal with the global economic slowdown).  Healthcare is once again rising as an issue as we have run out of money.  Criminal justice issues are always fun.  Senate reform.  Democratic reform.

The shame is that no party is really running on any very interesting ideas.  Dion tried that, it backfired, and no one has wanted to try since.

[BuddhaRhubarb]

I want a clean slate of politicians in Canada. There's no party that doesn't fill me with cynicism and depression. No leaders imho fit to govern.

That, by the way, would be the worst thing possible.  We had a taste of that in 1993 when all these unknown Reformers were elected.  Pretty much every single one of them was a fresh face.  And while there were some really great politicians, there were an awful lot of duds.

All of the parties have a lot of smart and talented people, either as ministers or in the back bench.  "Throw all the bums out" is a purely emotional response.

I was as usual being imprecise there. A clean slate of leaders is what is needed. There are indeed some decent people in each party, but very few of them have leadership aspirations (or are ready to have such, maybe)

But that's just a pipe dream. Just like my other idea that all the parties should actually participate in governing, instead of just calling each other names and saying how horrible bla blah policy is without offering any real alternatives. I see all sides doing this last thing, including those supposedly governing. Taking a break all winter is not governing.

Everything that's been done in Canadian politics recently is all about screwing the little guy, so that he will keep not voting and letting the Harpers & Campbells of the country keep on winning and filling their friends' pockets.

[Josephus]

The Globe cartoon was pretty good today. Can't find it online.
In one frame it showed that new building in Dubai. "the tallest building in the world."
In the other frame it showed Canda's parliament building. "the quietest building in the world."

[Jacob]

All of the parties have a lot of smart and talented people, either as ministers or in the back bench.  "Throw all the bums out" is a purely emotional response.

Yeah, I have to concur with BB here.

[crazy canuck]

There are still plenty of interesting and lively policy issues to discuss.  Separation / constitutional reform is still a live issue.  Global warming / CO2 is a huge issue.  Defeicits are back, and so is the question of how to deal with them (together with how to deal with the global economic slowdown).  Healthcare is once again rising as an issue as we have run out of money.  Criminal justice issues are always fun.  Senate reform.  Democratic reform.

The shame is that no party is really running on any very interesting ideas.  Dion tried that, it backfired, and no one has wanted to try since.

I agree those are all issues, but by and large those are all issues we mainly agree on.  The disagreement is on the small details which, unless you are a huge policy wonk in that particular area is boring.

Take deficits.  Pretty much everyone agrees that deficits in Canada are bad but that in hard times we have to endure them.  The disagreement lies in whether more or less money should be spent on project A or project B.  Boring.

Take Global Warming.  Most people agree that we should limit CO2 emmissions.  The big disagreement is how, how much and whether it makes any sense to do it if the Big polluters are not.  Granted this is a bit more interesting but given the wide consensus that something should be done it is not like the fundamental debates we have had in the past.

[crazy canuck]

the Harpers & Campbells of the country keep on winning and filling their friends' pockets.

Interesting.  Just how does one get his pockets filled by Harper?  You might not like Harper but financial scandals are not something you can fairly tar him with.

[Barrister]

I agree those are all issues, but by and large those are all issues we mainly agree on.  The disagreement is on the small details which, unless you are a huge policy wonk in that particular area is boring.

Take deficits.  Pretty much everyone agrees that deficits in Canada are bad but that in hard times we have to endure them.  The disagreement lies in whether more or less money should be spent on project A or project B.  Boring.

Take Global Warming.  Most people agree that we should limit CO2 emmissions.  The big disagreement is how, how much and whether it makes any sense to do it if the Big polluters are not.  Granted this is a bit more interesting but given the wide consensus that something should be done it is not like the fundamental debates we have had in the past.

Deficits: not everyone agrees we need to live with them right now.  Deficits were the issue that almost brought us the coalition.  Harper's first plan was to 'keep our powder dry', not run a big deficit, and wait for the global recession to run its course (since this wasn't a "made in Canada" recession).  I still think that first instinct was right.  The opposition disagreed, (and eventually got there way) as the fiscal update then introduced a ton of stimulus spending (which I think was wrong).

Global warming.  Huge disagreements over how to limit CO2 (carbon tax?  cap and trade?  incentives for green technology), and over how much to cut (see the whole Copenhagen debacle).  PLus people debating whether we need to limit atmospheric CO2 at all.

[crazy canuck]

I agree those are all issues, but by and large those are all issues we mainly agree on.  The disagreement is on the small details which, unless you are a huge policy wonk in that particular area is boring.

Take deficits.  Pretty much everyone agrees that deficits in Canada are bad but that in hard times we have to endure them.  The disagreement lies in whether more or less money should be spent on project A or project B.  Boring.

Take Global Warming.  Most people agree that we should limit CO2 emmissions.  The big disagreement is how, how much and whether it makes any sense to do it if the Big polluters are not.  Granted this is a bit more interesting but given the wide consensus that something should be done it is not like the fundamental debates we have had in the past.

Deficits: not everyone agrees we need to live with them right now.  Deficits were the issue that almost brought us the coalition.  Harper's first plan was to 'keep our powder dry', not run a big deficit, and wait for the global recession to run its course (since this wasn't a "made in Canada" recession).  I still think that first instinct was right.  The opposition disagreed, (and eventually got there way) as the fiscal update then introduced a ton of stimulus spending (which I think was wrong).

Global warming.  Huge disagreements over how to limit CO2 (carbon tax?  cap and trade?  incentives for green technology), and over how much to cut (see the whole Copenhagen debacle).  PLus people debating whether we need to limit atmospheric CO2 at all.

The issues you have identified are debated on the fringe of the right wing and I dont find them exciting.  Just crazy.  The people debating whether there should be any CO2 reduction are crackpots.  The issue is whether doing anything makes any sense if the Chinese, Indians and Americans dont also do it.

[BuddhaRhubarb]

the Harpers & Campbells of the country keep on winning and filling their friends' pockets.

Interesting.  Just how does one get his pockets filled by Harper?  You might not like Harper but financial scandals are not something you can fairly tar him with.

Oh sorry. It's just torture that he's running away from until the news gets bored of that story.  :somedumbemoticon:

One gets his pockets filled by Harper like anyone else: already be wealthy. It's not the wealthy who suffer from cuts to health, education, arts, it's the rest of us.

Yes that is the depth of my criticism of Harper. He hasn't done much other than not be the other leaders as far as I can see.

I feel he's just as class biased as I seem to be by standing on this point. I can't remember any leader ever making any of those crucial institutions stronger (education, health care, arts) None in my life time though.

To be honest I'm actually not even sure what it is that I hate so much about the guy. Maybe I'm a racist?

[Neil]

The arts aren't really a critical area on par with the other two.  Health care is sort of a provincial area, and education definitely is.  Maybe you should be more critical of the BC government.

[BuddhaRhubarb]

The arts aren't really a critical area on par with the other two.  Health care is sort of a provincial area, and education definitely is.  Maybe you should be more critical of the BC government.

I'm very critical of the BC governement. And as far as I'm concerned those three areas should be much better funded at all levels of government. You are right though on especially education and health care... those two things in my opinion trump all other things the government should be spending more on, not less. Fuck stupid wars we have no business in, and fuck corporate handouts.