Doan blasted in Canadian Parliament...

[IceCap]

its like what i say to the 'south will rise again' cranks every time they pop up, would it be that devistating if canada allowed the BQ to seperate?

First off I doubt the majority of French Canadians want to separate. Not one referendum has ended with a "YES" result.

Don't be so sure... in the last referendum, "YES" got 49.4% of the votes and one would have to assume almost 100% of all English speaking Quebecois (12.9% of Quebec is English) voted "NO"... if this was the case that means a majority of French speaking Quebecois voted "OUI"

But that was twelve years ago and that was at the height of Quebec Nationalism.

D'oh! Very good point. Can't believe I missed that.

Still, that 12.9% of English Québécois are/were Québécois. They had just as much say in the independence issue as the French Québécois did. Also, there is/was a seizable population of French-speaking immigrants who have Canadian citizenship living in Québec who voted to keep the province in Canada.

On top of that the last referendum was in 1995 and, like you said, Québec nationalism has fizzled out since then.

It would be interesting to see what the results would be in a referendum today, but I'm confident the result would come back "NO/NON".

How about we go with the pre-1535 map? The one with the natives controlling all the settlements?

Don't joke, a kid actually suggested this in my political science class.

Actually I would take the land forfeited from Québec in my proposal and give it to the First Nations tribes to set up as a First-Nation controlled province.

Are there enough people up there to make a viable province?

IIRC there is a substantial First Nations population in northern Québec, land that would go to Canada if Québec separated using my map.

I admit I'm not sure on the numbers though. It's not that big of a deal though, if the numbers aren't high enough, just merge the land with the Nunavut territory, adding land and population to the First Nations territory.

Here's a map of Québec, with traditional First Nations land coloured red.

[CC97]

its like what i say to the 'south will rise again' cranks every time they pop up, would it be that devistating if canada allowed the BQ to seperate?

First off I doubt the majority of French Canadians want to separate. Not one referendum has ended with a "YES" result.

Don't be so sure... in the last referendum, "YES" got 49.4% of the votes and one would have to assume almost 100% of all English speaking Quebecois (12.9% of Quebec is English) voted "NO"... if this was the case that means a majority of French speaking Quebecois voted "OUI"

But that was twelve years ago and that was at the height of Quebec Nationalism.

D'oh! Very good point. Can't believe I missed that.

Still, that 12.9% of English Québécois are/were Québécois. They had just as much say in the independence issue as the French Québécois did. Also, there is/was a seizable population of French-speaking immigrants who have Canadian citizenship living in Québec who voted to keep the province in Canada.

On top of that the last referendum was in 1995 and, like you said, Québec nationalism has fizzled out since then.

It would be interesting to see what the results would be in a referendum today, but I'm confident the result would come back "NO/NON".

Yes you're right, but your original point was the majority of French Canadians were against separation based on past referendum results -- not the majority of Quebec Canadians.

I am also confident a referendum today would be much more in favour of remaining part of Canada.

[DEAD!]

2. Parliament should have no say in the on-ice decisions of Hockey Canada - to think otherwise would be absurd. This makes the Liberals and NDP look like they are wasting time in parliament that could be otherwise spent dealing with real issues.

While I think debating the Doan situation is stupid and a waste of time compared to other issues, from what I understand, Hockey Canada does get money from the federal government, so from that standpoint the politicans have every right to question Hockey Canada even if it's for something like this. By comparison, I think congress taking time off for the BCS title game is even more ridiculous that this.

[leedsunited]

Quebec nationalism has fizzled considerably since the mid-90s' heyday, but Bloc politicos (esp. the dinosaurs) are always quick to trot out the issue for insta-support in the province. It makes for good soundbites, regardless of how feasible it really is.

[gojetsgo]

2. Parliament should have no say in the on-ice decisions of Hockey Canada - to think otherwise would be absurd. This makes the Liberals and NDP look like they are wasting time in parliament that could be otherwise spent dealing with real issues.

While I think debating the Doan situation is stupid and a waste of time compared to other issues, from what I understand, Hockey Canada does get money from the federal government, so from that standpoint the politicans have every right to question Hockey Canada even if it's for something like this. By comparison, I think congress taking time off for the BCS title game is even more ridiculous that this.

I agree, since Hockey Canada does receive money from the feds, they should have to answer to parliament for some things. These things should include how minor hockey is run with regards to the participation and safety of Canadians who play under the large umbrella of Hockey Canada. However, the on-ice decisions at the top level of international hockey should NOT be one of those things. That's just common sense.

[Coast2CoastAM2006]

3. How could anyone say anything bad about Shane Doan? He has a reputation as being one of the nicest guys in hockey.

When i was in LA some time ago, me and this guy i know who does independent film and is a rabid hockey fan from upstate New Jersey ran in to him when they Yotes were in town to play the Kings. He probably was one of the nicest guys i've met in a while. I remember asking him what was the biggest difference in playing in Phoenix from Winnipeg and he told me "up there everybody was under the microscope where as in Phoenix players aren't as scrutinized. Most players that has played in both rabid hockey mad cities versus non-traditional cities will tell you that." I remember asking him, "when you were drafted by the Jets did you ever imagine playing in Phoenix?" He goes and i'll try to paraphrase, "man if you told me on draft that that in a few years i'd here in the desert, I would have thought you were crazy. But i do feel for the Jets fans though. Theres nothing easy about losing your team that you are die hard crazy about" or at least something to that effect.

[DEAD!]

Now, if you really want politicians say some ridiculous things....

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitobavotes2007...ative-jets.html

[Snazel]

The Canadian political system is a massive joke. The senate is appointed by the Prime Minister and featured a WHOPPING 35% absentee rating from 1996-99, meaning not only are these jobs not elected, they are highly paid (and each receives a lifetime pension after one day of service), but they don't even bother to show up for 1/3rd of the votes. Many days there isn't even a quorum, and the entire work day is squandered.

In one day, in Canadian history, the PM granted hand-picked political appointed jobs to over 200 people, a whopping 30 million dollar annual expense, all just to pay off "friends and allies". The Governor General was recently discovered to use an OBSCENE amount of jet fuel and taxpayer luxuries. One of her trips, just one of them, cost taxpayers 5.8 million dollars. She is not elected, she is not accountable to anyone and she can veto any bill she wants, while she squanders millions. To me, that is utterly disgusting.

It's an AWFUL system, riddled with corruption, pork and petty politics and pandering. This particular case reeks of some very highly paid MP making hay out of a controversial issue.

Too often, America is pointed to as this rather corrupt country, but Canada has an ugly history all to itself, riddled with racism, greed, pork-barrel politics and rampant corruption, and has an extremely biased media and rather ignorant division over language, race and religion.

I love Canada, truly I do, but too often Americans think its this "happy left-of-centre" country, that's open minded and well governed. Indeed many Canadians think that. In my view, Canada has an embarassing track record with its federal and provincial governments and too often wastes tax payer money for pork-barrel politics and hay-making PR campaigns.

Not to say that America is any better, it isn't, but the warts and ugly side of Canadian politics is too often swept under the rug, for the sake of patriotism.

[Phil]

Now, if you really want politicians say some ridiculous things....

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitobavotes2007...ative-jets.html

...and yet, he's the only one whose shown any kind of vision for this province beyond fixing potholes and the like - and for that reason, and because of Gary Doer's poor track record for keeping our province economically competitive, Hugh McFadyen's party will get my vote.

Not that it will matter - my riding is so NDP that our local MLA has not had to do anything of note in the last 35 years, and yet he's virtually guaranteed to add 4 more years to his already-21-year-old representative run.

As far as Canadian politics in general, I think it's as good a system as any. It doesn't mean it's great, it doesn't even mean it's good, but to paraphrase Churchill, it's "the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried."

...and to say the Governor General can veto any bill is true, but misleading. I don't believe that power has been exercised in the modern era.

Canada's fortunate enough that our mistakes don't drastically affect the entire world. To that end, I don't believe Canada is governed any better or worse than the United States, except for the fact that the stakes for American politicians are much higher. If there is any difference, I might say that American politicians are more subject to the lobbying pressures of large corporate entities and industries - similar pressures exist in the Canadian system, but I don't think the dollar figures tossed around are quite the same.

[DEAD!]

Now, if you really want politicians say some ridiculous things....

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitobavotes2007...ative-jets.html

...and yet, he's the only one whose shown any kind of vision for this province beyond fixing potholes and the like - and for that reason, and because of Gary Doer's poor track record for keeping our province economically competitive, Hugh McFadyen's party will get my vote.

Fair enough. To be honest, I think anyone can talk about vision, a bright future, but since I know nothing about Manitoba politics, I'll take your word for it. But, c'mon, why would McFadyen even bring up the idea of bringing back the Winnipeg Jets? He doesn't need to bring it up to be taken seriously.

Don't you just like how all this comes together? Shane Doan, Phoenix Coyotes, Winnipeg Jets

[Snazel]

If there is any difference, I might say that American politicians are more subject to the lobbying pressures of large corporate entities and industries - similar pressures exist in the Canadian system, but I don't think the dollar figures tossed around are quite the same.

The general point was the Canadian system is wasteful and distracts itself with petty issues, so that politicians can glamorize themselves with topics that will get themselves a little media attention. To the end, I agree the Canadian system is just as bad as the American system.

I would say the American system is far superior in structure and balance. Not really a topic for this thread though. In general America has it right (with minor grievances), while the parliamentary system in Canada produces a "pseudo-democracy".

Also I have to say that the GG is a waste, and the old "oh but they never abuse their power" argument is false. I think Adrienne Clarkson proves that office can be thoroughly abused. The fact she stated: "I am above the government" when refusing to detail the reasons she flew a government jet to go shopping in New York city on weekends, shows that this office needs to be utterly abolished.

I would also say that Canadian politicians have been ripe with using public money to fund private endeavors that they or their friends profited from, Mulroney had large scandals in this area if you recall. Trudeau was famous for "catering" to large monetary supporters of his leadership bids. He once appointed 200 sweet-paying jobs to people he needed to return favors too.

I agree overall, with what you say (which was well written by the way). In general, American scandal can involve more money, or can certainly create more headlines. One of the problems with the Canadian system, is the media there is very docile, it rarely, if ever confronts their own government, and when they do, its only after the government opposition or ruling party has decided to make an issue of it, so its a hand-fed "controversy". In fact, due to the power of the CRTC, if a television station takes on the government too severely, they have problems renewing their license, or get called in for the dreaded "Canadian content audit".

I am going off on a tangent, but I was trying to answer "why is Doan an issue in the House of Commons" question.

The answer is, (in my opinion) because the Canadian system is ripe with corruption, absenteeism, and a docile media. So making hay out of a push button topic like this, is simply good politics within the confines of a system that rewards apathey. The only time you can get any real attention is to stand up for a ridiculous and sensationalized issue like this. Canada has a grand history of debating RIDICULOUS topics and getting outraged over dumb things like pirouettes and "fiddle-faddle".

While I concede the American system has its own corruption and apathey (how on Earth Tom Delay is not in prison, blows my mind), it's a superior system. However, I should point out, that the entire US government was once paralyzed and obsessed with a husband who wanted to pull the plug on a severe case in Florida...that brought the most powerful government on Earth to a stand-still. So it seems both systems are easily distracted if the topic they are distracted by will win a few political points on the boob tube.

[rams80]

The Canadian political system is a massive joke. The senate is appointed by the Prime Minister and featured a WHOPPING 35% absentee rating from 1996-99, meaning not only are these jobs not elected, they are highly paid (and each receives a lifetime pension after one day of service), but they don't even bother to show up for 1/3rd of the votes. Many days there isn't even a quorum, and the entire work day is squandered.

In one day, in Canadian history, the PM granted hand-picked political appointed jobs to over 200 people, a whopping 30 million dollar annual expense, all just to pay off "friends and allies". The Governor General was recently discovered to use an OBSCENE amount of jet fuel and taxpayer luxuries. One of her trips, just one of them, cost taxpayers 5.8 million dollars. She is not elected, she is not accountable to anyone and she can veto any bill she wants, while she squanders millions. To me, that is utterly disgusting.

It's an AWFUL system, riddled with corruption, pork and petty politics and pandering. This particular case reeks of some very highly paid MP making hay out of a controversial issue.

Sounds like Illinois... (except for the appointed Senate)

[Fred T. Jane]

but to paraphrase Churchill, it's "the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried."

He wasn't referring to a parliamentary form of government when he said that...

[Snazel]

He wasn't referring to a parliamentary form of government when he said that...

Yeah, true, he was referring to democracy in general. I think the exact quote is: "Democracy is the a bad form of government, but all other forms are worse".

I believe Churchill is also credited with saying:

"It doesn't matter who you vote for, the government gets in".

With Churchill quotes, many things get attributed to him that he never said, and even when they get that right, the quotes are so often paraphrased, they don't represent exactly what he said.

I believe Churchill preferred the parliamentary system in general, but also was envious of the President's executive powers during war. I think the parliamentary system is inferior, vastly inferior. But the main point is, Canada's political landscape, allows a topic like Doan to bubble up and become an "issue", despite the fact Canada has many, many more important issues to deal with. The suicide rates amongst native Canadians, the right to self-government amongst native people's, the fact the constitution has never been ratified by its second largest province, its weak charter of rights, its abuse of power within CSIS, its political bias and corruption within the CRTC and Canada's environmental record.

Here's a little known fact, seldom talked about or confronted by Canadian politicians or their media:

Canada uses much more energy and generate much more pollution to produce a given amount of goods and services relative to industrial competitors, including 33% more energy than the United States per unit of GDP.

Canada has the second highest per-capita sulphur-monoxide and carbon-monoxide emission in the world. It's a very big polluter (relative to capita), but most Canadians think they lead environmental concerns, when they are in fact one of the world's leading polluters. It's this kind of "soft" press that bugs me about my favorite country. Canada too often pats itself on the back, (like applauding with large headline when they win a bronze medal in rowing), but rarely if ever, gets self-critical about what's really wrong and lacking within their country.

[Fred T. Jane]

He wasn't referring to a parliamentary form of government when he said that...

Yeah, true, he was referring to democracy in general. I think the exact quote is: "Democracy is the a bad form of government, but all other forms are worse".

I believe Churchill is also credited with saying:

"It doesn't matter who you vote for, the government gets in".

With Churchill quotes, many things get attributed to him that he never said, and even when they get that right, the quotes are so often paraphrased, they don't represent exactly what he said.

Spot on as usual, buddy.

[IceCap]

Sorry, I don't want Canada to become a republic with an American structure of government. You might as well start drawing the annexation papers as we speak

We have a system of government that has a long and storied history. Not only does it have tradition going for it, but honestly it's no more wasteful or inefficient then the American system.

You complain about the Senate not being elected. You may be surprised to know that the Senate is more representative of Canada's ethnic melting pot then the House of Commons is. I agree the absentee rate is a problem, but a simple mandatory attendance change to the rules will fix that.

The Governor General is the Queen's representative in the Dominion. It's no more of an inefficient position then the monarchy is in the UK. Here I'm going to go out and play the tradition card. The Monarchy, like the GG, is a reminder of our country's British heritage. It's something we as a nation have embraced, and it gives us a distinct identity on the North American continent. It's part of who we are as Canadians.

Yes, the position has been abused, but that's a problem with the type of individuals appointed, not the position itself. Don't throw the baby out with the bath water.

In theory you're right, the Canadian system is a pseudo-democracy. In reality, however, it's just as much a democracy at the United States.

The Senate can only reject HoC legislation three times before it's automatically passed. The Governor General, like the Queen, is a figure head, with much of the position's powers having been removed over the ages.

In this day and age the HoC and the Prime Minister, elected officials, run the country. The niceties of the Parliamentary system, the GG, the Senate, etc... are all kept because they are part of what defines us as Canadians.

[Snazel]

I had to laugh hard at the argument that because the senate is more diverse than the house of commons, that this excuses the fact its used to reward political flunkies and has no accountability to the public.

What you are saying is: Yeah our senate is ripe with nepitism, favoritism and provides representation without voting or ratification from the public, and yeah its an obscene waste of money with a terrible attendance record, but we have more native Canadians in it than we do in the House of Commons, so its okay!

What this really tells me is, you Canadians don't vote for non-white MPs...which of course is true...many non-white candidates lose, or don't get picked to run, because often they can't win, which is why the Senate looks racially diverse (which it should be), but the House of Commons does not (which is a disgrace).

I am glad you like the tradition though, yeah that big ugly mace they bring into the clown show every day is really nifty, I'll give you that!

I would never define my Canadian heritage by the "niceties of the Canadian system". That sounds like something the CBC would say, frankly. I am happy you do however, but I wager most Canadians don't. In fact I know they don't...

A 2002 EKOS poll found that only 5% of Canadians could correctly identify Elizabeth II as Canada's Sovereign and Head of State.

The fact Canada clings to the British monarchy is an anachronism, one that will be corrected in time. It's out dated and offensive frankly, to assume Canada's main artery is connected to England. It isn't, and hasn't been for a very long time. I welcome the day the Queen is no longer on the coins and dollar bills and the hopefully even the Governor General will be tossed away like an old shoe.

To get back to Doan, he was hammed up in parliament, because hamming up in parliament will get you a soundbyte, and since you can go into an election at the most opportune time politically (when the PM sees the polls are ripe for the picking), there's less of a risk, and you can pander all you like, without fear of a 2 year clock, forcing you to be actually productive.

[Milo Meningocele]

With Churchill quotes, many things get attributed to him that he never said, and even when they get that right, the quotes are so often paraphrased, they don't represent exactly what he said.

"I am a Cardinal."

--Winston Churchill

[DEAD!]

With Churchill quotes, many things get attributed to him that he never said, and even when they get that right, the quotes are so often paraphrased, they don't represent exactly what he said.

"I am a Cardinal."

--Winston Churchill STLFANATIC

There, fixed

[habsfan1]

Looks like he will be booed at the Bell Center next year.