Canada 2020
polaris
Posts: 3,527
maybe canadians do understand the climate change crisis - if only we could get real leadership on the issue ... and surferdude - i know yer gonna wanna point to provinces and such ... but that stat on albertans is problematic - if you don't accept there is a problem - you're not gonna wanna fix it ...
anyways - what will canada be like in 2020??
***********
http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2006/06/30/canada2020.html
Nearly a quarter of Canadians think global warming will be the single biggest challenge facing the country by the year 2020, according to a poll commissioned by the Dominion Institute as part of an ambitious national project.
What will the weather be like in 2020? (CBC) That was the opinion of 23 per cent of respondents, compared to one in 10 who named health care as the biggest challenge in Canada by that time.
A full 72 per cent of respondents agreed with the statement that "global warming will have become the greatest crisis facing mankind" by 2020. Women were slightly more likely than men to agree with the statement, and only 57 per cent of Albertans polled agreed.
The Innovation Research Group telephone survey, which reached 1,007 adults in mid-June, is considered accurate to within plus or minus 3.1 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.
Other findings:
23 per cent believe Quebec will have separated from the rest of Canada 14 years from now, with 31 per cent of Quebecers polled holding that position.
78 per cent of respondents thought the gap between rich and poor Canadians will have widened.
63 per cent agreed with the statement that "Canada will be a more tolerant and caring society."
68 per cent agreed that "energy conservation and new technologies will have made the environment better."
70 per cent disagreed with the statement that "global terrorism will no longer be a threat to Canadian society."
66 per cent agreed "Canada's influence in international affairs will have increased considerably."
Poll kicks off major project
The poll was conducted as the Dominion Institute prepares to launch a project called Canada in 2020, with CBC as one of its three media partners.
The project is "a four-month public dialogue" designed to get Canadians thinking about what they want the country to look like in 14 years.
"I think now is the time we have to start really thinking and acting on the challenges facing our country in the future," Rudyard Griffiths, executive director of the Dominion Institute, said Friday.
A major part of Canada in 2020 will be the publication on CBC.ca and in the Toronto Star and Montreal's La Presse of a series of 20 opinion pieces by well-known thinkers and writers. The first piece will appear Saturday, July 1.
Other content related to the ideas in the opinion pieces will appear on CBC.ca, as well as on CBC Radio and CBC-TV.
Writers asked to imagine country in 2020
For the newspaper series, the writers were all challenged to produce 2,000-word essays "on a single issue or event that they think could transform Canada by the year 2020."
Another part of the project is an essay contest that offers a prize of $2,020 for the best 800-word entry. Details are available at the Canada in 2020 website, http://www.twenty-twenty.ca.
The Dominion Institute is a non-partisan registered charity established in 1997 "by a group of young professionals concerned about the erosion of a common memory in Canada."
A grant from the Peter Munk Charitable Foundation made the 2020 project possible.
anyways - what will canada be like in 2020??
***********
http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2006/06/30/canada2020.html
Nearly a quarter of Canadians think global warming will be the single biggest challenge facing the country by the year 2020, according to a poll commissioned by the Dominion Institute as part of an ambitious national project.
What will the weather be like in 2020? (CBC) That was the opinion of 23 per cent of respondents, compared to one in 10 who named health care as the biggest challenge in Canada by that time.
A full 72 per cent of respondents agreed with the statement that "global warming will have become the greatest crisis facing mankind" by 2020. Women were slightly more likely than men to agree with the statement, and only 57 per cent of Albertans polled agreed.
The Innovation Research Group telephone survey, which reached 1,007 adults in mid-June, is considered accurate to within plus or minus 3.1 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.
Other findings:
23 per cent believe Quebec will have separated from the rest of Canada 14 years from now, with 31 per cent of Quebecers polled holding that position.
78 per cent of respondents thought the gap between rich and poor Canadians will have widened.
63 per cent agreed with the statement that "Canada will be a more tolerant and caring society."
68 per cent agreed that "energy conservation and new technologies will have made the environment better."
70 per cent disagreed with the statement that "global terrorism will no longer be a threat to Canadian society."
66 per cent agreed "Canada's influence in international affairs will have increased considerably."
Poll kicks off major project
The poll was conducted as the Dominion Institute prepares to launch a project called Canada in 2020, with CBC as one of its three media partners.
The project is "a four-month public dialogue" designed to get Canadians thinking about what they want the country to look like in 14 years.
"I think now is the time we have to start really thinking and acting on the challenges facing our country in the future," Rudyard Griffiths, executive director of the Dominion Institute, said Friday.
A major part of Canada in 2020 will be the publication on CBC.ca and in the Toronto Star and Montreal's La Presse of a series of 20 opinion pieces by well-known thinkers and writers. The first piece will appear Saturday, July 1.
Other content related to the ideas in the opinion pieces will appear on CBC.ca, as well as on CBC Radio and CBC-TV.
Writers asked to imagine country in 2020
For the newspaper series, the writers were all challenged to produce 2,000-word essays "on a single issue or event that they think could transform Canada by the year 2020."
Another part of the project is an essay contest that offers a prize of $2,020 for the best 800-word entry. Details are available at the Canada in 2020 website, http://www.twenty-twenty.ca.
The Dominion Institute is a non-partisan registered charity established in 1997 "by a group of young professionals concerned about the erosion of a common memory in Canada."
A grant from the Peter Munk Charitable Foundation made the 2020 project possible.
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
we will have a bigger gap between the rich and the poor (hence more gun play).
we will have much more smog alerts.
quebec will seperate.
But hey atleast we will be making it harder fro people to smoke
I'm all for steps taken to reduce greenhouse emissions. I'm not for Kyoto. I'm not for other provinces telling another how to go about their business. I'm waiting to see the NDP ideas put forward to the government, I'd love to see them costed out. Because realistically the NDP is the only party in Canada that seems to have any handle on the environment, but who knows if they've properly costed out their proposals.
One thing I'd like to see Canada adopt is a type of labelling program that lets a consumer know how hard on the environment the manufacturing and distribution of the good is. I know that this is information that I'd use in making consumer decisions.
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
then why are you reading a thread that clearly stats Canada in it?
Because im a nobody.
www.myspace.com/jensvad
I agree with all of this, actually. People need to quit using the K-word and start looking at alternatives that actually have some bite. It doesn't work, people, its fundamentally broken. I'll second the notion that the NDP's proposals deserve a closer look.
What i'd like is Quebec to separate or at the very least get in the Canadian constitution, back to peace keeping and more intelligent deployment of our troops, maybe have a Trudeau in charge, no violation of any kind of human rights, will have a system like the revenue sharing in the NFL but it will be a country to country thing (rich help the poor), our healthcare system will be fixed (private or public), our education level will be at the top of industrialized nations, more openness to immigration and better integration of immigrants, but more selective and accurate immigration (doctors to be doctors, engineer to be engineer, fill the needs etc.)... of course a lot more...
Really what i'd want is probably very different than what will happen...
-Jean-Jacques Rousseau
Nice response ... Hmmm ... Quebec separating, no ... An agreement that increases the chance that they remain in Canada, check. I am not clear on what "back to peacekeeping" means, but since I support peacekeeping, check. A Trudeau in charge? Check, could be fun (and constructive). I don't think our human rights record is that bad these days, but check. Revenue sharing with other countries? Not without some pretty careful checks and balances. Healthcare fixed? Check. Education at the top, check. More openness to immigration isn't a big issue, I believe, but better integration of immigrants without quashing their own cultural beliefs? Check.
See, we aren't so different across this country.
Hehe sure, we could all reach out somewhere in the middle, it needs the will of everyone.
The NFL thing is more a joke, but it's more to say that i'd like Canada to commit to the previously announced .07% sharing with other country, and take a leadership role to make other country also do their parts.
-Jean-Jacques Rousseau
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
as the algae moves towards the bc coast and the violent storms continue - we can all harp about supposed economic costs but the cost to the economy will be far worse ...
great piece by evan soloman on Sunday on cbc on the topic ...
Have we lost our way tonight?
Have we lost our hope to sorrow?
Feels like were all alone
Running further from what’s right
And there are no more heroes to follow
So what are we becoming?
Where did we go wrong?
I think we'll have to wait till a new govt. is in place to see amelirations on the Kyoto objective in Canada, it's up to the provinces now to do something, provinces waiting for Ottawa to move will have to wait a couple of years or more, better start on their own...
-Jean-Jacques Rousseau
hard to say ... i think all things being equal - not really but if the rest of the country allows the right to take over, then i think ultimately the sovereignists will have the ammunition to win a referendum ... stephen harper would not be able to convince quebec to vote no ...
but as long as quebec is not officially part of the constitution - this will always hang over the country ...
what would be worse is the conservatives taking responsibility for any reductiions there are that are provincial initiatives ... that would make me ill ...
so explain to me what you mean by quebec is not officially part of the constitution if you will. is it not a full state? is it merely a territory? i don't quite understand....
Have we lost our way tonight?
Have we lost our hope to sorrow?
Feels like were all alone
Running further from what’s right
And there are no more heroes to follow
So what are we becoming?
Where did we go wrong?
Damn, now i have you AND reborn in agreement with me
A Trudeau could be interesting to watch, of course his dad made a lot of damage but one of the Trudeau kid will someday be in politics, that's a prediction more than a wish. Unless you like that Mulroney kids more
Here's the definition of a nation from the Webster dict. (i took a break for Canada day weekend, break over hehe)
"A stable, historically developed community of people with a territory, economic life, distinctive culture and language in common."
To some extent, one could say that the english (as you point out in the other thread) people living in Montreal/Québec could form something like a nation (assuming they're not part of the Canadian nation), Newfoundland could also be labelled as a nation (same assumption). Now it would be up to them to have their voice heard, and in no way, it should be an argument to say that Quebec doesn't form a nation.
-Jean-Jacques Rousseau
wow, i almost wrote that in my previous post "then we shouldn't be surprised if the Cons. step up and take pride in the provinces realisations". Hehe would make me ill as much as you, but i believe it could happen
-Jean-Jacques Rousseau
basically, they are a recognized province with the same rights and federal laws as every other province but they haven't signed on to the constitution - in a nutshell - quebec wants to protect certain heritage aspects of the province and want those aspects to be recognized in the constitution however, some other provinces deem it favouritism so negotiations have always been difficult ...
Take your time to read this from wikipedia, there's a lot of history involve, but what Polaris said is a good resume, Quebec want to have some stuffs written in the Constitution, some Canadians refuse, so it's not settle, in 2006.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec
Quebec independence and the Canadian constitution
Lévesque and his party had run in the 1970 and 1973 Quebec elections under a platform of separating Quebec from the rest of Canada. His party was defeated both times, with 23% and 30% of the vote respectively, and Lévesque himself was defeated in his own riding (electoral district). In the 1976 election, he softened his message by promising a referendum (plebiscite) on sovereignty-association rather than outright separation, by which Quebec would have independence in most government functions but share some other ones, such as a common currency, with Canada. Though many Quebecers, especially English-speaking Quebecers, viewed sovereignty-association as thinly-veiled separation, Lévesque and the Parti Québécois were swept into power with 41% of the popular vote on November 15, 1976. The question of sovereignty-association was placed before the voters in the 1980 Quebec referendum. During the campaign, Pierre Trudeau promised that a vote for the NO side was a vote for reforming Canada. Trudeau advocated the patriation of Canada's Constitution from the United Kingdom. The existing constitutional document, the British North America Act, could only be amended by the United Kingdom Parliament upon a request by the Canadian parliament.
Sixty percent of the Quebec electorate voted against the proposition. Polls showed that the overwhelming majority of English and immigrant Quebecers voted against, and that French Quebecers were almost equally divided, with older voters less in favour, and younger voters more in favour. After his loss in the referendum, Lévesque went back to Ottawa to start negotiating a new constitution with Trudeau, his minister of Justice Jean Chrétien and the nine other provincial premiers. Lévesque insisted Quebec be able to veto any future constitutional amendments. The negotiations quickly reached a stand-still.
Then on the night on November 4 to November 5 1981 (called by separatists the 'Night of the Long Knives' or 'La nuit des longs couteaux' after a bloody Hitler putsch in the 1930's) Pierre Elliott Trudeau met all the provincial premiers except René Lévesque to sign the document that would eventually become the new Canadian constitution. The next morning, they put Lévesque in front of the "fait accompli." Lévesque refused to sign the document, and returned to Quebec. In 1982, Trudeau had the new constitution approved by the British Parliament, with Quebec's signature still missing (a situation that persists to this day). The Supreme Court of Canada confirmed Trudeau's assertion that every province's approval is not required to amend the constitution.
In subsequent years, two attempts were made to gain Quebec's approval of the constitution. The first was the Meech Lake Accord of 1987, which was finally abandoned in 1990 when the provinces of Manitoba and Newfoundland refused to support it. This led to the formation of the Bloc Québécois party in Ottawa under the leadership of Lucien Bouchard, who had resigned from the federal cabinet. The second attempt, the Charlottetown Accord of 1992, was rejected by 56.7% of all Canadians and 57% of Quebecers. This result caused a split in the Quebec Liberal Party that led to the formation of the new Action Démocratique (Democratic Action) party led by Mario Dumont and Jean Allaire.
On October 30, 1995, with the Parti Québécois back in power since 1994, a second referendum on sovereignty took place. This time, it was rejected by a slim majority (50.6% NO to 49.4% YES); a clear majority of French-speaking Quebecers voted in favour of sovereignty.
The referendum was tainted by several controversies. Lucien Bouchard declared in a speech that Quebec is the "white society" with the lowest birthrate in the world. Federalists complained that an unusually high number of ballots had been rejected in pro-federalist ridings, notably in the largely Jewish and Greek riding of Chomedey (11.7 % or 5,500 of ballots were spoiled vs. 750 or 1.7% in the general election of 1994) although Quebec's chief electoral officer found no evidence of outright fraud as ballots that were slightly different were not accepted this time even though they were in the past. The Government of Canada was accused of not respecting provincial laws with regard to spending during referendums (which was achieved through corruption and became public in 2005, leading to the Canadian Liberal government's demise), and to having accelerated the naturalization of immigrant people living in the province of Québec (43,850 immigrants were naturalized during 1995, whereas the average number between 1988 and 1998 was 21,733).
The same night of the referendum, an angry Jacques Parizeau, then premier and leader of the "Yes" side, declared that the loss was due to "money and the ethnic vote". Parizeau resigned over public outrage and as per his commitment to do so in case of a loss. Lucien Bouchard became Quebec's new premier in 1996.
Federalists also accused the separatist side of asking a vague and misleading question. The question read:
"Do you agree that Quebec should become sovereign after having made a formal offer to Canada for a new economic and political partnership within the scope of the bill respecting the future of Quebec and of the agreement signed on June 12, 1995?"
After winning the next election, Bouchard retired from politics in 2001. Bernard Landry was then appointed leader of the Parti Québécois and premier of Quebec. In 2003, Landry lost the election to the Quebec Liberal Party and Jean Charest. Landry stepped down as PQ leader, and in a crowded race for the party leadership, André Boisclair was elected to succeed him. The PQ has promised to hold another referendum should it return to government.
-Jean-Jacques Rousseau
gotta be careful ... it could be underwater by that time
So, would it be possible for you to tell me what are the worst possible scenario about Global warming and Canada? I mean what would happen to Vancouver, Victoria, Montreal, Fleuve St-Laurent, Newfoundland, Halifax? What are the real consequence of global warming over the water level of these areas? Is it really a treat, a concern, or is it blown out of proportion? Sorry, lots of question
-Jean-Jacques Rousseau
well ... already the arctic is significantly affected ... sea ice is dwindling - glaciers are melting ... just a few years ago one of the biggest ice shelfs in antarctica fell into the ocean ... you can expect a rise in sea levels of about a few metres ... that would affect major cities like victoria, vancouver and st. john's ...
before then - you can expect more severe weather, which may result in drought, heat waves, cold spells affecting traditional industries such as farming and logging ... you may also experience a dwindling of fresh water supplies in the long run ...
the issue of threat really depends on who/what you are and what your concerns are ... if you are a polar bear - it may already be too late ... if you are a one of the dead in flooding in pakistan - it is too late ... if you don't concern yourself with others and such - you can probably live comfortably for the rest of your lifetime ...
So in the end (i guess that was my main question) sea level is not really dangerous for Canada, or is it? (just for the sea level part). I doubt we will ever see famine in North America, i mean we have all those industry relying on technology to feed us more than they rely on nature, anyway i'm not saying it's ok, just saying...
-Jean-Jacques Rousseau
well ... montreal is pretty close to sea level ... so, there are significant impacts ... the impacts are not necessarily related to famine as it is related to the costs of goods and economic consequences ...
**************
http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2006/07/05/daycare-study.html
Canadian cities facing day care crunch
Last Updated Wed, 05 Jul 2006 07:58:55 EDT
CBC News
Nearly every major city in Canada is dealing with a considerable shortage of licensed day care spaces, according to a new national study.
The report, entitled "Learning from Each Other: Early Learning and Child Care Experiences in Canadian Cities," examines the local provision of children's services in Canadian cities, including child care, kindergarten, and out-of-school-hours care for six- to 12-year-olds.
It concludes that in most cities there are licensed day care spaces for only 15 per cent of children.
Janet Libbey, acting director of the Mothercraft Day Care Centre in Ottawa said the lack of space has led to an increase in waiting list times.
"Well, it can be a minimum of a year's waiting list," said Libbey. "And sometimes with the full-time program, 18 months is not unrealistic. And there's still many families we never get to."
The City of Toronto organized the national study, which also includes St. John's, Halifax, Montreal, Sherbrooke, Toronto, Sudbury, Winnipeg, Saskatoon, Calgary, Vancouver and Whitehorse.
Montreal came out ahead in the study, due to a provincial commitment to day care. Montreal has spaces for 45 per cent of children until the age of 12.
Julie Mathien, policy development officer with the City of Toronto, said a Conservative government plan to cancel federal-provincial funding agreements next year will result in even more of a squeeze, with 5,000 fewer spaces in Toronto alone.
"Most of those spaces were in communities where there were significant numbers of children living below the poverty line and there is a significant lack of services to begin with," Mathien said.
In Ottawa, Libbey said the federal proposal to give parents a monthly allowance of $100 is inadequate, as the average cost for a preschooler in the capital is approximately $900 per month.
The full results of the study will be released Wednesday morning.
Jean Charest dit que le Québec a les moyens de faire la souveraineté
http://www2.canoe.com/infos/quebeccanada/archives/2006/07/20060707-144410.html
So it basicly say that Quebec Premier, Federalist and leader of the 1995 "love-in" in Montreal, leader of the NO side in the 1995 referendum, is in France right now, so he was on a tv show, after the commentators showed graphics and numbers about Québec saying Quebec have the MEANS and would be ABLE to be sovereign, Charest acknowledge, and said yes, "Quebec have the means to become sovereign", then realizing his gaffe, he said "but it's not in our interest"
edit2: here's an english link: http://www.news1130.com/news/national/article.jsp?content=n070747A
edit: no surprise, Boisclair jumped on it and said it was an historic moment
http://www2.canoe.com/infos/quebeccanada/archives/2006/07/20060707-160017.html
-Jean-Jacques Rousseau
global warming is in the hands of the people. there's no one to point a finger to.