Canada 2020

thankyougrandma

A Surprise Left wrote:

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....

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.

kenny olav

i'm thinking i should buy some cheap waterfront property on the Hudson Bay in Nunavut right now, because in 2020 after some more global warming its gonna be prime real estate!

polaris

Kenny Olav wrote:

i'm thinking i should buy some cheap waterfront property on the Hudson Bay in Nunavut right now, because in 2020 after some more global warming its gonna be prime real estate!

gotta be careful ... it could be underwater by that time

thankyougrandma

polaris wrote:

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 ...

polaris

thankyougrandma wrote:

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 ...

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 ...

thankyougrandma

polaris wrote:

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...

polaris

thankyougrandma wrote:

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...

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 ...

polaris

it is why this gov't cannot govern ... they care little for many canadians ...

**************
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.

thankyougrandma

I had to post this here (sorry guys), no link in english :

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" That will make some spark here, i predict, anyway Go France! Happy week-end, enjoy the game, don't fight if your team lose...

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 , all french:
http://www2.canoe.com/infos/quebeccanada/archives/2006/07/20060707-160017.html

onelongsong

i think canada should be most concerned about global warming. when the frozen tundra thaws; and the ground stratifies; canada will be no more. or maybe it'll be americas' north coast.
global warming is in the hands of the people. there's no one to point a finger to.

thankyougrandma

onelongsong wrote:

i think canada should be most concerned about global warming. when the frozen tundra thaws; and the ground stratifies; canada will be no more. or maybe it'll be americas' north coast.
global warming is in the hands of the people. there's no one to point a finger to.

canadians are concerned, our government is not...

onelongsong

thankyougrandma wrote:

canadians are concerned, our government is not...

BS! does your government force you to use fossil fuels? do you not have solar or wind energy available to you? point the finger at yourself. if you didn't use oil there would be no big oil corporations. YOU make their existance possible. supply and demand. so don't cop-out and blame someone else. global warming is caused by the peoples' consumption of goods that cause it.

thankyougrandma

onelongsong wrote:

BS! does your government force you to use fossil fuels? do you not have solar or wind energy available to you? point the finger at yourself. if you didn't use oil there would be no big oil corporations. YOU make their existance possible. supply and demand. so don't cop-out and blame someone else. global warming is caused by the peoples' consumption of goods that cause it.

What are you talking about?

For you bringing the personal aspect, i sold my car one year ago (november 2005), so keep talking while i actually do something for it. My point stand and take it as a "point the finger" all you want, most canadians care (polls, protest, actions, civillians organisations) our government do not (getting out from Kyoto, preaching for more oil sand exploitation).

supply and demand??? Better look up, cause alternatives are not available or hard to find, and mostly very costful. That's when govt. incensitive come in actions, look brazil energy plan and all the other country who manage to achieve their Kyoto goal, it didn't hurt their economy at all. I'm proud about Québec future plan, i hope it will work.

Blame someone elses??? Yes i can say i did my part personally, even if it's not of your business, i can't go around blaming everyone who have and drive a car just because i think they shouldn't, i have no power on them, but i have all the rights to criticize my govt., that's the point of democracy. Anyway...

polaris

onelongsong wrote:

BS! does your government force you to use fossil fuels? do you not have solar or wind energy available to you? point the finger at yourself. if you didn't use oil there would be no big oil corporations. YOU make their existance possible. supply and demand. so don't cop-out and blame someone else. global warming is caused by the peoples' consumption of goods that cause it.

the majority of our emissions are coming from the oil sands project in alberta ... the gov't has no interest in dealing with the oil industry in doing something about it ...

but for sure, it is in the people's hand ... no point looking at the gov't if one is not willing to make their own changes ...

but as long as oil continues to burn coal to to extract expensive oil we're in trouble here ...

even flow?

onelongsong wrote:

BS! does your government force you to use fossil fuels?

Hey my man. Point me in the direction of the city in North America that uses anything but fossil fuel for their public transportation and you may not sound so out there with the comment.

onelongsong

even flow? wrote:

Hey my man. Point me in the direction of the city in North America that uses anything but fossil fuel for their public transportation and you may not sound so out there with the comment.

phoenix public transportation runs on bio-diesel. (vegetable oil). how's that?

polaris

onelongsong wrote:

phoenix public transportation runs on bio-diesel. (vegetable oil). how's that?

bio diesel still needs to be processed ... requiring energy ... what is the energy source for the manufacturing stand point?

and what percentageo of phoenix residents use public transportation?

onelongsong

thankyougrandma wrote:

What are you talking about?

For you bringing the personal aspect, i sold my car one year ago (november 2005), so keep talking while i actually do something for it. My point stand and take it as a "point the finger" all you want, most canadians care (polls, protest, actions, civillians organisations) our government do not (getting out from Kyoto, preaching for more oil sand exploitation).

supply and demand??? Better look up, cause alternatives are not available or hard to find, and mostly very costful. That's when govt. incensitive come in actions, look brazil energy plan and all the other country who manage to achieve their Kyoto goal, it didn't hurt their economy at all. I'm proud about Québec future plan, i hope it will work.

Blame someone elses??? Yes i can say i did my part personally, even if it's not of your business, i can't go around blaming everyone who have and drive a car just because i think they shouldn't, i have no power on them, but i have all the rights to criticize my govt., that's the point of democracy. Anyway...

criticize away; but the answer still lies with the people.
my solar set-up was expensive but the power company sent a check for almost 25% within a month of completion. the federal government will return just over 25% and the state will return almost 40% over the next 6 years. all this time giving me free power that doesn't go out when it storms; or someone hits a pole; etc.

even flow?

onelongsong wrote:

criticize away; but the answer still lies with the people.
my solar set-up was expensive but the power company sent a check for almost 25% within a month of completion. the federal government will return just over 25% and the state will return almost 40% over the next 6 years. all this time giving me free power that doesn't go out when it storms; or someone hits a pole; etc.

I know you have talked about this in the past. And I think it is a super idea. I have been hitting some "solar power" sites in the past couple of years trying to see what they have to offer. A little expensive for the average joe who wants to make a difference. You have to admit. But on the flip side it is the way to go to be independent from the grid......and the man.


Good for Phoenix and the fuel they use. But it still comes from the ground, and needs to be processed, no?

thankyougrandma

onelongsong wrote:

criticize away; but the answer still lies with the people.
my solar set-up was expensive but the power company sent a check for almost 25% within a month of completion. the federal government will return just over 25% and the state will return almost 40% over the next 6 years. all this time giving me free power that doesn't go out when it storms; or someone hits a pole; etc.

great, more of these would be great.