HFBoards

Go Back   HFBoards > Non-Sports > Political Discussion - "on-topic & unmoderated"
Mobile Hockey's Future Become a Sponsor Site Rules Support Forum vBookie Page 2
Political Discussion - "on-topic & unmoderated" Rated PG13, unmoderated but threads must stay on topic - that means you can flame each other all you want as long as it's legal

What should Canada get rid of first?

View Poll Results: What should Canada get rid of first?
The Monarchy 30 50.85%
The Senate 29 49.15%
Voters: 59. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old
03-06-2013, 10:35 AM
  #76
bombers15
Registered User
 
bombers15's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Country: Canada
Posts: 4,876
vCash: 500
I don't care much for the monarchy, nor do I care if it's abolished. It doesn't do anything anyway.

The Senate, on the other hand, actually affects us. It's a complete joke.

bombers15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-06-2013, 01:07 PM
  #77
hersky77
Registered User
 
hersky77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,033
vCash: 500
The major problem with getting rid of the monarchy in Canada is that we would have to adopt a new way for the Prime Minister to gain power. As it sits now the governor general and the queen select who is going to be the prime minister. However they never go against what the people voted for.

Im not saying we should get rid of the senate, but we should make them elected representatives not appointed officials, and retirement age should be implemented and enforced.

I stand behind the way canadian government works, but their is always room for improvement and change though

hersky77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-06-2013, 02:21 PM
  #78
kaiser matias
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 1,885
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hersky77 View Post
The major problem with getting rid of the monarchy in Canada is that we would have to adopt a new way for the Prime Minister to gain power. As it sits now the governor general and the queen select who is going to be the prime minister. However they never go against what the people voted for.

Im not saying we should get rid of the senate, but we should make them elected representatives not appointed officials, and retirement age should be implemented and enforced.

I stand behind the way canadian government works, but their is always room for improvement and change though
The simple way to appoint the Prime Minister in a republic is just use the system we have now. Only replace the title Governor-General with President.

The only question them becomes how is the President selected. Continue having the Prime Minister appoint them, have a popular election, an election in Parliament (and then just the House of Commons, or both the Commons and the Senate?), or some other alternative?

kaiser matias is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-06-2013, 03:57 PM
  #79
hersky77
Registered User
 
hersky77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,033
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaiser matias View Post
The simple way to appoint the Prime Minister in a republic is just use the system we have now. Only replace the title Governor-General with President.

The only question them becomes how is the President selected. Continue having the Prime Minister appoint them, have a popular election, an election in Parliament (and then just the House of Commons, or both the Commons and the Senate?), or some other alternative?

I think if it would come to that they would just let the prime minister continue to appoint the governor general. It would keep things at the status quo.

hersky77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-06-2013, 06:18 PM
  #80
Seanconn*
mission accomplished
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Manhattan
Country: United States
Posts: 4,267
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wetcoaster View Post
Regardless of what you may think personally (and it seems there is little real thought that has gone into your position) we already have a Canadian head of state - Elizabeth the II Queen of Canada.

Since the law requires unanimity (the House of Commons, the Senate and each provincial legislative assembly per section 41 of the Constitution Act 1982) to make any constitutional change in relation to the office of the Queen and abolishing the Senate, short of a cataclysmic event such as the secession of Quebec, I do not see such unanimity as possible.
41. An amendment to the Constitution of Canada in relation to the following matters may be made by proclamation issued by the Governor General under the Great Seal of Canada only where authorized by resolutions of the Senate and House of Commons and of the legislative assembly of each province:
(a) the office of the Queen, the Governor General and the Lieutenant Governor of a province;
(b) the right of a province to a number of members in the House of Commons not less than the number of Senators by which the province is entitled to be represented at the time this Part comes into force;
(c) subject to section 43, the use of the English or the French language;
(d) the composition of the Supreme Court of Canada; and
(e) an amendment to this Part.
How hostile... There's a lot of thought that has went into my position. and the Queen is NOT Canadian. I already established before you interjected, that I realize the Queen is officially the Canadian head of State and Canadian Queen... not "just the British Monarch" ... but in reality, that is what she is... the British monarch. The whole thing REEKS of colonialism.

The very fact that you think it would have to come to our country being ripped apart (Quebec secession) Shows how much you respect the status quo. As well, I'm aware that provinces seats in the house of commons can be tied to their amount of seats in the senate. (can't have less seats in the house than in the senate)

So from the perspective of the senate, i could understand why Quebec would be hesisitant to sign off on any senate reform, unless they were guaranteed to continue to be over represented in the house of commons.

Bottom line, thinking that reforming the Senate, or abolishing the monarchy is "too hard", or "almost impossible" as you put it... is a bad way to think.

The very fact that the Queen selects who becomes PM, even if she respects our elections, is just wrong. Same thing with the Senate.

Bottom line, Canada's institutions of governance should be 100% Canadian. As it stands, we are nowhere close to being 100% Canadian... we have way too many ties to the British throne.


since you appear to consider yourself some sort of expert... what would happen to Canada if the Brits got rid of the monarchy? Would we be forced to get "creative", and make some changes?

would the abolishment of the monarchy in England, go beyond The Governer General... would it affect the senate, the house of commons, and many other levels of government?

It seems more likely the British would get rid of the Queen, before we would attempt to get rid of her, because are politicians don't have the balls to tackle constitutional changes.

Thanks for any respectful responses.

Seanconn* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-06-2013, 06:42 PM
  #81
Doppler Drift
Registered User
 
Doppler Drift's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 9,783
vCash: 500
This is going to be good.

Popcorn?



Check.

Beer?



Check.

And........


Doppler Drift is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-06-2013, 06:44 PM
  #82
finchster
Registered User
 
finchster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Belgorod
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 7,587
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to finchster
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doppler Drift View Post
This is going to be good.

Popcorn?



Check.

Beer?



Check.

And........

You forgot this one


At any rate Seanconn has returned to the board

finchster is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-06-2013, 07:18 PM
  #83
Roughneck
Registered User
 
Roughneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Calgary
Country: Ireland
Posts: 8,636
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Roughneck
When was the last time we had a Wetcoaster/Seanconn spat? When Seanconn came back as the 50 year old working on his second PhD?

Roughneck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-06-2013, 07:39 PM
  #84
Seanconn*
mission accomplished
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Manhattan
Country: United States
Posts: 4,267
vCash: 500
I'm confused as to why you think I'm someone else, carry on I guess? I enjoy the .gifs


Anyways, Can you guys please try to keep it on topic please? I'd appreciate to hear Wetcoaster's expert response.

while we're still in this thread, what do you guys think about Canada's monarchy?

Do you think Canadians will get rid of it first, or will the British get rid of it first, and force Canada to make some major changes?

Or neither, and go along with Wetcoaster's notion that none of this matters, unless Quebec separates from the rest of Canada? I definitely understand his reasoning behind that idea, but think it's a very bad attitude, especially if a majority of Canadians views the monarchy and senate as archaic and useless.

I believe there have been many nation wide polls that support the notion that Canadians no longer need the ties to the monarchy, and many more polls that suggest that most Canadians think the senate is useless and is need of reform or abolishment.

Seanconn* is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-06-2013, 08:12 PM
  #85
SonOfGom
Registered User
 
SonOfGom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Toronto
Country: Canada
Posts: 2,627
vCash: 500
LOL
Seanconn has mental issues man, who does this?

SonOfGom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-06-2013, 08:14 PM
  #86
Johnny LaRue
Registered User
 
Johnny LaRue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Kudamatsu-shi, Japan
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,394
vCash: 200
Quote:
Originally Posted by finchster View Post
pilottalk reminds me of Seanconn
You called it.

Johnny LaRue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-06-2013, 08:25 PM
  #87
Johnny LaRue
Registered User
 
Johnny LaRue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Kudamatsu-shi, Japan
Country: Canada
Posts: 10,394
vCash: 200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seanconn* View Post
How hostile... There's a lot of thought that has went into my position. and the Queen is NOT Canadian. I already established before you interjected, that I realize the Queen is officially the Canadian head of State and Canadian Queen... not "just the British Monarch" ... but in reality, that is what she is... the British monarch. The whole thing REEKS of colonialism.

The very fact that you think it would have to come to our country being ripped apart (Quebec secession) Shows how much you respect the status quo. As well, I'm aware that provinces seats in the house of commons can be tied to their amount of seats in the senate. (can't have less seats in the house than in the senate)

So from the perspective of the senate, i could understand why Quebec would be hesisitant to sign off on any senate reform, unless they were guaranteed to continue to be over represented in the house of commons.

Bottom line, thinking that reforming the Senate, or abolishing the monarchy is "too hard", or "almost impossible" as you put it... is a bad way to think.

The very fact that the Queen selects who becomes PM, even if she respects our elections, is just wrong. Same thing with the Senate.

Bottom line, Canada's institutions of governance should be 100% Canadian. As it stands, we are nowhere close to being 100% Canadian... we have way too many ties to the British throne.


since you appear to consider yourself some sort of expert... what would happen to Canada if the Brits got rid of the monarchy? Would we be forced to get "creative", and make some changes?

would the abolishment of the monarchy in England, go beyond The Governer General... would it affect the senate, the house of commons, and many other levels of government?

It seems more likely the British would get rid of the Queen, before we would attempt to get rid of her, because are politicians don't have the balls to tackle constitutional changes.

Thanks for any respectful responses.
To be fair Seaconn, nowhere in his post did Wetcoaster claim to be an expert. What he did was offer a reasoned opinion an cited the relevant section of the Canadian Constitution to support his opinion. That is how these sorts of discussions are supposed to work.

The opinion he offered was that it is nearly impossible to amend the constitution in matters where unanimous support is needed from the provinces. As many have stated, Quebec would never support the abolition of the senate (not without huge compromises that most other provinces would never allow).

I am certainly no expert, but from what I know of our country I believe he is completely correct.

Now, this doesn't mean he supports the status quo, but it doesn't matter what he wants.

I am personally pleased that it's nearly impossible to eliminate the monarchy because I support it.

Johnny LaRue is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-06-2013, 08:27 PM
  #88
finchster
Registered User
 
finchster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Belgorod
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 7,587
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to finchster
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny LaRue View Post
You called it.
I see he is banned again haha

finchster is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-06-2013, 08:55 PM
  #89
Tim Calhoun
Tim Calhoun
 
Join Date: May 2006
Country: Canada
Posts: 8,032
vCash: 325
Damn, I guess we'll have to wait another few months before Grandpa Norm appears again.

Tim Calhoun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-06-2013, 09:08 PM
  #90
Roughneck
Registered User
 
Roughneck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Calgary
Country: Ireland
Posts: 8,636
vCash: 500
Send a message via MSN to Roughneck
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny LaRue View Post
I am certainly no expert, but from what I know of our country I believe he is completely correct.
We could ask the federal PC's how trying to make changes to the Constitution works out.

Roughneck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-06-2013, 09:15 PM
  #91
The Moose
Registered User
 
The Moose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 5,268
vCash: 500
What's with this NDP motion to abolish the Senate? Even if it passes, what consequences can it have?

The Moose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-06-2013, 09:52 PM
  #92
hersky77
Registered User
 
hersky77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,033
vCash: 500
someone before brought up the whole ideal of quebec and not signing off on any senate reform if it doesn't help them in anyway. I agree with you but the fact is they do not have to follow anything the federal government does, because officially they have not ratified the constitution act of 1982. Where as we are running on the charter of rights and freedom that was created in 1975 by Robert Bourassa.

I think moving forward Quebec should sign the constitution then we should go about changing the whole ideal of the constitutional monarchy, is not very democratic, even though Canada runs on democratic pillars

hersky77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-06-2013, 10:51 PM
  #93
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Moose View Post
What's with this NDP motion to abolish the Senate? Even if it passes, what consequences can it have?
No consequences as motions are non-binding.

A stunt and with the NDP being completely completely uninformed as to the process.

The NDP critic on Senate reform obviously cannot read the Constitution as he says the Senate can be abolished without the Senate being involved.
The Supreme Court of Canada will determine how the Senate can be abolished and reformed, settling questions about what constitutional amending formula, if any, apply to Senate reform. Reforming the Senate would require the so-called “7/50″ rule in the Constitution, meaning at least seven provinces that hold at least half the country’s population must agree to the change for a constitutional amendment to go through. Abolishing the Senate may require taking the same path, or require the unanimous consent of all provinces.

If the Supreme Court rules abolishment requires unanimous consent, it would make the task very difficult, said NDP parliamentary reform critic Craig Scott.

“The key is to note that on either of those formulas…ultimately, the Senate does not have to consent to its own abolition,” he said.
Since when? Was the Constitution Act 1982 amended when we were not looking??? CHECKING.... nope still the same.

Seriously, are you capable of reading and comprehending clear language in the Constitution Act, 1982??? And this is the NDP's best and brightest critic on the issue... SHUDDER.

Amendments to the Constitution must be done in accordance with Part V of the Constitution Act, 1982, which provides for five different amending formulae depending upon the subject matter.

Amendments can be brought forward under section 46(1) and may be initiated either of the the Senate or the House of Commons at the federal level or by any legislative assembly of a province.

The general amending formula is set out in section 38(1), known as the "7/50 formula", requires: (a) assent from both the House of Commons and the Senate; (b) the approval of two-thirds of the provincial legislatures (at least seven provinces) representing at least 50% of the population (effectively, this would include at least Quebec or Ontario, as they are the most populous provinces).
38. (1) An amendment to the Constitution of Canada may be made by proclamation issued by the Governor General under the Great Seal of Canada where so authorized by

(a) resolutions of the Senate and the House of Commons; and

(b) resolutions of the legislative assemblies of at least two-thirds of the provinces that have, in the aggregate, according to the then latest general census, at least fifty per cent of the population of the provinces.
And under the unanimity formula at section 41 - a Senate resolution is also required:
41. An amendment to the Constitution of Canada in relation to the following matters may be made by proclamation issued by the Governor General under the Great Seal of Canada only where authorized by resolutions of the Senate and House of Commons and of the legislative assemblies of each province:

(a) the office of the Queen, the Governor General and the Lieutenant Governor of a province;

(b) the right of a province to a number of members in the House of Commons not less than the number of Senators by which the province is entitled to be represented at the time this Part comes into force;
How monumentally stupid do you have to be to not grasp this ever so basic requirement.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-06-2013, 10:58 PM
  #94
Wetcoaster
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Out There
Posts: 54,911
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by hersky77 View Post
someone before brought up the whole ideal of quebec and not signing off on any senate reform if it doesn't help them in anyway. I agree with you but the fact is they do not have to follow anything the federal government does, because officially they have not ratified the constitution act of 1982. Where as we are running on the charter of rights and freedom that was created in 1975 by Robert Bourassa.

I think moving forward Quebec should sign the constitution then we should go about changing the whole ideal of the constitutional monarchy, is not very democratic, even though Canada runs on democratic pillars
Time to put the ratification myth to bed.

Yes Quebec is bound as a matter of constitutional law as decided by the SCOC in the Patriation Reference.

And even if that was not the case Quebec has attorned to the constitutional jurisdiction by way of what is referred to in law as the principle of waiver and acquiescence - the Quebec legislature invoked the notwithstanding clause in Section 33 after the Charter came into force in 1982, Quebec inserted a notwithstanding clause into all its laws; these expired in 1987. You cannot act under law and then deny its jurisdiction.

Wetcoaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 04:56 AM
  #95
kov
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: NYC
Posts: 5,225
vCash: 500
First and foremost, Canada needs to get rid of poutine. That stuff is an abomination.

Beyond that, maybe it's just due to growing up in the states with a lot of anti-monarchy dogma from my first breath onwards, but paying money to a monarchy, regardless of how small, would piss me off. But this is a triviality compared to the poutine.

kov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 07:34 AM
  #96
finchster
Registered User
 
finchster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Belgorod
Country: Russian Federation
Posts: 7,587
vCash: 500
Send a message via ICQ to finchster
Quote:
Originally Posted by kov View Post
First and foremost, Canada needs to get rid of poutine. That stuff is an abomination.

Beyond that, maybe it's just due to growing up in the states with a lot of anti-monarchy dogma from my first breath onwards, but paying money to a monarchy, regardless of how small, would piss me off. But this is a triviality compared to the poutine.
Canada pays $0 to the monarchy and we only pay for their visits here. It's estimated that the monarchy costs $50 million a year which includes things like, The Governor Generals office, historical sites, foreign missions and other things that functioning governments do anyway. It's estimated that it costs Canadians $1.55 each a year for the monarchy. Considering it doesn't go to a foreign country, I can live with that.

finchster is online now   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 08:46 AM
  #97
The Moose
Registered User
 
The Moose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 5,268
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by finchster View Post
Canada pays $0 to the monarchy and we only pay for their visits here. It's estimated that the monarchy costs $50 million a year which includes things like, The Governor Generals office, historical sites, foreign missions and other things that functioning governments do anyway. It's estimated that it costs Canadians $1.55 each a year for the monarchy. Considering it doesn't go to a foreign country, I can live with that.
Didn't per-vote subsidy for political parties cost about the same? In fact it was even less per every Canadian resident . Apparently that was consider to be a big waste.

The Moose is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 10:52 AM
  #98
Puck
Ninja
 
Puck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Ottawa
Country: Tahiti
Posts: 8,798
vCash: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Moose View Post
Didn't per-vote subsidy for political parties cost about the same? In fact it was even less per every Canadian resident . Apparently that was consider to be a big waste.
Good point.

Puck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 11:26 AM
  #99
CanadianHockey
Smith - Alfie
 
CanadianHockey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Ottawa
Country: Canada
Posts: 28,716
vCash: 2391
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johnny LaRue View Post
Neither. I am a monarchist and think the senate can play a very positive role.

Also, as Wetcoaster would probably bring up, getting rid of the senate and monarchy would likely be riughly equal in difficulty to eliminate. Do dissolve the senate or get rid of the monarchy would require unanimous agreement from all provinces. That would be nearly impossible.
Pretty much this.

I don't mind the monarchy, and I don't think it's an excessive burden. Ditto to the Senate, which isn't as bad as people claim it to be.

__________________
CanadianHockey________ __ __________Sens, Oilers, and Team Canada
CanadianHockey is offline   Reply With Quote
Old
03-07-2013, 11:42 AM
  #100
Vyacheslav
That one guy
 
Vyacheslav's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Jackson, MI
Country: United States
Posts: 14,629
vCash: 541
Send a message via AIM to Vyacheslav
Poll needs Seanconn added to the options

Vyacheslav is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Forum Jump


Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:55 AM.

monitoring_string = "e4251c93e2ba248d29da988d93bf5144"
Contact Us - HFBoards - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Use - Advertise - Top - AdChoices

vBulletin Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
HFBoards.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.