If you honestly think that the liberals are closer to the NDP then they are the Conservatives then you clearly need to study their policies much more. Why don't we just get a two party system? Great idea, I wonder why it hasn't happened yet? Because two parties don't accurately represent the feelings of Canadians. That's the reason the NDP exists. It's not like the moderate liberal vote is split between two parties. The two parties are completely different and have largely different followers.

 

 

 

 

The conservative party does not accurately represent the feelings of Canadians when they got 40% of the vote. I would rather see a NDP/Lib merger than this.

 

Which the liberal party already declared they would not do as they do not share the majority of the NDP's policies.

 

In a perfect world. I can dream.

Ontario:

 

Votes:

 

CON: 2,455,900 (44.40%)

LIB: 1,416,537 (25.61%)

NDP: 1,400,280 (25.32%)

 

Seats:

 

CON: 73 (68.87%)

LIB: 22 (20.76%)

NDP: 11 (10.38%)

 

This is too depressing. I'm done, tell me when it's been four years :(

 

 

If you honestly think that the liberals are closer to the NDP then they are the Conservatives then you clearly need to study their policies much more. Why don't we just get a two party system? Great idea, I wonder why it hasn't happened yet? Because two parties don't accurately represent the feelings of Canadians. That's the reason the NDP exists. It's not like the moderate liberal vote is split between two parties. The two parties are completely different and have largely different followers.

 

 

 

 

The conservative party does not accurately represent the feelings of Canadians when they got 40% of the vote. I would rather see a NDP/Lib merger than this.

 

Which the liberal party already declared they would not do as they do not share the majority of the NDP's policies.

 

In a perfect world. I can dream.

 

Yes, and you can also dream about a supposed "democratic" two party system.

http://thetyee.ca/Mediacheck/2005/11/29/HarperBush/

Good read, had me loling several times throughout. Would recommend.

Sorry for the necro, but some updates for anyone who hasn't been following since the election:

With the election results barely a week old, Conservatives are muddying the waters around a central – and surprising – campaign pledge.

 

The revised 2011 budget that the government will present next month will not show a surplus by 2014-15 as promised in black and white in the Conservative campaign platform, even though the government insists it still intends to deliver on the election promise.

 

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/tories-back-off-campaign-pledge-to-show-a-surplus-by-2014-15/article2018983/

 

 

 

US Diplomats calling him out on the Arctic stuff:

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/990573--harper-s-arctic-sabre-rattling-a-bid-for-votes-u-s-diplomats-say

 

 

Is planning to allow police to be able to ask ISPs for any personal information without a warrant:

http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/04/13/harpers-promise-a-warrantless-online-surveillance-state/

 

 

 

A catchall law that they can use selectively to intimidate and punish people for using fake names online and linking:

http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/05/10/will-anonymity-and-hyperlinks-be-illegal-in-canada/

http://openmedia.ca/blog/proposed-crime-bill-makes-anonymity-and-hyperlinks-illegal-canada

http://www.parl.gc.ca/About/Parliament/LegislativeSummaries/bills_ls.asp?Language=E&ls=c51&source=library_prb&Parl=40&Ses=3

 

I'm hoping that these don't make it

 

 

A catchall law that they can use selectively to intimidate and punish people for using fake names online and linking:

http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/05/10/will-anonymity-and-hyperlinks-be-illegal-in-canada/

http://openmedia.ca/blog/proposed-crime-bill-makes-anonymity-and-hyperlinks-illegal-canada

http://www.parl.gc.ca/About/Parliament/LegislativeSummaries/bills_ls.asp?Language=E&ls=c51&source=library_prb&Parl=40&Ses=3

 

I'm hoping that these don't make it

 

May not be as bad as it was made to sound

http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/5794/125/

 

 

A catchall law that they can use selectively to intimidate and punish people for using fake names online and linking:

http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/05/10/will-anonymity-and-hyperlinks-be-illegal-in-canada/

http://openmedia.ca/blog/proposed-crime-bill-makes-anonymity-and-hyperlinks-illegal-canada

http://www.parl.gc.ca/About/Parliament/LegislativeSummaries/bills_ls.asp?Language=E&ls=c51&source=library_prb&Parl=40&Ses=3

 

I'm hoping that these don't make it

 

May not be as bad as it was made to sound

http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/5794/125/

True. Glad to see that, was not a fan of the original language.

Yep, that makes it better now doesn't it? Except what defines 'intent to injure or alarm a person'? We already know how ridiculous Canada's so called Human Rights Councils are, how long until some crazy activist group starts trying to have people arrested for a 'hate crime' comment they made in a heated debate online. But I guess someone needs to fill those shiny new prisons we're dumping billions into. The worst part is this is just the tip of the iceberg. With the planned Digital Copyright bill and deregulation of ISPs, I fear what the Canada of 2015 will look like.

 

Welcome to America 2.0, please leave your privacy at the door.

Yep, that makes it better now doesn't it? Except what defines 'intent to injure or alarm a person'? We already know how ridiculous Canada's so called Human Rights Councils are, how long until some crazy activist group starts trying to have people arrested for a 'hate crime' comment they made in a heated debate online. But I guess someone needs to fill those shiny new prisons we're dumping billions into. The worst part is this is just the tip of the iceberg. With the planned Digital Copyright bill and deregulation of ISPs, I fear what the Canada of 2015 will look like.

 

Welcome to America 2.0, please leave your privacy at the door.

 

Well on that username/hate linking stuff, it's an already existing law, they're just updating it to include internet on the list with telephones, telegraphs, etc. The crime omnibus and copyright stuff is so much horse [cabbage], I'm curious how hard it would be for a non-torie government to reverse that crap if it goes through

Yep, that makes it better now doesn't it? Except what defines 'intent to injure or alarm a person'? We already know how ridiculous Canada's so called Human Rights Councils are, how long until some crazy activist group starts trying to have people arrested for a 'hate crime' comment they made in a heated debate online. But I guess someone needs to fill those shiny new prisons we're dumping billions into. The worst part is this is just the tip of the iceberg. With the planned Digital Copyright bill and deregulation of ISPs, I fear what the Canada of 2015 will look like.

 

Welcome to America 2.0, please leave your privacy at the door.

 

Well on that username/hate linking stuff, it's an already existing law, they're just updating it to include internet on the list with telephones, telegraphs, etc. The crime omnibus and copyright stuff is so much horse [cabbage], I'm curious how hard it would be for a non-torie government to reverse that crap if it goes through

 

It could be a great campaign platform for the Liberals/NDP next election. I'm more disgusted by the warrentless surveillance than the bit about hyperlinks tbh.

Yeah, not really surprising coming from Harper though. He doesn't exactly seem too concerned about rights.

 

On Jan. 11, 1999, while he was on leave from formal politics and running the National Citizens Coalition, Stephen Harper told the right wing BC Report newsmagazine, that: Human rights commissions, as they are evolving, are an attack on our fundamental freedoms and the basic existence of a democratic society It is in fact totalitarianism. I find this is very scary stuff.

With this extremist view on human rights it should come as no surprise that in the first year in power Harper eliminated one of the most effective and innovative programs promoting and facilitating human rights the Court Challenges Program (CCP).

The CCP, established in 1978, provided funding for individuals challenging government legislation that was discriminatory (it expanded its program after the Charter came into existence in 1982). Here is what the Community Social Planning Council of Toronto said of the program: The rationale behind the program lies in the fact that access to justice requires significant financial resources which are beyond the reach of most individuals and groups, particularly those most marginalized. Without financial support to test the constitutionality of questionable laws, constitutional rights are only protected for the wealthy that have the resources to access the courts.

In short, the CCP made constitutional rights accessible that is, they made them real rather than theoretical. The CCP was instrumental over a period of 20 years in advancing the rights and equality not only of women (including First Nations women) but of gays and lesbians, and the disabled. The program has also enabled many community-based agencies to undertake court challenges regarding laws and policies that negatively affect racialized communities, immigrants and refugees, and other disadvantaged groups in Canada. Even the CCP-funded cases that lost in the courts often led, as a result of the high-profile challenges, to changes in legislation.

Prime Minister Harper cannot get rid of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms but by eliminating the modest ($5.6 million) budget of the CCP he has effectively made challenging discrimination in Canada a luxury available only to those with access to a quarter of a million dollars the amount it can cost to take a case all the way to the Supreme Court.