if u can't go east then go far west because it should not be run beside the curent lines
Bipole 1 and 2 run between the lakes, if they run bipole 3 east of lake Winnipeg thats a different route. The west side route makes NO sense to anyone but the NDP, but then they never are worried about spending extra tax dollars needlessly are they.
Bipole 1 and 2 run between the lakes, if they run bipole 3 east of lake Winnipeg thats a different route. The west side route makes NO sense to anyone but the NDP, but then they never are worried about spending extra tax dollars needlessly are they.
Want a good laugh? Read the Orange Rod.
Here is part of an actual blog post:
"The new stadium at the U of Manitoba will be built , regardless of cost. If Saskatchewan can build their stadium with $400 million worth of taxpayers money , so can we.
David Asper and Creswin may step aside from this deal. And that is OK. The Bombers and the Stadium will be community owned and we will have a amazing new stadium. Premier Selinger is showing incredible leadership in moving this project forward.
In 20 years, we will look back and be thankful we built this stadium, which will create hundreds of jobs and keep our economy chugging along."
Some UNESCO sites are factories. It doesn't have to be pristine, it has to exemplify something, and what the Boreal Forest exemplifies will be destroyed if a high voltage corridor runs through it.
There are various criteria to become a UNESCO site, the parks in the Rockies fit. A chunk of the Boreal with a hydro corridor in it doesn't.
Is this your opinion only, or do you have some in with the UNESCO committee that determines the criteria for designating WHS's? If it is your opinion that's fine, just don't try to come off as an expert on the subject. I work with people who represent Canada at UNESCO meetings and speak with a bit of knowledge on the subject.
Do you have any proof that we will not get a WHS designation with the corridor? Do you even know what percentage of the proposal would include the Hydro corridor? Even withoput a WHS designation, I would prefer the east side route for bipole III as it saves taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars.
Admit it, you're still mad that I predicted Rob Ford would win the race for Mayor of Toronto, when you said he didn't have a chance!
Just wondering, who asked for this UNESCO world heritage site? I don't believe the taxpayers of Manitoba agreed to the hundreds of millions of dollars this will cost in extra (unionized) construction costs and power line losses.
Taxes are bad enough here already, at an income of $40,000/yr (common retirement income) we pay twice the provincial taxes they do in Ontario! Focus should be on attracting industry and jobs by reducing income taxes, not wasting more and more money on crap like this UNESCO bullshit.
It's probably a result of our stupid Far North Act, which wants to turn half the province into a provincial park, where almost all forms of economic activity are virtually illegal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by khabibulin
Is this your opinion only, or do you have some in with the UNESCO committee that determines the criteria for designating WHS's? If it is your opinion that's fine, just don't try to come off as an expert on the subject. I work with people who represent Canada at UNESCO meetings and speak with a bit of knowledge on the subject.
I read a book about all the UNESCO sites and it listed the criteria for the categories. I figure if that particular part of the Boreal is going to be a UNESCO site, it had better damn well be unspoiled. It's a very boring place. The boreal in Primosky, Russia (lots of activity, but very pretty and has tigers) or further north in Manitoba, near Nunavut or in Northeastern Ontario (which is more swampy and virtually untouched) would probably be a better candidate than the area along the Ontario-Manitoba border. But living in the Boreal, I find the whole thing boring as hell. If we didn't have mountains here I'd go insane.
Quote:
Originally Posted by khabibulin
Do you have any proof that we will not get a WHS designation with the corridor? Do you even know what percentage of the proposal would include the Hydro corridor? Even withoput a WHS designation, I would prefer the east side route for bipole III as it saves taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars.
I didn't even know about the proposal until you guys brought it up. Doing a quick Google search, it seems to apply to the entire Boreal forest, which is the world's largest biome. So I really doubt a hydro line (or the oil sands) will have an effect on that. Honestly, I don't think the whole thing, even just the part in Manitoba, is really worth being designated. It should be an important part.
Quote:
Originally Posted by khabibulin
Admit it, you're still mad that I predicted Rob Ford would win the race for Mayor of Toronto, when you said he didn't have a chance!
I forgot about that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vid
Quote:
Originally Posted by khabibulin
Hey Vid,
Just thought I wopuld send a PM and rub it in! Told ya Ford would win as Mayor of TO. The common man is taking back the city!
Khabibulin
The common man took back the position of mayor. Toronto City Council will keep him in check. It will be about as effective as Harper has been for the past 4 years.
That is to say, not very effective.
Did you know that Rob Ford is a millionaire? How common of him!
Although not a provincial politician this is about one Sharon Carstairs, a do-nothing politician if ever there was one and now a senator who likes to spend tax dollars like there is no tomorrow.
$$ 74,000 $$ of your tax dollars for 3 months work folks, or roughly $350K a year to do basically nothing, if this isn't a strong case to abolish the senate what is?
Just in case some of you think the Free Press story picks on senators too much, here is another:
How do you know that she's done basically nothing? Oh, that's right, you don't.
Was she ever on the governing side of the legislature? What bills did she help to pass? What did she bring to the riding she represented? Other than being a shill for Izzy Asper she truly was useless! Do provincial govt.s have senates? They seem to all operate pretty good without them.
Provincial governments aren't federations. There is no federation in the world that operates without an upper house of either secondary consent or sober thought (ours is the latter, and it does its job in that regard).
Provincial governments aren't federations. There is no federation in the world that operates without an upper house of either secondary consent or sober thought (ours is the latter, and it does its job in that regard).
The Senate is, and always has been an excuse to provide rewards for political cronies (Jim Munson, Sharon Carstairs, etc.). And the appointees are fiercly partisan. It is a simple game of gotcha.....when in power, a Prime Minister has to appoint those who will be loyal to his party to reward them for past service or support, because the oposition party will only do the same once they become the government. Senate work is a duplication of what government committees do, as well as federal departments. The value taxpayers receive for all the incredible amount of money that is spent on the Senate is negligable. Think of all the social programs that could be funded or tax cuts and debt repayment that could happen if that money was redirected from the Senate. It boggles the mind that we continue to support and fund this worthless institution. Every opinion poll of Canadians that I have seen also support abolishing the Senate.
The US has 310 million people, there are 100 senators, 2 for every state.
In Canada with 34 million people there are 105 senators, each province has a varying amount of senators NOT based on population (ie. Both BC and Alberta have 6 senators while the provinces of Nova Scotia and New Brunswick have 10 each)
In the US each senator is elected.
In Canada each senator is appointed.
In Canada although the NDP have held federal seats since the 1940's there have been no senators from the NDP party.
My Proposal:
An elected Canadian senate with 24 senators, 2 from each province, 1 from each of the 3 territories and 1 representing Canadian first nations. Cheaper, more effective and all provinces equally represented!
Now, get everyone to agree. 1 ) The territories should actually have no senators, as they aren't partners in confederation. 2 ) The Senate is currently divided by region, not by province. 3 ) This is not the United States, and 2 senators would not be nearly enough to fill the committees or functions of the senate. 4 ) The entire reason that the Senate is not elected is to avoid the kind of gong show that the US Senate can become. Now, I think maybe there should be a new method of selection (a committee like the one for Order of Canada recipients for example), but to make Senators elected and beholden to the whims of the public (we already have a body for that) would entirely defeat their purpose and their ability to work.
Now, it is true that some people in the Senate are partisan hacks, and some do little, but for the most part, the majority of Senators do their jobs and they do them well. They don't spend all of their time bickering, and they use their power only sparingly. Your idea is no better than the current arrangement, and the things that would need to be changed and negotiated to get us there wouldn't be worth the effort. There's no reason that the legislative bodies of this country should move towards being clones of those in the US. This is an entirely different system based on an entirely different system. It is a system that is very old and very tested, and it has worked well for something like 600 years. Changes should never be made lightly or because something simply feels wrong to the people at the moment.
^ So an non-elected govt. body is superior to one that is elected, that is thus accountable to the constituents it serves?
The senate based on geography that may have worked 100 years ago?
The 4 western provinces now have close to 11 million people with 24 senators while the 4 Atlantic provinces with a paltry 2.3 million hold 30 senate seats.
^ So an non-elected govt. body is superior to one that is elected, that is thus accountable to the constituents it serves?
Yes, it can be when there is already an elected body present. They provide a counter to each other.
Quote:
The senate based on geography that may have worked 100 years ago?
Well, maybe that does need changing, but it's nearly impossible given the current political reality in Canada.
Quote:
The 4 western provinces now have close to 11 million people with 24 senators while the 4 Atlantic provinces with a paltry 2.3 million hold 30 senate seats.
And? This doesn't even factor in based on your arguments.
The senate based on geography that may have worked 100 years ago?
The 4 western provinces now have close to 11 million people with 24 senators while the 4 Atlantic provinces with a paltry 2.3 million hold 30 senate seats.
Isn't this the same disparity that would happen under your proposal?
You propose 2 senators for Ontario (13,000,000 people) and 2 senators for Prince Edward Island (150,000 people)...
I understand the goofy document that is the Constitution makes things difficult, but the libertarian in me would just as soon dissociate 100% from the Senate and from the British Crown, and for that matter most bureaucracy. A bunch of useless tit-turds, each one more greasy then the next. No decent human being becomes a politician. There has to be something inherently wrong with you.
Prev
Linear Mode
