It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Harper Continues to Unify Canada

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 03:40 PM
link   
Can it be? Do I agree with the man, yet again? Hell, I may find myself a fan of Harper by New Years.



PM to limit federal spending powers in provinces

OTTAWA -- Prime Minister Stephen Harper is poised to play a second national unity card by limiting federal spending powers in exclusive areas of provincial jurisdiction, CTV News has learned.

One option to achieve this goal is a constitutional amendment that would require the support of seven provinces comprising 50 per cent of the population, insiders say.

Talks are underway with key provincial governments, including Quebec Premier Jean Charest.

The plan is to prevent the federal government from launching new national programs without the consent of the provinces and any province could opt out with full compensation.

Insiders say a constitutional amendment would only deal with federal spending powers and would not lead to wholesale constitutional negotiations to get Quebec to sign on to the 1982 Constitution.

CTV Article


This has its ups and downs, but with the goal of remaining optimistic, I feel it will prove beneficial for our country. Correct me if I am wrong, but with this amendment, the Federal can no longer toss money where they please. They will now require the support of seven provinces to offer money up to provinces.

Seems with this, provinces will begin to work together a little more, thus creating unity amongst our provinces.

Every day Harper is putting his stamp on this country and it's day to day business.




posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 04:17 PM
link   
Not liking this:


One option to achieve this goal is a constitutional amendment that would require the support of seven provinces comprising 50 per cent of the population, insiders say.


Ontario, Quebec, Alberta and BC could stall anything that would be good for lesser populated provinces. That 50% thing. This looks innocuous on it's face but looking at it, it's more regionalism that Mulroney employed to keep the rich provinces rich and the poor ones? Who cares, the votes are elsewhere.



posted on Nov, 25 2006 @ 05:10 PM
link   
The 50% stood out to myself, but my optimism gets the best of me. I'll take it as provinces working together to reach a greater goal. However, provinces like Prince Edward Island are not going to carry much weight on this. Unfortunate, but when did we, the smaller provinces, ever carry any weight.

I stand by this initially, but it is left to be seen how it plays out.

[edit on 25-11-2006 by chissler]



posted on Nov, 27 2006 @ 10:46 AM
link   
The two words that I most hate to hear from politicians are 'constitutional amendment'. It doesn't much matter what they are talking about; the minute I hear that phrase, I start to get nervous.

The feds can still toss money about wherever thay want, just not in national programs in areas that are provincial. Areas like healthcare and education. Considering that Quebec votes against everything just on principle and Alberta is not a province I want setting social policy for the less populous and poorer areas, I'm going to have to say 'Thanks, but no thanks' on this one.



new topics

top topics
 
0

log in

join