Reactions Split On What Canada's Liberal Majority Means For Tech Policy Future (freezenet.ca) 220
Dangerous_Minds writes: Few could have predicted the Liberal majority win in Canada's recent election. Now that the Canadian government is in a state of transition, some have speculated what the new government will bring to the table when it comes to a policy on technology. Michael Geist is speculating that the people in the new Liberal government may bring about a positive policy change, concluding "All of this points to real change and the chance for a fresh start on Canadian digital policy in the years ahead." Meanwhile, Freezenet has a very different take. Drew Wilson points out that the last time the Liberal government was in power, the party was very combative on digital rights because they were trying to bring in Lawful Access and the Canadian DMCA before Stephen Harper took power. In one very infamous exchange, Sam Bulte lashed out at people like Michael Geist by calling him and his supporters "pro-user zealots". With digital rights not even on the radar during the election outside of Bill C-51 towards the beginning and the Liberals long history on these files, Wilson paints a very bleak future given that the Liberal party now has a majority government and can push through policies unopposed whether controversial or not.
Well if its anything like the US... (Score:3)
It will mean nothing at all.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
The fact that we voted the Conservatives out for a number of reasons, not the least of which was their attempt to sway the vote with a xenophobic campaign message, shows that we aren't as like the US as one might think.
Re: (Score:2)
No. Liberal/Conservative is very similar to Democrat/Republican. Two sides of the same coin. It's not stalemate crazy like the US, because we don't have the checks and balances [the Senate here rarely puts a stop to legislation]. It's more like a 5 year dictatorship once someone gets a majority. Hence, Harper got to shove through all kinds of unpopular legislation. Now, it's Trudeau's turn. The only difference is that Trudeau comes across as empty-headed, somebody else has to tell him what to say and
Re: (Score:2)
The only difference is that Trudeau comes across as empty-headed, somebody else has to tell him what to say and do.
Just wondering what leads you to this opinion?
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
their attempt to sway the vote with a xenophobic campaign message
Not unlike many other liberals, you grossly misuse "phobia". Not wanting X in no way implies a fear of X.
In fact, it puzzles me why liberals have such a tendency to put everything in terms related to "fear". The only theory I've found so far that makes any sense is that they're afraid of a hell of a lot of things, and are "projecting", as the psychologists say.
Because I can guarantee you that a lot of the people you call "phobic" are laughing at the idea that they are afraid of things you seem to thin
Re: (Score:2)
It's because liberals know how to read and have heard of this thing called the dictionary.
Xenophobia -- fear or hatred of strangers or foreigners, first known use 1903.
Looks like the train has left the station, Jane.
Re: (Score:2)
LOL
That made no sense, Eunuchswear.
Jane said: "Not wanting X in no way implies a fear of X" (where X is "strangers or foreigners" for xenophobia)
You said: "Xenophobia -- fear or hatred of strangers or foreigners, first known use 1903."
How does your definition of xenophobia refute what Jane said? Don't answer... it doesn't. Jane wrote that "fear" does not equal "not wanting" and what you wrote doesn't contradict that. If I don't feel like having cheese on my sandwich today, does that make me cheesephobic
Re: (Score:2)
That's a little terrifying just for the precedent it sets. Link to info about that?
Re:Well if its anything like the US... (Score:4, Informative)
There's no link, because it isn't true. Canadian hate laws don't work like that.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co... [belfasttelegraph.co.uk]
He's being prosecuted for hate speech - he hasn't been convicted, much less sentenced - and he lives in the United Kingdom, not Quebec.
But other than those minute details, you're absolutely right!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Well if its anything like the US... (Score:5, Insightful)
Churches should be allowed to be homophobic - and should also be toothless in matters of law and called out on their views. Idiocy and being wrong hasn't been outlawed - just pity the bigots and only raise your ire if they act on their views. [That said they can have their little homophobe club and exclude girls too for all I care - bygone relic of a superstitious age
Re: (Score:3)
Sorry, but no.
Everything funded by the government MUST comply with government rules. And not paying taxes means that you take money from the government.
Pay taxes and you are a private business again.
Re: (Score:2)
No it doesn't, regardless of your version of logic.
Re: (Score:3)
Sorry, but no.
Everything funded by the government MUST comply with government rules. And not paying taxes means that you take money from the government.
So does that mean that as a private citizen with an income too low to pay taxes, I'm not allowed to dislike homosexuality, while a rich person who pays lots of taxes can hate on homosexuality as much as he likes?
If I don't pay taxes, I'm "funded by the government," right?
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed. But who'd want the Westboros?
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah... I realize that not every country has the same free speech protections that the US does, but that sounds pretty extreme. Is that really the law? I have trouble believing that, and I hope that this is just hyperbole about a much less objectionable law.
Sure, you disagree with people who oppose homosexuality, and certainly religion should not be making the law, but you're pretty much telling someone that they will get arrested for believing something that they believe in good faith. That sort of prec
Re: (Score:2)
I live in a bible belt and the local churches spend a lot of time attacking homosexuality with no legal consequences.
Even Trinity Western University which forces students to sign a covenant which allow only sex between a husband and wife has no legal problems besides not being able to claim discrimination when the bar associations (3 or 4 out of 10 Provincial IIRC) refuse to accept their law students to the bar.
While we don't have as strong free speech protections as America due to not wanting to allow chil
Re: (Score:2)
Canada has freedom of speech. It just thinks that there are other freedoms that trump it.
A homosexual's right to live as they are trumps a bigot's right to harass said homosexual.
Re: (Score:2)
It's how the US works. Never let the facts get in the way of a good horror story that increases political donations.
Re: (Score:2)
Canada and Common Wealtch countries generally have a very different definition of freedom of speech than the US. Not our strongest showing for sure. Doesn't affect me much though. If I don't like you I don't go around you. If you insist on being a jerk in my presence and prevent me from avoiding you you won't remember what I called you because you'll be unconscious. Either way I don't need freedom for "extreme speech", because as I suspect most people are, my views are fairly moderate and I'm not hugely off
Re: (Score:2)
Just saying...
I appreciate this disclaimer. Basically tells me that even you think the bunch of words preceding it are bullshit.
Re: (Score:2)
Citation please, or I call bullshit.
Re:Well if its anything like the US... (Score:5, Informative)
2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(a) freedom of conscience and religion;
(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
(c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
(d) freedom of association.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps I am mistaken, but doesn't the Canadian Charter include a stipulation in it that essentially says, "The government can ignore any of these rights if they so choose"?
Re: (Score:2)
You are referring to the notwithstanding clause of the charter in Section 33. Although the clause is there its not like the federal and provincial governments invoke it willy nilly.
A pretty decent explanation here.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
I refuse to defend Quebec. Thats a whole different ball of wax.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry just replied to the Quebec Italian restaurant one. The Charter is not perfect and there are controversial items in it. Governments usually (again Quebec is a whole other discussion) have to have a solid reason to invoke the clause and do so with great political risk.
Overall the Charter has been a net positive. Should it be criticized? You bet! 100%! That's how democracies work. But it entrenches Canada as a free nation and most Canadians are proud of their country when they read it and identify
Re: (Score:2)
Funny, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms would disagree with you:
You missed S.1 of the Charter of rights and freedoms didn't you? [wikipedia.org]
1. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.
That means your speech, expression, and fundamental rights including unlawful searches, can be limited by the government or the courts. It's the reason why there are publication bans on court cases. That's why in Canada the RIDE
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, I'm glad we've retained our Freedom of Speech here in the US.
Guess it must suck to live in a liberal gulag where only approved thoughts may be voiced.
We didn't want child porn to be legal and we also didn't want a government that routinely ignores its Constitution to make things illegal.
We at least have a government that usually follows the Constitution and a Supreme Court Court that forces them.
You guys get a government that routinely breaks your Bill of Rights, especially the 1st amendment and a Supreme Court that allows it. Just think of all the laws that Congress has passed limiting speech that the courts agree with.
Here the government can Constitu
HRT (Score:4, Funny)
Now that the SJWs have taken over Canada, they're going to force everyone to undergo sex reassignment therapy. It's a proven fact that I read on 8chan.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nope. Everybody has to be reassigned. That way it's more fair.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Now that the SJWs have taken over Canada, they're going to force everyone to undergo sex reassignment therapy. It's a proven fact that I read on 8chan.
Yeah, but it's no big deal.
Socialized health care makes it free.
Hell, I get one every Hallowe'en for an authentic costume, it's great.
Re: (Score:2)
And you look good in that gown with the sequins and the split up the leg. I'd hit that.
Re:HRT (Score:4, Funny)
Well, I'm not undergoing sex reassignment therapy.
They'll have to pry my penis from my cold, dead hands.
Re: (Score:2)
They'll have to pry my penis from my cold, dead hands.
I think there's a subreddit devoted to that exact fetish.
Re: (Score:2)
"They'll have to pry my penis from my cold, dead hands."
Au Canada il est un membre, francophobe!
Our friends up north are just like us apparently (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Our friends up north are just like us apparentl (Score:5, Informative)
Well, it can. About the only time I was proud of my country was when Schroeder said no to Iraq war. A conservative government would have followed Dubya without even thinking twice about it.
Re: (Score:2)
How dare you?
Justin has much better hair.
Re: (Score:3)
Well, it can. About the only time I was proud of my country was when Schroeder said no to Iraq war. A conservative government would have followed Dubya without even thinking twice about it.
Absolutely! Americans who have only the Republican/Democrat "choice" to contemplate can too easily dismiss the difference made by the party in power. Joschka Fischer and the SPD/Grüne coalition conducted a foreign policy significantly different from that of the CDU.
Re: (Score:3)
Well in the case of Canada and my opinion at least we don't really have much of an option. We have about 5-6 parties but 1 only runs candidates in Quebec, a couple don't run candidates in enough ridings to have a chance of being an opposition let alone form a government. Of the 3 left, really only 2 have had a good chance of winning in the last 20 or so years. So effectively 2 party if not actually.
I thing a better solution, which would be in effect the same thing as campaign finance reform: eliminate the p
Re:Our friends up north are just like us apparentl (Score:4, Informative)
Oh they definitely thought about it. Some Steven Harper quotes:
Having this new government is like waking up from a terrible nightmare.
Re: (Score:2)
Leaders lead, they don't take surveys. A leader should lead from his heart, and if the people don't want to follow him any more, they should follow someone else.
A leader whose actions are dictated by public opinion is not a leader at all, and should be immediately replaced because he has nothing to offer.
Re: (Score:3)
The previous Liberal governments that preceded the one we just kicked out, worked out very well. It's very nice to have them back. They balanced our federal budget back in the 90's and used surpluses to fund debt repayment and personal income tax cuts for the middle class mixed with corporate tax cuts.
Re: (Score:3)
They were also investigated by the RCMP for Adscam which went all the way to the PMO's office and his assistants, and the funneling of federal tax dollars into Quebec, where the said people in Quebec then donated those federal tax dollars right back into the Liberal party coffers. Sorry man, they're corrupt as fuck and they're not any different than the Provincial Liberals in Ontario, who are involved in 4 different police investigations ranging from destruction of data to engineering an election result in
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Being investigated and being found guilty of something are two completely different things. The Liberals booted everyone involved in Adscam and prosecuted them. They did not give hush money to senators, or prorogue parliament to avoid answering questions about it, or pass laws retroactively absolving people for it like the harper cons did.
The liberals didn't prosecute anyone that was the RCMP. They even gave diplomatic posts to individuals who were involved in Adscam in order to get them out of the country. The liberals stonewalled as hard as they could until popular opinion in the country was at such a pitch they couldn't stonewall anymore. Sadly, I'm old enough to remember that.
Oh and the liberals sure did give hush money to senators. One of them even spent the last 20 years of his time in the senate, sitting in mexico. And sadly, they
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=m... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Oh it makes a difference. Not as much as it should, but it does. Or do you seriously think that Obama is just like George W, or that it will make no difference whether we have Hillary Clinton as President or Carly Fiorina?
In general politicians of opposing stripes tend to be most like each other on issues that their respective bases don't pay attention to -- like intellectual property rights and fair use.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, considering the immense contrast between when the Liberals were last in power and what happened in our country during the last 10 years under Harper, we don't just believe it makes a difference, we have conclusive proof it does.
Oligarchy (Score:5, Insightful)
We don't get to vote for the boss. The boss is the person who fills the lobbyist's pockets and tells them under what conditions to fork over said money. The boss is the person who arranges that little junket Thailand, or the Bahamas, or Las Vegas. The boss is that person who makes sure that congress-critter McTurd's second cousin Tedwina gets an absolutely amazing price on that succulent little bit of property. The boss is that guy who sees to it that post-congress, there's a $$k/event speaking tour waiting the wings. The boss is the guy with that awesome stock tip.
And sure as hell, the boss is not us.
But yes, new boss, same as old boss. Because no change in boss. At all. Has nothing to do with elections.
Liberal Party? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Liberal Party? (Score:5, Informative)
In Canada, the Liberal Party has that name, but it is the centrist party.
"All politics is local," that is the saying. In Canada, no one is fighting over Obamacare, just like in America no one cares about Quebec independence. In fact, one of the ways the party won is by getting a lot of votes in Quebec (also, Justin Trudeau is kind of hot).
Don't try to focus on "left" or "right," it is a way to divide us. Instead focus on specific issues.
Re: (Score:2)
It's dangerous to evaluate foreign countries on the American political spectrum
That's only because we don't have a scale that calibrates that far left.
Conservatives = Democrats
Liberals = What kind of Commie bastards are you?
NDP = Heads literally explode
The closest thing they have to our Republicans is the Christian Heritage party, if they even exist anymore.
Re: (Score:2)
The closest thing they have to our Republicans is the Christian Heritage party, if they even exist anymore.
Well there's the rhino party. Does that count?
Re: (Score:2)
The closest thing they have to our Republicans is the Christian Heritage party, if they even exist anymore.
Well there's the rhino party. Does that count?
No. The Rhinoceros Party of Canada knows that it's a joke. [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
That's only because we don't have a scale that calibrates that far left.
No, you are wrong, it's because it's a different scale. What do republicans and democrats have to say about the French issue? Different countries have different problems....just like local issues tend to be completely different than national issues.
Re:Liberal Party? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Even better example is the British Columbia Liberal Party who are much further right then the unrelated Federal Liberal Party.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Yep. The traditional right vs left that originated in post revolutionary France has been obsolete ever since those days. There is not a political spectrum, it's a political hologram. The US is overly stupid on this trying to label states as red or blue when they're all very much a muddy mix. But the rest of the world is still confused on this, when they say "right/left of center" and think it means the same thing in even two different countries.
Re: (Score:2)
"Liberal" is a cuss-word in Australia too! :)
I think the North American meaning of the word is different to ours though.
Can it get worse? (Score:2)
Canada has a lot of very innovative start-ups such as D-Wave [wavewatching.net] and General Fusion [wavewatching.net], the former received some federal venture capital, but with regards to fusion Canada turned out the lights long ago. There isn't even anybody designated anymore at the federal level for that file.
Pathetic given that Canada used to be a pioneer in nuclear technology as evideneced by the CANDU [wikipedia.org] reactor design.
Re: (Score:2)
Hey now the Liberals seem ok with nuclear energy. In 2001 our former Liberal PM Jean Chretien visited the Qinshan Nuclear plant [wikipedia.org] who have at least two operational CANDU designs.
Re: (Score:2)
CANDU is a very smart reactor design, not only because it can use natural, unenriched uranium, but also because this gives it inherent security features (natural uranium ore really doesn't like to entertain a fission reaction, so the reaction shuts down quickly when things start to go awry).
Nobody like to have a nuclear power plant in their backyard, but if I had the choice I'd always opt for CANDU over any other reactor (unless it's was an experimental spallation reactor [wavewatching.net], can't beat the safety of those).
Re: (Score:2)
That genie has gotten out of the bottle a long time ago.
Don't blame Canada.
Re: (Score:2)
Any word on what Liberals will do to energy policy? Does this election mean that petroleum and tar sands development or natural gas fracking will be replaced by wind turbines, which NIMBYs will then not let anyone build? Will Calgary go back to being famous for its rodeo?
Re: (Score:2)
Famous for its rodeo and mayor :-)
The oil prices alone are doing plenty of damage to the oil patch. The Libs can just sit on their hands and let the market sort it out.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Renewable power is quite competitive these days, and there's huge potential for it in Canada, but it's an illusion [theglobeandmail.com] to think that it isn't big business these days. [huffingtonpost.ca].
At any rate, General Fusion is a start-up, and very much not big business.
Pro-User zealot? (Score:2)
How dare he! Doing something for the people. Maybe even by the people.
There is no room for that in our democracy!
You misspelled "diversity policy" (Score:2)
Given the PM's remarks on Gamergate, it'll be more about left-wing "diversity" policy than tech policy.
Canadian Tech Campaign Issues (Score:2)
It was pretty disappointing that a lot of tech issues didn't make the appearance that I would hope they would. Things like how our telecommunications industry has us over a barrel and we enjoy the most expensive experience in the developed world.
There were a few tech issues that were touched upon during the long campaign, however most of them got over shadowed by BS topics used to distract.
1) The first is about the future of Bill 51. Which is a draconian privacy invasion government spying bill under the pre
Re:Nothing good (Score:4, Interesting)
While true, only Liberals or Conservatives/PC have had enough seats to claim the PM title, smaller parties have held significant power at times. Whenever you get a minority government the ruling party must make deals with someone to get legislation passed and it's at those time the smaller parties can get some things done.
The problem is in a majority government the ruling party doesn't have to listen or negotiate with anyone, in many cases even their own members so the PM can pretty much do whatever they want. While not a legislative issue, Trudeau's already shown his willingness to rule from on high by effectively removing Canada from the multinational anti-ISIS campaign against the wishes of his own party members and the majority of Canadians. Our handful of jets weren't doing much but at least they gave us a voice at the table and showed some willingness to help.
There are simply no checks or balances in a majority government.
If we at least had a useful Senate then there might be some hope but seeing as they are all just appointed and would rather not rock the boat while getting their nice paychecks, what the PM wants the PM pretty much gets.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"If we at least had a useful Senate then there might be some hope but seeing as they are all just appointed and would rather not rock the boat while getting their nice paychecks, what the PM wants the PM pretty much gets."
To be fair, this is a symptom of the first past the post system more than anything. Canada has been largely blessed over the years with a combination of fairly competent governments, or minority rule. It's only the last few years it's suffered from a bad majority that the problems of FPTP
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Polls by Ipsos Reid, EKOS and Angus Reid all had support for the mission at between 54-74%, while opposition maxed out at 33%. The only place opposition was above approval was in Quebec but on a party line, all parties had a majority supporting the mission (66% for Liberals specifically).
So unless every poll performed on this was just dead wrong, yes, a majority of Canadians supported the mission.
Re: (Score:2)
On the other hand, the LPC got a pretty clear mandate, and one of their clear campaign promises was, gasp, to pull out of combat against ISIS.
Remember, the LPC won a handy majority, WITH the left vote being split between two parties, AGAINST the incumbent party, with ZERO vote splitting on the right. That's a clear mandate.
Re: (Score:2)
see above. every poll had support for the mission significantly above opposition across all party lines.
google is your friend.
Re: (Score:2)
Every poll including ones requested by the CBC, had support significantly above opposition to the bombing missions, including amongst Liberals and NDP.
Re:Nothing good (Score:4, Interesting)
The Liberals have also promised this will be the last election under our current first-past-the-post system. Depending on the result of that, there may be a lot more MPs elected who arent from the two parties, and it may be the last majority government in Canada.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As part of a national engagement process, we will ensure that electoral reform measures – such as ranked ballots, proportional representation, mandatory voting, and online voting – are fully and fairly studied and considered.
It's one of many of options. It's very unlikely they will try to implement mandatory voting though, unless they actually want the reforms to fail. Changing the voting system at all is controversial enough, given how badly the notion has been defeated in recent times.
Re: Nothing good (Score:2)
http://www.cbc.ca/m/news/polit... [www.cbc.ca]
Sounds like Australia (Score:3)
We have what is effectively a 2 party system too and both parties are equally willing to rubber stamp anything the big media companies want (like the recent bill allowing media companies to force ISPs to block pirate websites)
Re: (Score:3)
The one issue all parties in Parliament seem to agree on is tougher copyright laws.
Re: (Score:2)
In New Zealand we got Proportional Representation in 1996 which has given us a bunch of coalition governments.
The one issue all parties in Parliament seem to agree on is tougher copyright laws.
What's the situation there with "campaign donations"? How about pure and simple bribery, like recording industry execs and lobbyists taking politicians and their party (wives,friends,kids) on VIP-arrangements to concerts, including backstage meet-and-greets? Because it's not something that's going to make them very popular with their constituents, there must be another motive.
Re: (Score:2)
If the new majority is a liberal-in-the-US-sense party, by what ideological theory is it supporting business over consumer in copyright matters? Canada doesn't have a big film industry to protect, as our Democratic Party does.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And you've fought beside us, time and time again. I didn't vote in your election - I can but I don't. I'm First Nations and hold dual citizenship, but I don't feel it is my right to vote because I spend, at best, a month in Canada each year. I am in Buffalo, still, at the moment but I have crossed over to visit a dozen times in the past month. I think they're getting sick of me at the border. :-)
Re: (Score:2)
More importantly Buffalo has a hockey team. You are one of us.
One of us.
One of us.
One of us.
Re: (Score:2)
My hotel is not that far from the First Niagara Center. I have yet to go. :( I'm like a muffin. I guess. I'm sitting around, getting stale, and full of raisins.
Re: (Score:2)
We only do $750 billion dollars worth of trade with the US and ship them 3,000,000 barrels of crude a day (more than OPEC put together)
Sheesh. Who knew there were Canadians on here? I didn't even know they had Slashdot in Canadia.