HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: nadeau@bnr.ca (Rheal Nadeau)
Subject: Re: Election sun rising
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd., Ottawa, Canada
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 13:40:21 GMT

In article <SBO.92Sep7164500@froh.vlsi.polymtl.ca> sbo@vlsi.polymtl.ca (Stephane Boucher) writes:
>>>>>> On 7 Sep 92 12:49:33 GMT, steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter) said:
>
>  > And automatic by-elections for new mandate if the bum changes party
>  > or policy dramatically from that for which he was elected.
>
>Je suppose que tu inclus le partie liberal du Quebec au
>grand complet dans ton "el al"? Apres tout, Le partie a
>decide de ne pas respecter son propre programme...
>
>Si on implante un systeme comme tu le proposes, je dit qu'il
>faut aller jusqu'au bout: Si un politicien ne respecte pas
>sa parole alors il doit y avoir une election partielle.
>
>Evidemment, determiner si un politicien respect son mandat
>ou sa parole est un processus pas mal subjectif.

Mais dans ce cas ci (je suppose que tu parles de l'entente
constitutionelle), il y a un referendum.  Les liberaux (ou disons, plus
simplement, Bourassa) n'ont pas simplement fait un changement
unilateral; ce qui est propose est offert aux electeurs pour leur
approbation ou desapprobation.

Le Rhealiste - Rheal Nadeau - nadeau@bnr.ca - Parlant pour moi-meme
Xref: sparky can.general:4418 can.politics:6669 soc.culture.canada:6466
From: beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard)
Newsgroups: can.general,can.politics,soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: Lower and upper Canadas
Date: 10 Sep 92 16:41:36 GMT
Organization: Institut de recherche d'Hydro-Quebec, Varennes, Canada

In article <1992Sep10.083921.23236@spxtech.qc.ca> steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter) writes:
>From article <12811@audetf>, by audetf@Software.Mitel.COM (Francois Audet):
>
>> Nouvelle-France was lost long before the Revolution (under Louis XIV I
>> think): Napoleaon wasn't even born yet.
>> 
>> Shouldn't this belong in can.history?
>
>Not while people like Denis hold my kids responsible for the "British
>Invasion" :-)
>
>  ||| Steve Potter:         steven%spxtech@CAM.ORG                     |||

Disinformation.  I said that English schools are for English speakers
that were in Quebec for years, not for recent immigrants.  The same status
for all immigrants (they select where they emigrate, after all).  Period.

-- 
  \_\    Denis Beauregard  *  internet:beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca
 /   \   Genealogiste officiel : Beauregard/Jarret/Jarest/Vincent
J   __>  Un Quebec renouvele dans une Amerique renovee
\_.-===                                                  Opinions ? Et pis non !
Newsgroups: can.general,soc.culture.canada
From: buckland@ucs.ubc.ca (Tony Buckland)
Subject: Bigger worries than which lane to drive in
Organization: University of B.C. Computing Services
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 18:34:13 GMT

 Well, actually we've stopped warring over when to yield certain
 traffic lanes - for a while.  Now we're worrying over the slightly
 more serious issue of private access to the means to kill each
 other.  And we're no doubt warming up to some truly verbose worrying
 about the referendum of Oct 26.
 
 But what's really worrying me right now is the referendum of Sep 20.
 In France, on the Maastricht treaty.  It seems only too possible
 that the peaceful unification of Europe could be brought to a
 screeching halt, on issues much more trivial in comparison to what
 is at stake than those that will decide many votes on the Canadian
 constitutional update.  And what doesn't move in geopolitics in one
 direction tends not to stay still, but to move in the other.
 
 Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the current peace,
 since 1945, between the great powers of Europe - Britain, France,
 and Prussia (later Germany) (and, if you exclude wars between
 proxies, Russia) - is the longest in the last three centuries at
 least, and shows promise of indefinite extension if the momentum
 created in the early post-WWII years can be maintained.  But that
 can only be done if the individual nations continue to yield
 their traditional powers to emerging central government.
 
 So, for the next few weeks, a Oui in Paris will be something I
 worry about much more than one in Montreal.
Newsgroups: can.general,soc.culture.canada
Newsgroups: can.general,soc.culture.canada
From: mstede@cs.toronto.edu (Manfred Stede)
Subject: Re: Bigger worries than which lane to drive in
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto
Date: 10 Sep 92 16:06:55 GMT

cthorne@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Charles E Thorne) writes:

>In article <9SEP199218280179@jetson.uh.edu> schieber@jetson.uh.edu (Schieber, Jay D.) writes:

>Speaking as an outsider, it's difficult to imagine economic union without
>political union.  It seems that trying to send goods and services across
>present national borders with the numerous regulations of each country to
>comply with is an economic waste.  It seems that much of the opposition to
>union (either political or economic) is the politicians.  Why in Europe does
>one need to make 30 different light bulbs to satisfy each country when one
>would do just as well?

While you're outside of Europe, you're in the midst of what will soon be 
the largest free trade zone in the world, yet none of the three countries
involved is seriously considering a political union.

I agree with the light bulbs point; it's annoying to travel from Canada 
to Germany, Italy and GB and to need four different adaptors in order to
shave in the morning.  But again, this may well be settled without a 
central government, just as -- for instance -- all sorts of communication 
systems have been more or less standardized around the world.

-manfred
Newsgroups: can.general,can.politics,soc.culture.canada
From: nadeau@bnr.ca (Rheal Nadeau)
Subject: Re: Election sun rising
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd., Ottawa, Canada
Distribution: can
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 02:48:14 GMT

In article <6qoqqB1w164w@ham.almanac.bc.ca> emd@ham.almanac.bc.ca writes:
>
>So far in this discussion, all the comment has basically been that party 
>discipline is bad, presumably on the basis that the party has no "right" 
>to dictate an M.P.'s actions, and that any such dictation is 
>automatically bad. 
>
>Another scenario might see the M.P. espousing something in Parliament 
>obviously against his/her Party's policies - policies, mind you, that he 
>has campaigned under and won election on. Is party discipline warranted 
>in this case? 
>
>And lastly, what responsibility does the M.P. have to carry out decisions 
>made democratically within his party - presumably at convention - that he 
>personally finds distasteful? 

First off, I do agree that party discipline can be taken to ridiculous
extremes at times.  I also agree with Robert (emd@...) that party
discipline is not necessarily a total evil.  Party policy, after all,
does not emerge from a vacuum - Mulroney does not, however much he
might want to, set PC policy single-handed.  The back-benchers get many
chances to participate - in caucus, in committees, in lobbying (esp.
for the interests of their own constituents, sometimes to the extremes
of pork-barrelling).  How effectively the MP does this is, of course,
up to the voters to judge in the next election.

Of course, many voters don't WANT their MP to do anything, since many
voters do vote for the party, or the leader, rather than the actual
candidate in their riding.

The Rhealist - Rheal Nadeau - nadeau@bnr.ca - Speaking only for myself
Newsgroups: can.general,can.politics,soc.culture.canada
From: wales@valeria.cs.ucla.edu (Rich Wales)
Subject: Re: Election sun rising
Reply-To: wales@CS.UCLA.EDU (Rich Wales)
Organization: UCLA CS Department, Los Angeles
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 92 18:37:05 GMT

Alan Williams wrote:

	The Canadian Parliamentary system wouldn't be that bad,
	if only we could crack party discipline.

I think the only way this can effectively be done is if the house rules
can be modified which currently treat virtually every vote on any gov-
ernment bill as an implicit test of confidence in the government.

It is hard to talk about relaxing party discipline, and thereby allow-
ing MP's to vote against their caucus, if anyone who ever bucks the
party's position is in effect voting to kick his/her own colleagues out
of power.

One approach might be to say that the government can be ousted by Par-
liament only by losing a resolution dealing solely and specifically
with the confidence issue.  Everyday votes on other legislation would
no longer carry any risk of toppling the PM and cabinet, so the pressure
on MP's to toe the party line on each and every vote could be relaxed.

This proposal can, if necessary, be fine-tuned by adding a reasonable
limit on how long the House of Commons has to wait after one confidence
vote before considering another (so the opposition can't just grind
things to a halt by calling for a non-confidence vote every week).

Also, there's the idea (similar to what I've been told is done in Ger-
many) that a non-confidence resolution should have to either name a
=specific= new candidate for PM, or else state explicitly that the
intent is to force a dissolution of Parliament and call new elections.

In any case, I think =this= is the issue that really has to be looked
at; party discipline as such is just a symptom and cannot be effectively
changed without addressing its underlying cause.

--
Rich Wales <wales@CS.UCLA.EDU> // UCLA Computer Science Department
3531 Boelter Hall // Los Angeles, CA 90024-1596 // +1 (310) 825-5683
Xref: sparky can.general:4320 can.politics:6492 soc.culture.canada:6328
From: yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Dave Shariff Yadallee)
Newsgroups: can.general,can.politics,soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: Election sun rising
Date: Sun, 06 Sep 92 05:25:17 MDT
Organization: Edmonton Remote Systems #3, Edmonton, AB, Canada

And the plot thickens!!

Why is the government using an election-styled defence to sell NAFTA ??

Dave Shariff Yadallee (yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca,
userLIBE@mts.ucs.ualberta.ca)
God Save the Queen, God Bless us All! Remember! Jesus Saves!!
Treaty of Maastricht, synonymous with the Key to Armageddon.
Xref: sparky can.general:4371 can.politics:6575 soc.culture.canada:6397
From: audetf@Software.Mitel.COM (Francois Audet)
Newsgroups: can.general,can.politics,soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: Lower and upper Canadas
Date: 8 Sep 92 14:14:28 GMT
Organization: Mitel. Kanata (Ontario). Canada.

In article (Steve Potter) writes:
>Didn't "New France" become "Quebec" in 1759/1760 after France abandoned
>it, under Montcalm, to General Wolfe?

No.

PS: It wasn't "abandoned"; it was conquered and invaded.

-- 
                                                       Francois Audet
                                                           '
        Telephone: (613) 592-2121 x1754     Facsimile: (613) 592-4784
                          Internet: Francois.Audet@software.Mitel.COM
Xref: sparky can.general:4427 can.politics:6695 soc.culture.canada:6487
From: beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca (Denis Beauregard)
Newsgroups: can.general,can.politics,soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: How about some polling?
Date: 11 Sep 92 12:47:27 GMT
Organization: Institut de recherche d'Hydro-Quebec, Varennes, Canada

In article <7JVVqB3w165w@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca> yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca (Dave Shariff Yadallee) writes:
>An idea:  Gallup, Reid and others polls the population on contemporary issues.
>Why not us as Canadians do some polling of our own.  Anyone can do it.
>If we want, a separate newsgroup for this discussion.
>a proposal to think about.
>
>Dave Shariff Yadallee (yadallee@ersys.edmonton.ab.ca,
>userLIBE@mts.ucs.ualberta.ca)

Source : le groupe soc.culture.french fait un sondage sur Maastricht.

Contre : sondage non representatif.  Exprimer pourquoi on est pour ou contre
est preferable.

Source : see soc.culture.french (survey about Maastricht)

Against : survey is not representative.  Saying why one if pro or contra
is better

-- 
  \_\    Denis Beauregard  *  internet:beaurega@ireq.hydro.qc.ca
 /   \   Genealogiste officiel : Beauregard/Jarret/Jarest/Vincent
J   __>  Un Quebec renouvele dans une Amerique renovee
\_.-===                                                  Opinions ? Et pis non !
Newsgroups: can.general,soc.culture.canada
From: merce@xenitec.on.ca (Jim Mercer)
Subject: Re: Justifications for owning guns?
Organization: XeniTec Consulting, Kitchener, Ontario, CANADA
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1992 14:34:46 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.023007.24210@csi.uottawa.ca> cbbrowne@csi.uottawa.ca (Christopher Browne) writes:
>In article <1992Sep07.205612.7601@xenitec.on.ca> merce@xenitec.on.ca (Jim Mercer) writes:
>>hand grenades would fall into the same category, there is no justification,
>>historical or otherwise, for private ownership of high explosives.
>>
>NO justification?  In Canada?  I'll bet that there's more private use of
>HE in Canada than there is in any other country in the world.  I roomed
>with a family in which the husband (who was certainly NOT working for the
>government, other than the 60-70% of his income that eventually went to
>various gov't agencies...) had considerable quantities of explosive-related
>materials.

someone who uses HE for business reasons would not really be "private
ownership".  i'm talking about people going out and buying HE for
entertainment/hobby type uses.  legitimately.

-- 
[ Jim Mercer   Reptilian Research  merce@iguana.reptiles.org  +1 519 893-6085 ]
[             I don't want to work for a company that has a CIO.              ]
[              Disclaimer! I don't need no stinking Disclaimer!               ]
Newsgroups: can.general,can.politics,soc.culture.canada
From: nadeau@bnr.ca (Rheal Nadeau)
Subject: Re: Lower and upper Canadas
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd., Ottawa, Canada
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 21:34:28 GMT

In article <12800@audetf> audetf@Software.Mitel.COM (Francois Audet) writes:
>In article (Steve Potter) writes:
>>Didn't "New France" become "Quebec" in 1759/1760 after France abandoned
>>it, under Montcalm, to General Wolfe?
>
>No.
>
>PS: It wasn't "abandoned"; it was conquered and invaded.

Aye, time for a history lesson (from someone who has no busines giving
history lessons.  What year did Champlain settle in Quebec?  Uh, 1908?
:-) )

While much is made of the battle of the Plains of Abraham in Canadian
history, this was a mere skirmish in the war between Napoleonic France
and England.  (The colonies, at that time, were considered minor
possessions.)  This war was resolved, of course, at Waterloo.  (It had
to be resolved again later, of course; that's the way history works.)

One of the conditions of capitulation, for Napoleon, involved his
ceding to England one of France's colonies:  Canada, or St. Pierre &
Miquelon.  Napoleon chose to keep the islands over Canada, which was
considered to be nothing more than "quelques arpents de neige"
(Voltaire).

The idea that Quebec was invaded supposes that Quebec existed as an
independent entity - it didn't.  Quebec fell into English possession
not at the Plains of Abraham, but on the battlefields and negociation
tables of Europe.  (And, if I remember my history correctly, the
British victory at the Plains of Abraham was short-lived, since they
were later defeated in another battle with the French, leaving France
still in control of Nouvelle-France.)

Heck, if Napoleon hadn't over-extended himself in Europe, and had been
able to hang on to the French colonies in North America (from Quebec to
New Orleans, including much of Ontario and the prairies), we'd have a
very different world today - who is to say which language, if any,
would now dominate here:  English, French, or Spanish?  But then, if
Napoleon hadn't tried to invade Russia, Tolstoy wouldn't have been able
to write "War and Peace"; he'd have had to stick to a less ambitious
work, "and Peace".  :-)

Really, "what-if" games lead us only to absurdity.  We must deal with
the world as it is today, not as we imagine it to have been in years
gone by.

The Rhealist - Rheal Nadeau - nadeau@bnr.ca - Speaking only for myself
Newsgroups: can.general,soc.culture.canada
From: jdnicoll@watyew.uwaterloo.ca (James Davis Nicoll)
Subject: Re: Justifications for owning guns?
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 14:50:55 GMT

In article <1992Sep07.210058.7796@xenitec.on.ca> merce@xenitec.on.ca (Jim Mercer) writes:
>
>guns are designed for launching a projectile.
>
>guns are restricted.
>
>a friend pointed this out to me:
>
>banning guns will probably have the same effect as the illegality of street
>drugs as far as crime.
>
>NIL.
>

	Actually, the illegality of drugs increases  crime: in a  black market,
the price/mass is higher, justifying (in  some cases) the financial outlay
needed to produce and distribute the chemical in question. 

	Also, banning a formerly legal drug (Like caffiene, for example)
moves all of the users  from the class of law abiding drug users  to  the
class  of law-breaking drug users,although whether they remain  criminals
is up to them...

								James Nicoll

	I  would  cheerfully gun down anyone who tried  to get between me
and  my morning cup of caffiene...
Newsgroups: can.general
From: cmartin@kean.ucs.mun.ca
Subject: Applicants for seminar to Indonesia
Organization: Memorial University. St.John's Nfld, Canada
Date: Sat, 12 Sep 1992 16:56:17 GMT

	Faculty and student applicants are now being sought for the annual
World University Service of Canada (WUSC) International Seminar.  Every year
30 students and 3 faculty from across Canada travel to a different developing
nation.  The seminar will take place in Indonesia next June/July
for 5-6 weeks, the language of operation will be English.

	Students work on a small research project, have brief "home stays"
with local families, attend conferences, and travel throughout the country.
The goal is to introduce students with no prior experience in development
to a developing nation.  Students must be full time students at a post-
secondary institution in Canada.

	The faculty advisors must have a demonstrated understanding of 
development issues, assist the coordinator in planning and implementing
the programme and provide leadership and academic guidance to the student
participants.  If you know of any colleagues who might fit the bill, please
pass this posting onto them.

	For more information and/or an application contact:

		WUSC - Constituency Services
		P.O. Box 3000, Stn "C"
		Ottawa, Ontario
		K1Y 4M8
		Phone: 1-800-267-8699
			(613)798-7477/0832
		Fax:	(613)798-0990

Chris Martin
Memorial University of Newfoundland
Xref: sparky can.general:4345 can.politics:6530 soc.culture.canada:6357
From: steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter)
Newsgroups: can.general,can.politics,soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: Election sun rising
Date: 7 Sep 92 12:49:33 GMT
Organization: Securiplex Technologies Inc., Montreal, Canada
X-Bytes: 1267

From article <1992Sep5.194350.27076@ee.ubc.ca>, by jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca (John Paul Morrison):
> In article <1992Sep5.024437.5216@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca> golchowy@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Gerald Olchowy) writes:
>>
>>Proportional representation should also come with term limits!
> 
> And mandatory recall from parliament if voters want the MP to change
> votes, or throw the bum out!

And automatic by-elections for new mandate if the bum changes party
or policy dramatically from that for which he was elected.

  Richard Holden    (What a buffoon :-) )

  Lucien Bouchard   (betrayed his PM - should have got a new
                     mandate from his constituents right away)

  Gilbert Chartrand (who couldn't quite make up his mind and
                     crossed the floor twice)

  Clifford Lincoln  (couldn't toe party line - I agreed with
                     his reasons - but he should have sought
                     a new mandate too)

  et al


-- 
  ///==================================================================\\\
  ||| Steve Potter:         steven%spxtech@CAM.ORG                     |||
  ||| Expertise/Experience: Computer Systems Engineering / Real Ale /  |||
  |||                       Politics in Education in Quebec            |||
Xref: sparky can.general:4423 can.ai:42
From: steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter)
Newsgroups: can.general,can.ai
Subject: Robot Olympics
Date: 10 Sep 92 17:17:59 GMT
Distribution: can
Organization: Securiplex Technologies Inc., Montreal, Canada
X-Bytes: 407

Would somebody please post or email the item on the Robot Olympics
again? 

I can't find it.

Thanks.

-- 
  ///==================================================================\\\
  ||| Steve Potter:         steven%spxtech@CAM.ORG                     |||
  ||| Expertise/Experience: Computer Systems Engineering / Real Ale /  |||
  |||                       Politics in Education in Quebec            |||
Xref: sparky can.general:4416 can.politics:6657 soc.culture.canada:6460
From: steven@spxtech.qc.ca (Steve Potter)
Newsgroups: can.general,can.politics,soc.culture.canada
Subject: Re: Lower and upper Canadas
Date: 10 Sep 92 12:39:20 GMT
Organization: Securiplex Technologies Inc., Montreal, Canada
X-Bytes: 625

From article <12811@audetf>, by audetf@Software.Mitel.COM (Francois Audet):

> Nouvelle-France was lost long before the Revolution (under Louis XIV I
> think): Napoleaon wasn't even born yet.
> 
> Shouldn't this belong in can.history?

Not while people like Denis hold my kids responsible for the "British
Invasion" :-)

-- 
  ///==================================================================\\\
  ||| Steve Potter:         steven%spxtech@CAM.ORG                     |||
  ||| Expertise/Experience: Computer Systems Engineering / Real Ale /  |||
  |||                       Politics in Education in Quebec            |||
Newsgroups: can.general,soc.culture.canada
From: buckland@ucs.ubc.ca (Tony Buckland)
Subject: Justifications for owning guns?
Organization: University of B.C. Computing Services
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1992 01:11:00 GMT

In article <1992Sep3.212907.25612@ohrd.uucp> ohrd!rdowlati@cs.toronto.edu (Ramin Dowlati) writes:
>Can anybody out there really justify the sale of fire arms in this society?
>Surely, we can maintain some type of hunters association and isolate the
>fire arms within them so they don't find their way into the cities.

 Of course, you realize you're starting a war (of words) by asking
 that question?  And that most of us will follow the guiding
 principle of British generals through the generations, and
 refight the most recent war of the past?
 
 Justifications for selling - and more basically, for owning -
 fireams in our society:
 
 - it ensures that a large proportion of the population is capable
   in the use of firearms (well, that's the theory, although there
   will always be hunters who shoot cows with "COW" painted on
   them in Rescue Orange, or who shoot their own feet) in case of
   need.  Remember that it's only a few years since invasion by
   one or another totalitarian regime was a credible scenario,
   and the movie "Red Dawn" was believable if unlikely.
 
 - it ensures the existence of the ultimate check and balance in
   democratic societies, the ability of the population to rise if
   the government becomes undemocratic enough.
 
 - it ensures that the population is not totally helpless in the
   event that civic order collapses.  In Vancouver we (1) live
   in a major earthquake zone, and could in the worst case find
   ourselves with nothing between us and roving bands of looters
   except our front doors and whatever we happen to be sitting
   behind them with; and (2) have a police force that seriously
   considered a total strike some years ago.