All the bright and shiny people, or the new Order of Canada appointees

143 posts / 0 new
Last post
Slumberjack

Ahhh the free exchange of ideas.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

I think this whole thread is a waste of time.

Unionist

Arthur Cramer wrote:

I think this whole thread is a waste of time.

6079_Smith_W

Bingo?

This exchange between k and Sean aside (which I am certainly not cheering over), that assessment is not surprising when one's contribution is a can of gas and a match.

Personally I wasn't making a tally of the Order of Canada recipients, and it's not a thread I would have likely started. But to come in and start going on about how people's concerns are illegitimate? Sorry, but that did give some purpose to this thread, by my reckoning.

 

 

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Unionist wrote:

Arthur Cramer wrote:

I think this whole thread is a waste of time.

Thanks for the pic, U, it's just how I always imagined you would look. Laughing

wage zombie

Is it unreasonable the British Columbians want to be represented?

Unionist

wage zombie wrote:

Is it unreasonable the British Columbians want to be represented?

But isn't it based on merit? In which case, they've got it!

Unionist

Michael Moriarity wrote:

Thanks for the pic, U, it's just how I always imagined you would look. Laughing

Thanks, sweetie, didn't know you spent all that time fantasizing about my looks. Send me a PM and we'll talk some more.

quizzical

equity would be good. and the fkn eastern bias in this thread sucks.

Unionist

Unionist wrote:

Michael Moriarity wrote:

Thanks for the pic, U, it's just how I always imagined you would look. Laughing

Thanks, sweetie, didn't know you spent all that time fantasizing about my looks. Send me a PM and we'll talk some more.

Just for clarity: I know Michael was kidding, and I'm sure he knows I was. All is good between us!

Sean in Ottawa

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

The tax break discussion was directly related to a statement that the real issue here is not east west but about inequality over money.

That is just a ridiculous statement. We obviously have a communications problem. I think you derailed a thread about the place of the West in our federation by bringing up Mulcair and tax breaks. Your post reads like just another Central Canadian overlord telling us what is important.

So what the fuck to you think about the thread topic. Do you think the Order of Canada should be for highlighting people from all regions or the country or should it be mostly for the Toronto, Ottawa Montreal movers and shakers?

You should settle down and read the thread again. First of all I did not take a side in your debate with Unionist -- all I did was ask a question related to his post.

And not everyone has to have your opinion in order to legitimately post here.

As for your topic -- I happen to agree with the East West issues here although perhaps I am not allowed to agree with you since I am in Ottawa. I had not even disagreed with your point before you lebled me as the enemy here.

I do also agree that there is a prime division across society based on economic means -- and so I basically do subscribe to the conflict theory and largely accept the Marxian view of social interaction. This does not mean to be a contradiction with the hinterland/centre vision of Canada. In fact if you pay attention to Canadian history, these are absolutely not exclusive. I do not deny the foundations of Western anger with the centre. Although at times, in some cases, like with your little fit here, this anger goes so far overboard that you alienate those who might otherwise agree with you. Isolation can be triggered by significant grievance and then maintained by picking fights with everyone you identify comes form the wrong place. As you have demonstrated.

In any case, you really do not understand my perspective of the Canadian Federation or its history. I would also go further to say that I certainly think it is offensive to point to the upper and lower Canada rebellions and completely miss all that happened on the Red River from the record. But you taking a presumption that I am against you serves you and your argument poorly.

That said, as well-founded as regional anger due to experience of colonialism and empire building, the issue of economic divison remains universal. You really might do better to try to build alliances with those who may agree rather than presume that any opinion that does not start with yours is an argument against it. You might even shock yourself into finding that Unionist might agree with you on some points -- but you will not notice as long as you are warring over which of two correct viewpoints is the winner.

Sean in Ottawa

quizzical wrote:

equity would be good. and the fkn eastern bias in this thread sucks.

What I don't see are questions related to the process. Some obvious questions include:

1) Since the public nominates, what are the statistics for the nominations? Is the problem that the nominations are more well-known and promoted in the East?

If the nominations are proportionate then move to question 2

2) Since there is a group that reviews the nominations -- is there a bias there?How is it composed? What are the criteria?

"The Chancellery of Honours will consult with the references you provide and with experts to establish the reach and impact of a candidate’s contribution. They will present this information to the Advisory Council of the Order of Canada, which is an independent advisory body whose members reflect the diversity and excellence in Canadian society.

So rather than just complain about the result someone should be asking questions about the process to see where exactly the breakdown is happening.

For all the passion here, has anyone written a letter asking for regional statistics for nominations? Statistics regarding the groups reviewing the nominations? Efforts to promote the nomination process? Has anyone even written asking for an explanation as to what might have happened?

If people want to get angry then that's fine but if they want to do something it seems like there is some information missing that can be located as a matter of public record if asked for.

So if the issue is to look for sympathy -- sure it seems unfair. But if you want to actually do something and find out what the problem is fighting with other people for commenting in the thread is not going to help -- you start by asking questions. And you start by determining the right ones to ask. So what questions do you want to know -- and who are you going to write to? I suggest access to information and/or Western MPs. Being angry here for an injustice is not going to fix it.

Pondering

Unionist wrote:

kropotkin1951 wrote:
You seem to be willfully blind to the Central Canadian power structure that this represents.

"Central Canadian"? You mean, ON and QC? You could do a decent comedy show in Montréal with lines like that.

Quote:
Even with the third largest population in the country BC gets lumped in with the prairies as the West. Personally I think that BC is its own region.

I don't believe the "west" exists. Have that debate with the "east vs. west" proponents in this thread.

Quote:
So do I believe in dualities no. Not east/west or French/English or Quebec/ROC but I do believe that the Order of Canada should not be dominated by Central Canadian narcissism. In BC we are already under represented in the democratic institutions of our nation so I guess from your lofty perch you figure we should just not complain about being treated with distain in the symbolic ones as well.

I will happily advocate for all Order of Canada nominations to come exclusively from the "West". But if you want my real opinion? Manitoba and Saskatchewan fought against colonial domination and robbery and exploitation by the phoney federation that was cooked up by British colonialists in 1867 (who, if you recall, had crushed rebellions in Ontario and Québec). I don't recall any such resistance from Alberta or BC. Perhaps you could refer me to some of the history that I may have missed.

We should look for unity and common struggle. Not this horseshit about "regional balance". Have you analyzed the Order of Canada appointees based on race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, economic class, settler vs. Indigenous...? No? Then you forfeit any say about how BC is hard done by.

You are right that we should look for unity, but that is achieved by looking for areas of common ground not by dismissing the concerns of others. We should be looking at the list from all those perspectives. B.C. does strike me as a very different place from the prairies and the rest of the country.

Canada's population is concentrated in the center giving us a great deal of power over what happens in the entire country.

I'm not sure what I think of the Order of Canada as an institution but this is an easy give.

6079_Smith_W

@ Sean

You know, I think you have hit on it.

I have always thought the same thing about poor people - that they are going about it all wrong, and it seems all they really want to do is complain and look for sympathy.

If they were actually interested in change they would get organized, strike a committee and do the real work of finding out the cause of the problem rather than just whining.

Or just DO somehting to help themselves.Maybe they are just jealous that they aren't as successful.

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/could-budget-2015-score-an-order-...

Quote:

One unexpected line item in Tuesday’s federal budget was a $13.4 million set aside over five years for reforming Canada’s honours system – that is, the way in which Canadians are inducted into the Order of Canada and other citations.

No details about the planned reforms could be found in the budget documentation. It simply explained that the changes will bring the award “closer to all Canadians.”.

The key language might be “under-represented sectors.” Some critics believe the Order has disproportionately gone to elite artsy swells while those who do the heavy lifting of Canadian progress – business leaders, community builders – are overlooked.

...

Whatever the reason, the trend shows no signs of reversing.

Since 1967, Atlantic Canadians have taken an increasing share of Orders while the rest of the country has fallen off or remained steady.

The proportion of honours given to Quebec residents each year has declined over the past 44 years, while the share going to Ontario recipients has remained largely the same.


 

6079_Smith_W

Finally found the original article. And yes, I remember Maurice Vellacott handing out two awards to anti-choice activists who had been arrested. Just because Harper's solution was to hand the process over to MPs doesn't mean there weren't imbalances in the first place

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/could-budget-2015-mean-an-order...

Sean in Ottawa

6079_Smith_W wrote:

@ Sean

You know, I think you have hit on it.

I have always thought the same thing about poor people - that they are going about it all wrong, and it seems all they really want to do is complain and look for sympathy.

If they were actually interested in change they would get organized, strike a committee and do the real work of finding out the cause of the problem rather than just whining.

Or just DO somehting to help themselves.Maybe they are just jealous that they aren't as successful.

http://ottawacitizen.com/news/national/could-budget-2015-score-an-order-...

Quote:

One unexpected line item in Tuesday’s federal budget was a $13.4 million set aside over five years for reforming Canada’s honours system – that is, the way in which Canadians are inducted into the Order of Canada and other citations.

No details about the planned reforms could be found in the budget documentation. It simply explained that the changes will bring the award “closer to all Canadians.”.

The key language might be “under-represented sectors.” Some critics believe the Order has disproportionately gone to elite artsy swells while those who do the heavy lifting of Canadian progress – business leaders, community builders – are overlooked.

...

Whatever the reason, the trend shows no signs of reversing.

Since 1967, Atlantic Canadians have taken an increasing share of Orders while the rest of the country has fallen off or remained steady.

The proportion of honours given to Quebec residents each year has declined over the past 44 years, while the share going to Ontario recipients has remained largely the same.


 

I assume this is sarcasm rather than obtuseness. I guess it really could be either -- or both.

I wonder are you just attacking me for the fun of it or are you claiming that the people of Western Canada are all poor people who in their poverty do not have the ability to ask the questions I did and demand answers?

I agreed that something is wrong and we should be asking where the problem comes from and seek to fix it.

6079_Smith_W

It's sarcasm, specifically the "rather than just complain", "just looking for sympathy" and "if you only asked the right questions" I am making fun of.

Never mind that people have been looking at the specific problem, doing things, and asking the right questions for some time now, there actually is evidence showing a regional disparity. Funny thing is, when we deal with other social issues here, we don't usually assume that the system is working fine, and is free of systemic bias, and that all you have to do is fill out the right form. Nor do we put the onus on dealing with those problems on those who are on the receiving end of them.

As for "complain to your western MP", as you can see from my above example, putting it in their capable hands can sometimes make things worse.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

I wonder are you just attacking me for the fun of it or are you claiming that the people of Western Canada are all poor people who in their poverty do not have the ability to ask the questions I did and demand answers?

I agreed that something is wrong and we should be asking where the problem comes from and seek to fix it.

Actually what the Order of Canada highlights is the lack of clout of any kind for the Western provinces.  Even in symbolic areas we are underrepresented. The people of BC ask the questions but with no clout in Ottawa there is no democratic option available. The people of PEI get twice the representation in the H of C as urban ridings in BC.  Our federation is a mess and no one wants to change it unless it is to tweak it to suit Central Canadian interests.

Neither you nor Unionist are part of the ruling elite from the your provinces however your elites have dominated our Confederation from its inception. The fact that people living in Central Canada can be so dismissive of the identity of a large portion of the country highlights the imbalance of the BNA Act. You may not get the fact that our system has always relied on people in the West being resource extractors sending the profit to your part of the country but many of us who live in this part of the world get it.

So the Order of Canada while meaningless in most ways is symbolic of the disrespect paid to one part of the country by the elites who run our country.

Sean in Ottawa

6079_Smith_W wrote:

It's sarcasm, specifically the "rather than just complain", "just looking for sympathy" and "if you only asked the right questions" I am making fun of.

Never mind that people have been looking at the specific problem, doing things, and asking the right questions for some time now, there actually is evidence showing a regional disparity. Funny thing is, when we deal with other social issues here, we don't usually assume that the system is working fine, and is free of systemic bias, and that all you have to do is fill out the right form. Nor do we put the onus on dealing with those problems on those who are on the receiving end of them.

As for "complain to your western MP", as you can see from my above example, putting it in their capable hands can sometimes make things worse.

So you say.

So please explain why if all these questions have been asked none of that made it to the forum? Why is there no evidence of any discussion of an attempt to find the "specific cause" of the wrong and right it?

So why does it take a guy from Ottawa in the thread to ask for the conversation to go there?

The nominations are open to the public --

So why is there no identification of whether the problem is judgment of the nominations or a bias in the nominations themselves (suggesting that either people in the West are not as interested or not as aware of the nomination process.

If you want the on-topic discussion then identifying if the problem is in the public nomination process or the more private review process is a necessary first step.

I see lots of anger and sarcasm but nothing by way any step to look at the process other than griping about the problem -- which we can see is a very real one. But real problems deserve more than griping.

When people care about something they seek solutions. Where do we see evidence of that in this thread?

So any of the people who claim to give a shit -- why don't they report to this thread -- which already has a boatload of posts on exactly what people have found "looking into the specific problem" what things they have been "doing" and what "right questions" they have been asking? Otherwise is it possible that you are just attacking me for actually doing what this forum is supposed to do and examine the problem?

I agree that there is evidence of regional disparity -- that is self evident and the opening post supports that. It also seems that the problem is severe. We also recognize that it goes in the context of the West being shortchanged. But that is not good enough. You go form there to specifics.

So get off your high horse of sarcasm and report on all the stuff you allege has been done, said and asked. Then we can have a conversation that goes beyond complaint. When people claim to care about a problem looking at a wall of complaint with no development of any substance what was laid out in the opening post is not productive.

I am agreeing with the opening post -- something is wrong. I don't need your sarcasm. But the examination has not been developed beyond that. We have lots of handwringing about off-topic posts. What we really have here are almost no on-topic posts that go beyond the initial complaint. If you think the initial complaint was valid you should also respect it with a desire to support an investigation into the details. Instead you offer your desire to complain and level sarcasm against the only person so far in the thread that sought to find out what happened.

So is it public relations, awareness and advertising that is tilted East such that the nominations are not coming from the West or are Western nominations being discarded disproportioantely?

Since it is a public open process there is clearly a starting place -- either there are a proportionate number of nominations coming from the public or not.

So since you seem to claim to be the sarcastic expert-- answer the question.

Sean in Ottawa

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

I wonder are you just attacking me for the fun of it or are you claiming that the people of Western Canada are all poor people who in their poverty do not have the ability to ask the questions I did and demand answers?

I agreed that something is wrong and we should be asking where the problem comes from and seek to fix it.

Actually what the Order of Canada highlights is the lack of clout of any kind for the Western provinces.  Even in symbolic areas we are underrepresented. The people of BC ask the questions but with no clout in Ottawa there is no democratic option available. The people of PEI get twice the representation in the H of C as urban ridings in BC.  Our federation is a mess and no one wants to change it unless it is to tweak it to suit Central Canadian interests.

Neither you nor Unionist are part of the ruling elite from the your provinces however your elites have dominated our Confederation from its inception. The fact that people living in Central Canada can be so dismissive of the identity of a large portion of the country highlights the imbalance of the BNA Act. You may not get the fact that our system has always relied on people in the West being resource extractors sending the profit to your part of the country but many of us who live in this part of the world get it.

So the Order of Canada while meaningless in most ways is symbolic of the disrespect paid to one part of the country by the elites who run our country.

Since the nomination process is public -- are you interested in my question: Is it a lack of proportionate nominations or a bias in reading the nominations?

You can see easily that depending on the answer to that question you would have a different prescription for moving forward.

Or something else -- If there is a problem with criteria -- what is that? I did not find any criteria on the website and it seems wide open. If it is biased -- then how?

https://www.gg.ca/document.aspx?id=14940&lan=eng

Or are we not really trying to explore the source of the problem?

 

Rev Pesky

Well, I'm from BC, born and bred. Lived here all my life, which is sneaking on up towards 70 years, and I agree completely with Unionist on this. To begin with, who really gives a shit about the order of Canada? It's doled out by the crown, which should automatically remove it from consideration by leftists. The fact that some who call themselves left appear to feel slighted by the way the order is awarded tells me a lot more about the state of the left than about the state of east/west relations in this country.

And of course the whole east/west thing is utterly ridiculous. If the left aspires to unite workers around the world, surely one would expect them to be able to unite workers within a single country!!!! After all, if east/west in Canada is a colonial issue, how much more is the colonial issue between Canada and Africa, say?

Of course those who feel suppressed by the Ottawa colonizers could always unite with the remnants of the Reform party. That's where you'll find your intellectual soul-mates, if not your intellectual equals...

6079_Smith_W

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

So get off your high horse of sarcasm and report on all the stuff you allege has been done, said and asked.

I just did in my last couple of posts, Sean.

A newspaper study found that yes, since 1967 there has been a growing regional disparity. There have been complaints, and that the federal government has done something about it (though like most of Stephen Harper's solutions, it is questionable as to whether it is likely to make anything better).

And I did it without making an observation about whether easterners just complain and don't check stuff.

You know, I don't take issue with your recommendations about going through the proper channels (which is fine, if uncharacteristically naive), but rather the assumption that people here haven't done anything about it, and that their motive is just is to complain and get sympathy.

 

 

6079_Smith_W

Rev's got the right solution; if you voice a concern that isn't one of the priorities of the united workers' front you're a dumb Reformer.

I guess we're all done here, eh?

Sean in Ottawa

Rev Pesky wrote:

Well, I'm from BC, born and bred. Lived here all my life, which is sneaking on up towards 70 years, and I agree completely with Unionist on this. To begin with, who really gives a shit about the order of Canada? It's doled out by the crown, which should automatically remove it from consideration by leftists. The fact that some who call themselves left appear to feel slighted by the way the order is awarded tells me a lot more about the state of the left than about the state of east/west relations in this country.

And of course the whole east/west thing is utterly ridiculous. If the left aspires to unite workers around the world, surely one would expect them to be able to unite workers within a single country!!!! After all, if east/west in Canada is a colonial issue, how much more is the colonial issue between Canada and Africa, say?

Of course those who feel suppressed by the Ottawa colonizers could always unite with the remnants of the Reform party. That's where you'll find your intellectual soul-mates, if not your intellectual equals...

Interesting -- makes me want an asnwer to my question even more-- perhaps people in the West just don't care for and therefore do not nominate to the Order of Canada as much.

Now I am not saying this is conclusive -- and it is not. But at the least -- should we not know how many nominations were received for Western Canadians? If the number is low then perhaps the issue is promotion and not some biased group of Easterners saying "no" to Western entries.

When I think someone should be recognized I typically think of something else. But I am also not a royalist and don't think of the trappings of royal awards. Maybe this is part of the division? Maybe not but if people care about this -- why so little conversation on the substance?

wage zombie

There's so little conversation on the substance because most of the conversation is about whether westerners are justified in wanting fair representation.

Unionist

The 2011 survey conducted by the Ottawa Citizen for all years from 1967 to that date clearly showed that the Atlantic provinces have a huge and growing representation compared with western provinces - while "the proportion of honours given to Quebec residents each year has declined over the past 44 years". Ontario remained largely the same.

Clearly, the ruling elites of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, PEI, and Newfoundland and Labrador have been wielding their clout to the detriment of the rest of the country.

If the coveted Order has become so biased and inequitable... can Peace and Good Government be far behind?

"Merit" sounds great, but how fair is it really, when the Irving family has been ruling the roost for so many decades?

It's all well and good to say people should be nominating more of their own... but what if years of neglect have turned hope to despair?

To repair the historical injustice, is there a need for an Affirmative Action program - say, a moratorium on Atlantic Canada, and perhaps a partial moratorium on awards to Ontarians - for a defined number of years? Perhaps a connection with transfer and equalization payments? Or an asymmetric awarding formula?

I'm just raising some ideas, based on the evidence to date - not wedded to any particular one.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
You know, I don't take issue with your recommendations about going through the proper channels (which is fine, if uncharacteristically naive), but rather the assumption that people here haven't done anything about it, and that their motive is just is to complain and get sympathy.

In SiO's defence, I don't think he's suggesting that anyone who's displeased needs to fill out an official Umbrage Form in triplicate, so much as suggesting that the first step in unpacking this might be to try to find out where the bias, if there is one, is located.

Are you saying that folk have already done that?  What was the result?

I don't think it's an unfair suggestion.  Just settling for "well the whole thing is clearly corrupt, based on the numbers" is somewhat lazy, yes?

Slumberjack

Unionist wrote:
East versus West? What a stupid concept and thread. Just thought I'd say how I really felt about this childish waste of time.

Yup.  Sack of hammers stupid.

quizzical

yup just as sack of hammers stupid as anarchy beliefs or denying central Canadian  centrism.

Sean in Ottawa

wage zombie wrote:

There's so little conversation on the substance because most of the conversation is about whether westerners are justified in wanting fair representation.

Right, so when someone agrees with you and tries to explore the cause Western folks piss on him becuase is was from Ottawa.

How to win friends and influence people.

I really don't care much for this kind of award but I was interested in an unfairness and wanted to explore the cause to see what it was -- only to find just about no interest from the people who were complaining -- just sarcasm.

 

6079_Smith_W

Hey Magoo, I said pretty clearly (in the quote you pulled, as a matter of fact) I don't have a problem with suggestions about using official channels. I also said pretty clearly  in that same quote what I did take issue with.

And speaking of complaining without actually doing anything about it, is it really my responsibility to provide answers to questions that I have repeated once already?

6079_Smith_W

And at least someone agrees that this kind of squabble over viceregal trappings is beneath us:

Quote:

I learned long ago that honours do not make a man, any more than the withdrawal of honours unmakes one.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/conrad-black/conrad-black-order-of-canada_b...

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Okay.  So you take exception to the assumption that people haven't done anything, and/or that their motive is to complain.

What do you feel they've done?  And what do you feel their real motive is?

Quote:
is it really my responsibility to provide answers to questions that I have repeated once already?

I'm not looking to be quarrelsome, but could you repeat them a third time, and plainly?  Because I just went over this thread from the beginning, and I'm honestly not seeing where you identified the source of the bias in this, unless it was just implied by the suggestion that the east has been doing the west wrong since the 19th century, and I know you know that doesn't cut it.

6079_Smith_W

*sigh*

Fine. For the fourth time, I have no problem with Sean's suggestion to go through official channels. And if you read the first article linked to in this thread, it mentions that no clear source has been identified. 

But really, if the problem is an imbalance, one can stall until doomsday and do nothing but ask why, or one can take the much simpler step of trying to correct that imbalance.

And really, my point was that people's complaints have been both noticed, and acted on, even if we haven't seen results yet.

 

 

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
But really, if the problem is an imbalance, one can bother until doomsday about why, or one can take the much simpler step of, if not a quota, at least trying to change the numbers.

Why would you feel the need to "change the numbers" without the knowing why?

As an example, so-called "men's rights organizations" love to point out that there's a statistical discrepancy between the number of women given sole custody of children, and the number of men given sole custody of children.

To them, the numbers are everything.  We all know that exactly half of all parents are women and the other half are men, and so to them, if sole custody isn't a 50/50 split then clearly "the fix is in".

But others have pointed out that there are reasons independent of a biased family court system that can help explain this.

But they just want to fix the numbers.

Is "the fix in" with regard to the Order of Canada?  Do we want to know, or do we just want to make sure that the math checks out?

6079_Smith_W

No. Of course we wouldn't want to change anything without a complete study. By all means keep bothering about it until doomsday if necessary.

Just changing the numbers is far too simple; we wouldn't want to discriminate, after all.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
No. Of course we wouldn't want to change anything without a complete study.

Without looking into where the problem really lies, what do you propose we should change?

It makes no sense to say "let's not change the PROCESS, let's just change the OUTCOME.

6079_Smith_W

Well, if they can't figure it out, then until they get their shit together I don't have a problem with a quota system, by provincial population. Can't be worse than the way things are trending right now, and if it leaves good candidates out well maybe it might be some real impetus to do something about it.

 

quizzical

maybe we can get a grant for a feasability study?

on a serious note as  Smith said quotas per pop would be a start if we wanted to keep this nonsense going of awards for best Prime Minister photographer, dance troup teacher or joy of joys  best capitalist.

 

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Quote:
Well, if they can't figure it out, then until they get their shit together I don't have a problem with a quota system, by provincial population.

We could try that.  But if BC, with about 13% of the population, gets about one eighth of the Orders of Canada, I don't think I'll have any energy left to hear about how almost all of those are from Vancouver and Victoria ("Does Northern BC not even EXIST??") or that 70% of them are male ("Hello!!  50.1% of BC here!!!") or how many were Native, had disabilities, identified as Queer or whatever.

Will you join me in saying "enough is enough", or will we need to go all Zeno's Paradox on this?

Sean in Ottawa

6079_Smith_W wrote:

Well, if they can't figure it out, then until they get their shit together I don't have a problem with a quota system, by provincial population. Can't be worse than the way things are trending right now, and if it leaves good candidates out well maybe it might be some real impetus to do something about it.

 

No need for a study -- why not just try fix it?

If the nominations are too few then promote it more in the West. And do a quota system. If the nominations are balanced already the quota will fix it, if the nominations are not proportionate then you need to do both.

 

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Unionist wrote:

The 2011 survey conducted by the Ottawa Citizen for all years from 1967 to that date clearly showed that the Atlantic provinces have a huge and growing representation compared with western provinces - while "the proportion of honours given to Quebec residents each year has declined over the past 44 years". Ontario remained largely the same.

My apologies. I didn't understand that. Obviously it is the Canadian way for the Maritimes to be over represented in our democratic bodies so of course it makes sense for the Order of Canada as well. Anyone who thinks that the Maritimes is over represented is a Reform supporter. The working class people of PEI with their long tradition of labour activism deserve the extra accolades. Hell are there even unions in BC what with it being Reform country and all?  I suspect you need to look to the Maritimes for the proud labour tradition that us Westerners can only imagine.

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

Not to be nosey, but who did you nominate (only to see them once again passed by in favour of Stan of Green Gables)?

Unionist

Overthrow the Atlantic Canadian Overlords! We shall overcome! Free at last!

Mr. Magoo Mr. Magoo's picture

It might sound easy, but I bet they've got a great Navy.

Unionist

Mr. Magoo wrote:

It might sound easy, but I bet they've got a great Navy.

True. But the Prairies anticipated that by arranging to be largely landlocked. Hudson's Bay could be a problem.

Sean in Ottawa

Unionist wrote:

Mr. Magoo wrote:

It might sound easy, but I bet they've got a great Navy.

True. But the Prairies anticipated that by arranging to be largely landlocked. Hudson's Bay could be a problem.

Well Ontario/Quebec has an Air Farce.

Slumberjack

Yeah but we're pretty good with filleting knives.  And everyone has a club, mainly for the seals at present but you just never know.

Slumberjack

I'd be in favour of confiscating the orders of Canada from easterners and handing them over so that westerners can shove them up their asses if it meant we no longer had to witness posters being led down the garden path by a troll.

6079_Smith_W

Though speaking of not having people to recommend for the order, it's hard to have artists to recommend if you can't hear them:

Quote:

By now you will know that a few people in CBC Toronto are about to completely obliterate CBC Radio’s live music recording program across the Prairies and in Newfoundland. This is not just about Harper and his cutbacks. This is also about CBC Toronto deeming our prairie musicians and music events unworthy of regular recordings and historical archiving. It is about the journalism side of CBC being favoured disproportionately over the arts side of CBC’s mandate.

http://brendabaker.com/_w/letter-to-q/

I found out about this a few years ago, at the time it was happening, from a friend at Radio Canada. I simply could not believe they would do something like this. What is a network if you can't leave the studio?

Pages