All On Syphon Filter

It looks like you fellas have a new Prime Minister over there, Stephen Harper. I suppose after a party has been in power for 13 years people get a little worried. I should know, the Liberal Party has been in power for just under 10 years in Australia as well and people are starting to get worried over here. And what's this I here about Stephen Harper being a radical social conservative (which he denies), come on locals I need a sit rep.

Wow, you're well informed about politics of foreign countries... I don't even know who's the PM of Australia!

You're right, Stephen Harper just got elected as our new PM. A lot of people are afraid of him, because they compare his policies to those of G.W. Bush. But he's far from there in fact. This is only a fear campaign. Conservatives have been in power in Canada before, and they haven't created a new USA.
He is said to be against abortion and gay marriage, which is true. But he won't change anything to the Human Rights here during is next mandate, that's for sure. I don't agree with a lot of their fondemental ideas, but his election program had some very good points. Way better than the Liberal platform IMO.
Besides, the Harper government is a minority government. I think you too in Australia live in a parliamentary system, so you must know what I'm talking about.
We've had two minority governments for one after the other for the first time since like 40 years. I just hope this one will last longer than the previous government. We need a little rest before another election!

Politics is really not my thing, I don't care as long I'm happy with the government.

Yeah politics is my main interest in life (besides gaming of course), I could tell you almost everything about the political system of any western country and most of the others. I will probably end up being a Senator or Member of Parliament in Australia when I'm older (about 10 years from now).

By the way, how often does Canada have federal elections because Down Under it's 3 years and the government is trying to change it to 4 years and as usual everyone getting involved.

Oh yeah, John Howard is the PM of Australia. You know the old, short, going bald guy with glasses, that’s him (it’s now part of Australian culture to pay out the PM in a light hearted way).

Are elections in Australia held at fixed dates, like in the US?

Here in Canada, a mandate cannot exceed 5 years. But we will normaly have a federal election every 4 year. However, with minority governments, it can be a lot shorter, like it has been the case lately.

No, the PM has the power to call an election at any time around the end of his term (usually up to about 3 months either before or after his term is finished). The current PM has a tendency to abuse this power and sometimes call the federal election when it's to his advantage, just like he did in 2001.

I'll explain; from 1999 there was an influx of illegal immigrants from South East Asia arriving on the west coast in small boats. In 2001 a shipping vessel called the Tampa from Norway on their way to Australia found one of these boats sinking 300km (186 miles) off the west coast with about 40 people on board, so they saved all of them and continued on their way to Australia.

Now there are many Aussies who are racist and/or xenophobic, it’s been estimated at about 30% of the population. The PM knows this and when he found out what the Tampa did and where they were going (via the Navy’s spynet that covers the north and west coast) he declared that he was not going to let the Tampa into ‘our’ country by saying these now famous words “We will decide who comes to our country”. Three weeks later he called an election and won it easily. That episode in our history is now referred to as the ‘Tampa crisis’ because it raised the issue of our intolerance.

That's what they do each time here! Normalle, the PM called the election when he wants too, except when it's a minority government situation. The principal is that any government must always have the confident of the Chamber. If a law is voted against by the deputies, it means the Chamber has lost confidence in the cabinet. In most governments, that have a majority of deputies, that's not an issue at all. But when the opposition have more deputies, then it means trouble. Since we're not used to minority governments, our political culture isn't used to coalitions between parties. In countries like France that live in a proportionnal system, coalitions are part of the political data, because they have no other choice. But here, the life of a minority government is usually really short because an alliance will never last between two parties and sooner or later the government will lost the confidence of the Chamber.

Besides, we live in a particular situation here in Canada, caused by the existence of a party that will never take power. This party is known as the Bloc Québécois. As it's name implied, it's related to the province of Quebec (in which I live). As you know (I guess), Canada is a bilingual country, but the ratio isn't equal (about 70% English and 30% French). Most of the French people live in Quebec. There has been a separatist movement that was born during the '70s that wants to make an independant country out of our province (that's funny, because this is related to Syphon Filter, if you heard about that story...). Anyway, so that movement is still alive and pretty strong. They even have their own party to represent them on the federal government since 1993. And this party has had a lot of success in the last two elections. The thing is, since they only have deputies from Quebec, they can not (and they're not seeking it anyway) be in power. I'll skip their arguments for justifying their presence despite that fact. But in the end, when the Bloc Québécois is very popular and gets many deputies elected, it makes the election of a majority government harder, because they obviously take away votes from the other parties. Then, unless one party is very popular (like the Liberals were in the last decade), a minority government is likely to get elected. And it's exactly what is happening right now. The Liberals have been falling in polls for the last 2 years because of many scandals and now people in Canada are divided. And I truly hope something will change, because I don't feel like going into an election each 2 years!

Anyway, that was a quick overview of the political situation here!

We have a similar situation here in Australia, but we have two political parties that will never take power. The Greens (environmentalists) and the Democrats (neutral party with good intentions), the Greens only have two Senators and no MP’s (Member of Parliament) and the Democrats have about five seats in each chamber, so they don’t have much influence at all.

Now I’m not sure if you know this, the current government of Australia is actually a coalition of two different parties, The Liberals (conservative big city bankers, lawyers, etc, etc) and the Nationals (mainly traditional people from small outback towns). The Liberals make up about 80% of the coalition and this coalition has been in effect since the 70’s so everyone is used to it now.

The main opposition party is Labour (Trade unions and factions) and they have been in opposition for almost ten years now. The next election should be interesting mainly because of our involvement in the Iraq war, but there are many other issues like industrial relations reform, healthcare and as you know Australia is an extremely large country with a small population (remember there is only 20 million of us, unlike say Japan who has 20 million in and around Tokyo City alone) so the state of the roadway network is always an issue because too many people die on our roads every year, just yesterday a family died in another highway accident.

So that’s the political landscape of Australia right now, an election is due sometime around the end of this year and I’m looking forward to it (I always do).

By the way, the Commonwealth Games start sometime soon in Melbourne, Australia. And there is something that has always intrigued me about Canada, you blokes are still a member of the Commonwealth. I could never understand this because of the history between the UK and France over the last 1000 years, I guess every time Canada has a referendum on this it has always voted 70% against and 30% for full independence.

We had a referendum on full independence in 1999, the end vote was about 65% for the Monarchy and 35% for independence. Most people who voted for the Monarchy just didn’t like the model of independence put forward, including me (it was a bad model, somewhat similar to the U.S.A.).

I’m hoping you can give me some insight into why Canada is still a member of the Commonwealth (I think it’s great by the way, but I assume you probably don’t).

We also have a Green Party in Canada, and it probably will never form a government. They haven't managed to have one deputy elected yet.
But still, in theory they could take power because they have a candidate in each county. The thing about the Bloc Québécois is that even if all their deputies were elected, they would be enough to form the government.
Finally there's a forth party, the NDP (New Democratic Party) which is more of left party. It had about 30 deputies elected in the last elections but they probably won't win an election before a long time.

Yes, Canada is part of the Commonwealth and it will probably be forever. Don't forget that French actually represent a small proportion of the total population. Most English Canadians were at the beginning loyalists who fled from the US during the Independance War. So the population still has a great attachment to England.

I'd love to join the debate, but Belgium is worldwide kown for being extremely complicated.....

(65%? I tought that in the UK, the majority was favorable to the fall of monarchy)

Yeah, I know all about attachments to England, there is a huge Monarchy movement in Australia (and an independence movement). After all, Australia is the only Colony that went to plan for the old English Empire. We never had a civil war or anything like that, the old Empire basically wrote our constitution when they gave us sovereignty in 1901 and the Queen of England is still our official Head of State.

There is one good aspect of all this though, Australia is one of the few countries around the world that started their existence with a vote instead of a war (something which we are very proud of).

Dr_Maricon,

How come Belgium is so complicated? It can’t be that bad mate, I know for a fact that Belgium makes high-quality beer so that should help uncomplicated things, it certainly does in Australia.

Yes you are right about the population of the UK in favour of abolishing the Monarchy. There was a lot of talk about this during and after the referendum in 1999, especially after we voted to retain the Monarchy because it costs an immense amount of money and time to hold a referendum so we most likely won’t be having another one for 20 years or so. By that time the UK might have elected to remove the Queen and the Monarchy from their constitution, leaving Australia as one of the only Monarchist country left.

Canada was born the same way Australia was: from a law voted at the British Parliament in 1867. But that didn't give us a complete independance. We were still dependant of Mother England for our international relations. For instance, when WWI broke out, Canada did not have to declare war. When England did, we were at war too. We couldn't say a word about it.
In 1931, Canada got its full independance. At WWII, we didn't not declare war to Germany at the same time as England.
Since then, although the Queen of England is still the official leader of our country, she has no power at all. The General Governer (the Queen's representative in Canada) only has symbolic powers.

Very much like Australia. There is still widespread anger and resentment over the fact that we wanted nothing to do with WWI (the Australian state was only about 10 years into it’s existence), but the Empire would have none of that. No, they decided that we had to sacrifice ourselves for the Mother country on the other side of the World.
If you ever get the chance, you should sit down and watch a movie called Gallipoli (one of Mel Gibson’s first movies), that will show you what the consequences of the Empires decision were.

Our Governor General just visits schools and hospitals most of the time, every now and then he has something official to do, for example yesterday he swore in the Parliamentary Cabinet for the new year. It’s really stupid now because the PM nominates someone to be the Governor General instead of the Queen, when that person becomes the Governor General they then have the power to dismiss the PM and his Government for whatever reason he sees as necessary.

It has only ever happened once, on the 11th of November 1975, the Governor General at the time Sir John Kerr dismissed the PM Gough Whitlam and his Cabinet for bad finance management (the PM spent about 300 million dollars that we didn’t have).
The PM Gough Whitlam walked out of Parliament just after he was dismissed and said these now very famous words to the waiting media “God may save the Queen, but he will never save the Governor General”

Well, first of all, the king has absolutely no power. But he can still refuse a law at the last moment, even if he has never used it.... (in 1999, he symbolicaly dissmissed for 3 days the time that the prince sign the law because he was completely against it)

Then, the most important man is Guy Verhostad, the Prime Minister.

After that, the government is globaly divided on two levels, the communautary level, the regions level. Wich are themselves divided between the northern part (were poeple speak that awful dutch - "La Flandre") and the southtern part (were i am "La Wallonie").

Now that's were things get complicated... all those government got to cooperate, but for Wallonie, it's the socialists who are in power, while you got a right party with the Flammands. For the french community, there is the christians (who have actualy nothing to do with religion...), and i forget about the dutch community.

That system is very efficient but is incredibly slow and there's always compromises when something is decided...


This is an inacurate simplified schema....

Mate, that does sound complicated. And I had no idea you guys had a King, I suppose you do learn something every day.

Another Question: Is Belgium a full member of the EU with the Euro currency and everything that goes along with it?

Yes, and i would even say that belgium was, with the luxembourg and the nederlands, the embryo of today's europe; and most of the european institutions are based in brussels : the european council, the ministers council, the european commision, and the european parliament for "informal" meetings (most of the time, it take place in strasbourg).

Ok, so Belgium was one of the countries that initiated the EU and now has an important role to play in the EU. I didn’t know that either.

I have most likely got more political questions in the back of my mind, but I think we’ve had enough of politics, for now. I didn’t think this topic was going to be so expansive, well I guess politics usually are.

Yesterday (11th of September 2007) Canada’s Prime Minister Stephen Harper addressed the Australian parliament, this was the first time that a Canadian PM has addressed the Australian parliament. I don’t know much about his polices, but it seems like Stephen Harper is an excellent PM, his speech to the Australian parliament was outstanding. For me, it was almost an enlightening moment, which is a refreshing change from the usual bickering that we get from the Aussie parliament.

Harper took this opportunity very seriously, he wasn’t talking crap (unlike the US President did a couple of years ago), I tried but failed to find a video of his address because you could see just how serious his tone of voice was during this speech, so instead here is a transcript of what he had to say:


11th of September 2007.
CANBERRA, AUSTRALIA.

The Honourable David Hawker, Speaker of the House;

The Honourable Alan Ferguson, President of the Senate;

The Honourable John Howard, Prime Minister;

The Honourable Kevin Rudd, Leader of the Opposition;

Distinguished Representatives and Senators of the Parliament of Australia;

Ladies and gentlemen:

Mr. Speaker: It is an honour and a privilege for me to be the first Prime Minister to address your Parliament on behalf of the people of Canada.

Laureen and I have been utterly and completely charmed by the warm Australian hospitality we have encountered every step of the way on this, our first visit together to your wonderful country.

Thank you for all your kindness.

I'd like to begin by congratulating the Government and people of Australia on hosting such a successful APEC Summit.

In particular, the progress made toward forging a new international consensus on energy and environmental policy is a credit to the unity and good will of all APEC members and, especially, to the chairmanship and leadership of Australia.

I am very pleased to have this opportunity to reciprocate Prime Minister Howard's visit to Canada last year.

His address to a joint session of our Parliament was a warm and eloquent tribute to the deep friendship between our nations.

I believe that the warmth and closeness of our relationship today is a remarkable thing.

For it was not born of proximity or necessity.

We started at opposite ends of the earth. Our dreams guided by the North Star, yours by the Southern Cross.

Australia was born in English, Canada in French – at Quebec City four hundred years ago next year – reflected to this day by the presence of Francophones and the "Quebecois nation" within our united country.

But even after Canada came under the British Crown, for centuries our countries doggedly pursued their own destinies.

Ultimately, it was through our shared values that we discovered our true kinship.

The epic struggles of the twentieth century – against imperialism, fascism and communism – pitted us against the common enemies that threatened our greater civilization.

Though our troops rarely fought on the same battlefield, Canadians and Australians fought for the same ideals.

And, of course, in the First World War, the spark of our national identities was lit: Ours at Vimy Ridge, yours at Gallipoli.

In these great national tests and those ever since, our familial bonds have been renewed and strengthened.

We have become like cousins – "strategic cousins" in the words of your military historian John Blaxland.

Today, despite the vast distance between us, Canada and Australia follow remarkably similar paths.

We have built on the enduring strengths which we inherited from our European ancestors,

Added the common experience of multicultural, immigrant nations,

And sought to achieve reconciliation with our first peoples.

Of course, Canada and Australia have also both borrowed and adapted the traditions and institutions of British government and American federalism.

I can't help but notice, however, that you have done a much better job than us with at least one of our Westminster institutions, the Upper House.

As one Canadian political scientist I know likes to say, when we look at Australia, we suffer from "Senate envy."

Because in Canada, Senators remain appointed, not elected.

They don't have to retire until age 75, and may warm their seats for as long as 45 years.

By the nature of the system, they're not accountable to voters.

So it's a rare pleasure for me to be among Senators who are actually elected by the people they represent.

The mandate to govern, when it is given to you directly by the people, is a great honour and a great responsibility.

It's the very essence of responsible government, and it is the minimum condition of 21st century democracy.

Australia's Senate shows how a reformed Upper House can function in our parliamentary system.

And Canadians understand that our Senate, as it stands today, must either change or, like the old Upper Houses of our provinces, vanish.

But Canada and Australia can not only learn from one another, we have much to offer others.

We are stable, prosperous, peaceful democracies.

We are free, open, pluralistic societies.

At home, we share an overriding belief in giving all of our citizens "a fair go".

That's why we have a large and growing middle class to which hundreds of millions of people in the developing world aspire to belong.

Abroad, we are committed to free and fair trade, helping those in need and defending global security.

We have fought and sacrificed for just causes, but we have neither the capacity nor the will to conquer or to dominate.

We are fast friends of, but fiercely proud of our differences with, our other strategic cousin -- the United States.

In sum, our two countries genuinely aspire to the highest ideals of civilization, however imperfectly we achieve them.

For all these reasons, Canada and Australia are uniquely able to serve as a force for positive change in the world.

And we should commit ourselves to the service of that cause.

Together.

I do not suggest or embrace this duty lightly.

It is guided, in part, by the sombre anniversary we're marking today.

September 11, 2001, was truly a day that shook the world.

Six years on, the horrific images from that morning still evoke anger, sorrow and – as intended – terror.

The buildings may have been American, but the targets were every one of us:

every country and every person who chooses tolerance over hatred, pluralism over extremism, democracy over tyranny.

We have been struck again and again in London, Madrid, India and many other places, including, of course, Bali.

Canadians mourned your losses, and we redoubled our resolve to stand with you, because two dozen of our citizens died in New York on 9-11.

And seventy Canadian soldiers and one of our diplomats have fallen in Afghanistan – as well as a Canadian carpenter, murdered by the Taliban after he built a school for the children of a remote Afghan village.

So both our countries have been bloodied by terror.

And both of us are doing our part to confront and defeat it.

In Afghanistan and elsewhere, both our countries are committed to working together,

As Prime Minister Howard said in his address to our Parliament last year "not only for the betterment of Australia and Canada, but for the betterment of all the peoples of the world."

This cause is noble and necessary.

Because, as 9-11 showed, if we abandon our fellow human beings to lives of poverty, brutality and ignorance, in today's global village their misery will eventually and inevitably become our own.

And, friends, we should not underestimate either our capacity to influence events or to influence others,

At enormous human and financial cost, we have built solid reputations as defenders of freedom, democracy and human rights.

We've worked closely to build multilateral institutions and establish international law.

Our peacekeepers and peacemakers have saved countless millions from war and devastation.

Our aid programs and relief workers have helped poor countries across the globe improve the lives of their citizens.

And our histories have set an inspiring example.

That is symbolized by this great institution.

This Parliament, like our own, enjoys a continuous democratic tradition rarely equalled in the history of the world.

Unbroken by tyranny or conquest.

Unbroken by civil war or social disorder.

What an extraordinary achievement that is.

We were buffeted by the same forces of economic depression, social unrest and political tension that drove other countries over the brink into political authoritarianism, economic collapse and much worse.

So, why not us?

I leave it to historians to debate the details.

For me, two strengths shine clearly above all the rest: our democratic spirit and our devotion to equality of opportunity.

Democracy is more than free elections, as essential as they are; it is a conviction, a habit of mind, an instinctive sense of fairness, self-restraint and compromise.

Our democratic spirit gives us the confidence to meet new challenges and strike out in new directions.

Equality of opportunity springs from the same principles.

It's about removing the roadblocks that prevent others from getting ahead in life.

Creating the economic conditions that reward hard work.

Providing a safety net and access to social services.

And keeping taxes low and fair for everybody.

In recent years, both our economies have enjoyed strong growth.

Australia has been on a prosperous roll for a decade.

Never think that this happened by accident.

It had everything to do with prudent policy choices.

Far-sighted leadership,

And careful fiscal management.

I believe that one of the great dangers facing both our countries today is complacency about the economy – complacency because many of our citizens have long forgotten, or have never experienced, economic recession.

But we cannot take our continued prosperity for granted.

We face unprecedented new competition from rising economic giants like China and India.

It's more important than ever to make the right, sometimes difficult, policy choices,

Because the wrong choices could unravel our progress and prosperity far more quickly than many would like to believe.

And the world needs us to continue to serve as powerful models of prosperous and compassionate societies, independent yet open to the world.

That is the Canadian and the Australian way.

It's evident in our collaboration within the World Trade Organization – our work for a successful and ambitious outcome that will lead to freer and fairer trade for developed and developing countries alike.

It's evident in our shared efforts, demonstrated at APEC, towards effective international action on climate change – action that seeks to balance economic and environmental imperatives and thus to realistically engage all the world's major emitters.

And it's evident in our leading roles in the security and development in the provinces of southern Afghanistan.

It's a great comfort to our troops in Kandahar to know that there will soon be a thousand Aussie soldiers next door in the province of Uruzgan. And I know that our soldiers greatly admire the solidarity that all parties in this Parliament have shown in support of this United Nations mission.

As technology, trade and, yes, the threat of terrorism, make our world smaller and smaller, Canada and Australia are growing closer and closer.

Two-way investment between our countries hit 12 billion dollars last year.

200,000 Australians visit Canada every year. 100,000 Canadians come here.

The vast majority are young people.

As often as not, when you get on a ski lift at one of our mountain resorts, a cheerful attendant will welcome you in that distinctive Aussie accent.

This annual pilgrimage of young people between Down Under and the True North augurs well for even closer relations between our countries in the future.

That's why I'm so pleased to report that our governments have just concluded an agreement to renew and expand our student working vacation program.

This will give more young Canadians and Australians opportunities to visit each other's countries, and to widen the personal relations that increasingly bind our nations as family.

In my experience, our people feel equally at home in both our countries.

We both appreciate the God-given beauty of our vast natural landscapes.

We understand, unlike few other nations, that real football isn't a game played with only the feet

With familiarity, we learn to appreciate each other's versions of the game.

And, Prime Minister, I promise you that, if I can get you to a top-level ice hockey game, you will see why you should never again propose that I watch cricket.

Ladies and gentlemen, in the course of our week-long visit to Australia, I heard a suggestion for a new metaphor to describe the relationship between our two countries.

Bookends.

Spaced well apart, but holding together a vast store of knowledge and experience – not just for ourselves, but for all those who aspire to share it.

But perhaps the comparison to family is still the best one.

As proof, let me conclude with an amusing anecdote from one of my predecessors, Lester Pearson.

In the 1940s, when he was a young diplomat in Ottawa, he one day found himself with your Prime Minister J.B. Chifley, the young Princess Elizabeth and her infant son Charles.

At the time, Canada-Australia relations were, I gather, in somewhat strained condition, so when Pearson wrote of the encounter in his diary he said and I quote: "(I) hope that relations…were not further disturbed by the fact that I was able to make the baby laugh while Chifley was not."

That sounds like a family to me.

Thank you.

God bless our great nations.



He also spoke in French at times, I think he was repeating the key points of his speech in French but I can’t be sure since I don’t know any French at all. Anyway, one can see how well this speech was written, I hope that he wrote it instead of some kind of adviser (I am confident that he did though).

Harper was one of the more outspoken leaders during the Australian APEC summit as well, while leaders like Bush (who left a day early) and Putin were just there to been seen, Harper was actually trying to get things done (or at least agreed to) along with the Aussie PM John Howard.

So, it seems like you Canadians have a damn good PM.

What say you?

YEah sure.. I read all of it