- cross-posted to:
- canada@lemmy.ca
- europe@feddit.org
You must log in or register to comment.
Capitalists are gonna have a meltdown when we’ll have to implement the 4 weeks minimum paid vacation, banked overtime with a yearly limit, bretter minimum wage, tougher regulations on food and environment protection. Etc.
Yet i can get behind this framework as something good for the population. It’s like a NDP program but more realistic and with economic growth with our peers as a target.
This year (most years) i will vote Liberal but i did vote NDP on and off in the past and my circumscription changes from red to orange often in the last two decades.
I’m still voting NDP. We can still get a minority liberal government with a strong NDP coalition.
No. Unless they change a party ked by Singh is not getting my vote. I’m not even sure about the liberals yet we’ll have to see what he does so far not looking good. And cons are a no.
Yeah… Just learned this week Carney has ties to Ghislaine Maxwell (or his wife rather). Jeffrey Epstein’s right hand.Isn’t it funny how all these rich elites all have ties to that motherfucker? I don’t want to be a conspiracy theorist, but man it’s getting difficult.Edit: Holy shit I got duped hard. Turns out it was all fake.
This is the first I’ve heard of it. Can you share your source, please? I want to see it myself whether it’s reputable before I form an opinion.
Hey thanks for making me look it up.
I saw this on an Instagram story. But it turns out it’s all fake. Conservative media has been pushing it really hard. I could only find sources like the the Toronto Sun and True North.
I got duped pretty bad there.
I edited my comment with the fact check.
Wow, the Russian (probably) movement went hard on that one.
My respect to you for going back and checking it out.
I’ll probably get called entitled, but even 3 weeks isn’t enough, and I know that’s more than many people get.
You’re being reasonable.
It’s ridiculous. And 2 days of paid sick days per year? Like wtf
Ya, I bet those aren’t the people in favour.
Fun fact, Canadians can legislate these things on our own, without having to also adopt a whole bunch of European dysfunction.
Not with the U.S. right next to us we can’t. Every time we push to have better conditions, companies start throwing a tantrum and threatening to move to the U.S. Then that throws the politicians into panic and they never implement anything. I don’t know if this tarif war or conflct with the U.S. is gonna change that.
Any company that moves to the states loses Canada and the EU as trading partners. I say let them leave, minimizing your customer base is very hot with the fascists right now
Hahahahaha
Actually, it’s a prerequisite for getting into the European dysfunction.
Why does everyone think it’s a binary choice somehow?
…what?
What do you mean what?
Surprised I had to scroll all the way down here to find it. Was everyone else having a discussion only based on the headline?
Thankyou
Being a member of the European Economic Area is a more realistic goal and would probably solve Canada’s problems derived from being far too Economically entwinned with their next door neighbour.
Mind you, any form of being part of the EU Single Market (which EEA members are without being EU members) requires a ton of uniformization of things like Product regulations (which amongst other things means Canada would not be allowed to import many if not most US food products such as for example beef of cattle which has been fed hormones) and acceptance of Freedom Of Movement for both people and goods.
(Following Brexit, Britain did not move to become an EEA member exactly because of both the Freedom of Movement requirement and the difficulty in getting other EEA member approval since the UK are a disproportionatelly large economy compared to all EEA members but Canada’s reasons are different - not anti-immigration and xenophobia like the UK - so things like Freedom Of Movement would probably not be an issue and its Economy is just a bit over half the size of the UK’s)
We need stronger ally relationships, considering things are going south with our Southern ally!
I think EU membership is a huge stretch, but we could certainly move in the direction of harmonizing with EU trade regulations. A good medium-term goal might be to join the Schengen trade zone, and then move on from there.
I would support stronger ties to Canada, but Canada is not exactly in Europe
Why would that matter? It’s a political and economical union, not a geographical one.
As the parliament says
In order to apply for EU membership, a country has to be European and respect the EU’s democratic values
Since according to Article 49
The applicant country must […] be a European state;
https://publications.europa.eu/resource/cellar/0ae670d2-1ece-4994-b1e3-adda39e1c6de.0006.03/DOC_1
respect the EU’s democratic values
Just like Hungary does?
They did when they got in.
The problem is that it’s impossible to kick out a member if they stop respecting the EU’s democratic values whilst being a member.
As mentioned in the post above, what constitutes as European is decided by the European Council and European Commission. You are correct in that it is a requirement but there is nothing stopping them from going “Canada is European, as it shares our values, ideals, and ideologies”. The decision does not have to be geographical.
It’s unlikely and kind of a “the rules don’t say a dog can’t play basketball” type move but it’s technically valid.
Cyprus isn’t in Europe at all and is in the EU. You just have to be “substantially” European, according to whatever committee.
Failing that, it’s possible to be in the EU in every way but officially. Norway and Switzerland have that situation.
It’s literally one of their requirements.
Maybe not right now but requirements can be changed, especially in times of need.
The definition of what classifies as European is up to the assessment of the European Council and the European Commission and need not be defined by geography.
III. CONDITIONS OF ACCESSION a) The European State
The sole material condition laid down by Article O of the TEU is that the applicant must be a ‘European State’. There is no unequivocal interpretation of that criterion. It can be read equally well in geographical, cultural or political terms.
In 1987 an application to become a Member of the Communities was received from Morocco. The application was rejected by the Council on the grounds that Morocco was not a European State ( 7). In the case of Turkey, Article 28 of the Association Agreement signed in 1963 incudes the option of Turkey’s eventually acceding to the Communities. Turkey in fact lodged an application to accede on 14 April 1987. Historically, Turkey has formed part of the so-called ‘European concert’. Although part of Turkey’s territory is located geographically in Asia, Parliament, the Council and the Commission have confirmed Turkey’s eligibility ( 8). This example shows that the term ‘European State’ need not be interpreted in a strictly geographical sense. It is at all events a criterion subject to political assessment.
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/enlargement/briefings/23a2_en.htm
In other words if we decide that Canada counts, then Canada counts.
What if we just take Canada and move it over a little?
Thinking outside the
boxcontinent. I like it
Canada does share a land boarder with Denmark.
Two! Both sea and land borders with France. Don’t forget Vimy Ridge!
We do where. Seems Denmark is really far away.
I think they’re referring to Greenland but I’m not aware of a land border
Greenland is part of Denmark, we share a border with them through Hans Island
So are many parts of the Netherlands or France, for example
Local residents are not Europeans, they don’t necessarily even use euro despite their mainland countries doing just that, but they are residents of the European Union.
True, but ‘being in the EU’ is actually not that simple, and these territories have special statuses and and are not part of the ‘core EU’. Here is a simple visualization
I don’t think Canada needs the Euro or the Stability and Growth Pact straightjacket. We also don’t need European xenophobic attitudes towards immigration.
Let’s have a customs union, and let’s have closer integration and cooperation, but let’s keep our independence.
Signed, a dual citizen.
Yeah works for me.
Membership of the #EU is a long term project with many intermediate steps. Some decided they are fine with a certain step and stay on it(Norway) some decided to get off completley(Iceland) and some decided to get out after they were in(UK). Though I admit brexit was, unnecessarily, bitter the rift is healing and we enjoy good relations with all.
Tough I’d welcome Canada into the union I dont think either side fully grasp how deep and wideranging ascension would be. Regardless I’m perfectly fine with a customs union if thats what #Canada wants.
I dont think either side fully grasp how deep and wideranging ascension would be
Precisely. Canadians are currently experiencing whiplash from the American betrayal. While there is absolutely nothing wrong with strengthening ties, full fledged EU membership is a whole other rabbit hole that requires sober thought.
European xenophobic attitudes
You know we’re not all like that, right?
And Canada also has far-right nutjobs.
Yup. Like I said, I’m a dual citizen, and I’ve experienced being an immigrant in Canada and it’s nowhere near what immigrants back home experience. But of course, Europe also has strong left and left-of-centre traditions. It just so happens that right now, they’re mostly on the back foot.
Stability and Growth Pact
So, here’s the Wikipedia on that. It sounds like it’s basically a way to make the Euro somewhat functional, which is ironic considering that’s the other thing you said to avoid.
I wonder how we’d rank. We have the best fiscal situation in the G7 at the moment.
Yet Europe has way more immigrants than Canada, but OK
In absolute numbers, yes. As a percentage of the population, nowhere near.
I’m all for closer ties with the EU but it doesn’t make sense to join the union due to simple geography.
Eurovision Song Contest laughs at your petti geography.
The criteria as set out in the treaties is to be “a European country”, what “European” means has been deliberately left open. Geography is at best a secondary factor.
Greenland.
I’m not a fan of actions taken in haste but diversifying trading opportunities and providing mutual security really could be beneficial.
It won’t happen
not with that attitude