
Stéphane Dion of the Liberal Party of Canada praises Avaaz
7 months ago
The Leader of the Opposition praises people power.
Please Join Vimeo or Log In if you want to comment. It only takes a few seconds.
- Vimeo: About / Blog / Roadmap / Developers / Forums / Help! / Site Map
- Legal: © 2008 Connected Ventures, LLC. All rights reserved. / Terms & Conditions / Privacy Statement



.
27.8K
1
19
0
0
0
Previous Week
This is the first time in a long time i see democracy work.
Good job to everyone who signed the petition!
It's like Pepsi and Coke - very little difference.
"la lutte continue" ("the struggle continues").
"There is an urgent need to send a signal to the world about the future," the conference chair, Canadian Environment Minister Stephane Dion said, signalling his eagerness to kickstart a wider discussion of future commitments.
Let's not be so reductive as to compare a dymanic entity such as a political party to a soft drink. Analogies are rarely accurate in the important details.
Bush and Harper got their way.
I wish everyone would stop being so critical, and have our side work together on the issues we all believe in, like climate change.
Great work Avaaz!!!!
It is obvious that the groundswell of public opinion along with just about every other country in the world represented at Bali was able to change the US position. I am really happy to have participated in the Avaaz petition and be a part of this! Thanks Avaaz!
I say brilliant and BIG congratulations to Avaaz and everyone who works damn hard for victories long time coming.
If any of you have ever worked for environmental causes, you'll know exactly where I'm coming from. This world needs more celebration and Please!! less bickering...
The job of cleaning up our environment is just beginning. No specific goals has been set in the Kyoto Protocol. This is also expressed in a post by Andrew Phillip many hours ago.
And to all those who participated in this vision keep on keepin' on and lets work together now, for a good future for all :)
One Love
It is essential to understand that this is just a skirmish in the fight on re-definition of sovereignty, as an entity that sees no borders and national partisanship (or People Power, as someone here has put it). At this time sovereignty is still defined by national governmental powers, as their electoral or representational scope. These decision making spheres however are often tied to corporate interests and narrow national politics, and clearly fail to represent the basic interest on the global or common human level, on their own.
The global civil society has been first brought into the picture by former Secretary General of the UN Kofi Annan, who called for a participation of Non Governmental Organizations, as well as a “Peoples Assembly”, in the great decisions of our future world. It is that thrust, that has finally been seen practicaly in action at the Bali conference, where Avaaz and other civil society groups, loosely co-mingling with official political delegates, have formed a strong block of political pressure to achieve a shift in outcome.
There will certainly going to be further friction between the People Power, and national governments, who will no doubt try to curb the newly found direct influence of the people, bypassing their own authority. We will have to keep figuring out how to answer and also start building this People Power base, into a structured and consistent global entity, rather then dispersed individual campaigns.
Amos El-Roy
In the interest of ongoing progress on climate change, and going back to political parties and the people being the ones who make it happen, we can all ensure that Canada becomes a model country in the future by doing what the trend is showing in the political landscape and that is by voting for none of the big 3 parties, who all have their strengths and weaknesses in their fight on climate issues. I think, and so do the polls, that it is time for the Green Party to share the stage with other Canadian parties, in the political debates as well as in parliament. The polls do show them at 13%, just behind the third place party and with such a significant portion of the electorate being behind them why are they not part of the debate. It seems that it would make the debate a much more well rounded forum, instead of giving only the usual suspects a widely broadcasted voice.
Scott Petrie