Going forward
Cibc in a report has indicated that Canadians are optimistic even though there’s adversity out there and at least 68% of them have made progress towards their goals in the last year.
Category: Government Works
Context January 6th look back.
“after an action report,”
This is a view that 70 million voters didn’t support and 90 million acquiesced.
G Seven meeting
It would be good to pay attention and act peacefully and purposefully in all the outcomes.
Schedule F
The “F list” for the US public service refers to Schedule F, a job classification within the excepted service of the United States federal civil service. It’s also sometimes referred to as “Schedule Policy/Career.”
Here’s a breakdown of what it is and its significance:
* Purpose: Schedule F was created to classify permanent policy-related positions within the federal government. The stated purpose was to increase the president’s control over the federal career civil service by making it easier to dismiss employees in these positions, thereby increasing accountability to elected officials.
* Key Characteristics: Positions designated as Schedule F are typically those of a “confidential, policy-determining, policy-making, or policy-advocating character.” This can include roles with substantive participation in the development of regulations and guidance, policy-related work in agencies, supervision of attorneys, and significant discretion in how an agency exercises its functions.
* Loss of Civil Service Protections: The most significant aspect of Schedule F is that employees in these positions would lose many of the civil service protections that typically shield federal workers from political interference. This would make them “at-will” employees, meaning they could be more easily hired and fired.
* Controversy: Schedule F has been highly controversial. Critics argue that it undermines the merit-based civil service, opens the door to political retaliation against federal officials, impedes effective government functioning, and creates risks to democracy by allowing for the replacement of experienced, non-partisan civil servants with political loyalists.
* Current Status: Schedule F was established by an executive order during the Trump administration but was never fully implemented before being rescinded by President Biden. However, there have been discussions and efforts to reinstate it. The concept remains a point of contention regarding the balance between political accountability and a professional, non-partisan civil service.
In essence, Schedule F is a classification that aims to strip job protections from certain career federal positions, treating them more like political appointments.
Peace and order
” Drain the Swamp”
Donald Trump may have achieved the mandate for this. However, he was supported by 70 million as opposed to being acquiesced to by 90 million,this may have consequences.
So going on to the world stage with its with its problems. It would be well of all of us to keep clear heads and hold people to accountability while preserving stable governments at home.
Harvard anyone?
Schools recruits to improve standings.
Citation confidence key
Navigating University Rankings: A Comprehensive Guide to Global and Regional Assessments
I. Executive Summary
The landscape of higher education is increasingly shaped by various university ranking systems, which serve as influential barometers of institutional performance globally. These rankings, compiled by prominent organizations such as Quacquarelli Symonds (QS), Times Higher Education (THE), and the Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU), offer comparative assessments that guide a diverse array of stakeholders, including prospective students, parents, educators, and policymakers. While ostensibly providing clarity and benchmarking, these systems operate with distinct methodologies, leading to varied outcomes and highlighting the importance of understanding their underlying criteria.
This report delves into the intricate world of university rankings, clarifying their geographical scope from global to national and provincial levels. It meticulously examines the methodologies of major global ranking bodies, detailing their indicators and assessment foci. A particular emphasis is placed on a Canadian case study, illustrating how these global frameworks translate into national and regional assessments, with specific data points for leading Canadian and British Columbia universities. Furthermore, the report critically analyzes the inherent criticisms and limitations of current ranking paradigms, addressing concerns regarding methodological biases, data integrity, and the profound impact on institutional behavior and academic priorities. Finally, it explores evolving trends and alternative assessment approaches that prioritize teaching quality, student experience, social responsibility, and open science, advocating for a more holistic and nuanced understanding of university quality for informed decision-making in higher education.
II. Introduction to University Rankings
University rankings are structured comparative evaluations of higher education institutions, designed to provide a snapshot of their performance across a spectrum of criteria. Their primary purpose extends beyond mere comparison, serving as critical tools for guiding prospective students in their academic pursuits, enabling institutions to benchmark their performance against peers, informing governmental policies on education, and influencing the allocation of vital funding and resources. For instance, QS explicitly states its rankings are designed to assess key aspects of a university’s mission, encompassing teaching, research, the nurturing of employability, and internationalization. Similarly, THE evaluates universities across five core mission categories: Teaching, Research Environment, Research Quality, International Outlook, and Industry Income.
The user’s inquiry regarding “counties rankings of university’s” points to a common desire for geographically specific information. It is important to clarify that university ranking systems typically operate at broader geographical scales than individual counties, focusing instead on global, national, or sub-national divisions such as provinces or regions. This approach is necessitated by the extensive scope of data collection required and the operational scale of most higher education institutions. Global rankings, exemplified by QS, THE, and ARWU, offer a worldwide comparative perspective, while national rankings, such as Maclean’s in Canada, provide detailed country-specific insights. Provincial or regional breakdowns are often derived from these larger-scale rankings or are a focus of specialized national publications.
University rankings are not merely passive descriptive tools; they function as active mechanisms that profoundly influence institutional behavior and national policy. Governments, for example, explicitly leverage ranking outcomes to direct funding and prioritize resources towards universities that demonstrate strong performance on global scales. This governmental reliance can lead to policy reforms in higher education, including curriculum modernization, faculty recruitment strategies, and the allocation of research and innovation funding. Concurrently, university administrators meticulously monitor these rankings to maintain competitiveness, attract students, and secure funding. This close observation often translates into strategic decisions, such as allocating more resources to research output, faculty publications, and citation impact, as these metrics significantly influence ranking positions. This dynamic illustrates that rankings possess a significant power beyond simple comparison, potentially leading to a homogenization of institutional priorities, sometimes at the expense of other vital academic missions.
III. Major Global University Ranking Systems and Their Methodologies
Understanding the methodologies of the most influential global university ranking systems is fundamental to interpreting their results and appreciating the nuances of institutional assessment on an international scale.
A. QS World University Rankings
The QS World University Rankings are designed to evaluate university performance based on what QS identifies as core aspects of a university’s mission: teaching, research, fostering employability, and internationalization. Specifically, their subject rankings are determined by five key indicators :
* Academic Reputation: This indicator is derived from a global survey of academics, reflecting which universities are considered excellent for research in particular fields by their peers. The survey results are meticulously filtered according to the narrow area of expertise identified by respondents.
* Employer Reputation: This metric is based on survey responses from graduate employers worldwide. Employers identify institutions they consider excellent for recruiting graduates and specify the disciplines from which they prefer to recruit.
* Research Citations per Paper: This indicator sources all citation data from Elsevier Scopus. A minimum publication threshold is applied for each subject to prevent anomalies from small numbers of highly cited papers, and the weighting for citations is adjusted to reflect prevalent publication and citation patterns within specific disciplines.
* H-index: The H-index serves as a measure of both the productivity and impact of an academic or a university department. It is calculated based on an academic’s most cited papers and the total number of citations these papers have received in other publications.
* International Research Network (by broad faculty area): This index quantifies an institution’s capacity to diversify the geographical reach of its international research collaborations by establishing sustainable partnerships with other higher education institutions globally.
QS offers users various ways to navigate its rankings, allowing for filtering by broad subject areas such as Arts and Humanities, Engineering and Technology, Life Sciences and Medicine, Natural Sciences, and Social Sciences and Management. Users can also view rankings for specific disciplines, with the latest rankings covering 55 subjects ranging from history of art to veterinary science. Furthermore, the platform allows users to filter by individual indicators, enabling them to identify top universities based on specific criteria like academic reputation or employer reputation.
B. Times Higher Education (THE) World University Rankings
The Times Higher Education (THE) World University Rankings aim to comprehensively assess world-class universities across their core missions: Teaching, Research Environment, Research Quality, International Outlook, and Industry Income. THE’s methodology undergoes periodic updates, with notable changes in the 2025 World Reputation Rankings. These updates moved beyond a singular reliance on vote counts to incorporate pairwise comparison and voter diversity, reflecting an evolving understanding of reputation.
The key categories and metrics for the overall THE World University Rankings include:
* Teaching (the learning environment): This metric evaluates the quality of the learning experience and is underpinned by five performance indicators: teaching reputation (derived from the Academic Reputation Survey), staff-to-student ratio, doctorate-to-bachelors ratio, doctorates-awarded-to-academic-staff ratio, and institutional income.
* Research Environment (volume, income, and reputation): This category considers the scale and quality of research activities, measured through research reputation, research income, and research productivity.
* Research Quality (citation impact, research strength, research excellence, and research influence): This category assesses the impact and influence of a university’s research. It includes citation impact, with additional metrics introduced in 2023 for research strength, research excellence, and research influence.
* International Outlook (staff, students, and research): This category highlights an institution’s global competitiveness and its ability to attract a diverse international cohort of students and researchers. It is measured by the proportion of international students, international staff, and the extent of international collaboration.
* Industry Income (income and patents): This category reflects the commercial impact of a university’s research, indicating its industrial value and commitment to supporting local and national economies. It is calculated based on industry income and the number of patents generated.
For the THE World Reputation Rankings 2025, the assessment is structured around three core pillars of evaluation:
* Vote counts: This pillar assesses the number of votes received for both research and teaching. The 2025 methodology introduced a cumulative scoring function to flatten the score curve, allowing for more meaningful comparisons.
* Pairwise comparison: This method encourages voters to consider a broader spectrum of institutions beyond the well-known “super-brands” by asking respondents to rank preselected universities from 1 to 5.
* Voter diversity: This pillar rewards universities that receive votes from a wide array of territories and subject areas, suggesting a more robust and widely recognized reputation.
These pillars are further broken down into six underlying performance indicators with specific weightings: Research vote count (30%), Teaching vote count (30%), Research pairwise comparison (10%), Teaching pairwise comparison (10%), Research voter diversity (10%), and Teaching voter diversity (10%).
The distinct methodologies employed by QS and THE, particularly when contrasted with ARWU, reflect fundamentally different philosophies regarding what constitutes “excellence” in higher education. ARWU’s heavy reliance on highly objective, high-impact research outputs, such as Nobel laureates and publications in elite journals, inherently favors large, established, research-intensive institutions with a long history of producing groundbreaking discoveries. This approach, while seemingly objective, may not fully capture the diverse missions and contributions of all universities. Conversely, QS and THE incorporate more subjective reputational surveys and broader factors like employer perception and internationalization, which can offer a more holistic, though potentially less universally “objective,” view of a university’s standing. THE’s recent modifications to its reputation rankings, by including “pairwise comparison” and “voter diversity,” signal an evolving effort to broaden the scope of reputational assessment beyond mere brand recognition. This indicates a dynamic understanding within these ranking bodies of the multifaceted elements that contribute to a university’s overall standing. This divergence in underlying philosophies means that a university’s numerical rank is highly contextual and depends significantly on which ranking system is consulted. Users must therefore understand these differing priorities to interpret rankings effectively and select the assessment that aligns best with their specific needs and values, whether prioritizing research strength, student experience, or graduate employability. This also creates a strategic environment for universities, as they may choose to align their investments and efforts with the metrics of specific ranking systems they aim to perform well in.
C. Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU – ShanghaiRanking)
The Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU), initially published in June 2003 by Shanghai Jiao Tong University and copyrighted by ShanghaiRanking Consultancy since 2009, distinguishes itself by utilizing six objective indicators to rank world universities. This emphasis on quantifiable, empirical data sets it apart from other systems.
The key objective indicators used by ARWU are:
* Number of alumni winning Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals: This indicator assesses the quality of education and the long-term impact of the university’s graduates.
* Number of staff winning Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals: This metric reflects the caliber of the faculty and their significant contributions to their respective fields.
* Number of highly cited researchers selected by Clarivate: This indicator measures the influence and recognition of the university’s researchers within the global academic community.
* Number of articles published in journals of Nature and Science: This highlights research output and impact in two of the most prestigious scientific journals worldwide.
* Number of articles indexed in Science Citation Index-Expanded (SCIE) and Social Science Citation Index (SSCI): This evaluates the volume of research publications in widely recognized and influential academic databases.
* Per capita performance of a university: This indicator assesses the academic performance relative to the size of the institution, providing a measure of efficiency and productivity.
ARWU annually ranks more than 2500 universities, with the top 1000 being publicly released. This rigorous, research-focused methodology often results in a consistent top tier dominated by well-established research powerhouses.
D. Other Notable Approaches: CWTS Leiden Ranking
The CWTS Leiden Ranking offers an alternative approach to global university assessment, based exclusively on bibliometric indicators. Compiled annually by the Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS) at Leiden University, this ranking system was established in 2003 as a direct response to ARWU, aiming to demonstrate a more appropriate use of bibliometric data for comparing universities.
The Leiden Ranking assesses universities worldwide based on the volume and citation impact of their academic publications, meticulously accounting for differences in language, discipline, and institutional size. Key indicators include:
* Mean Citation Score (MCS): The average number of citations received by a university’s publications.
* Mean Normalized Citation Score (MNCS): The average number of citations, normalized for field differences and publication year, allowing for fairer comparisons across diverse disciplines.
* Proportion of Top 10% Publications (PP(top 10%)): The percentage of a university’s publications that fall within the top 10% most frequently cited papers in their respective fields and publication years.
Beyond citation impact, the Leiden Ranking also evaluates scientific collaboration, including co-authorship with other institutions, international collaborations, and partnerships with industry. The Leiden Ranking is particularly lauded for its rigor and robustness compared to other university rankings, scoring highly in “rigor” and “measure what matters” in independent evaluations. It provides multiple options for sorting rankings, deliberately avoids subjective reputational surveys, normalizes indicators where appropriate, and represents uncertainties with stability intervals, all contributing to its strong reputation for transparency.
A significant development in this regard is the launch of the Leiden Ranking’s “Open Edition” in 2024. This new edition draws its data from OpenAlex, an open-source, open-access database of research publications, aiming to provide greater transparency and eventually replace the original closed version. This initiative directly addresses a long-standing criticism of traditional, commercially-driven ranking systems like QS, THE, and ARWU, which are often criticized for using “closed, proprietary datasets” and for a general “lack of transparency” regarding their complex algorithms and scoring systems. The opacity of these commercial systems has frequently raised questions about their validity and reliability. The CWTS Leiden Ranking’s proactive move to utilize an open-source database and provide article-level data to demonstrate precisely how scores are calculated represents a significant and commendable response to these criticisms. This shift reflects a growing recognition within the broader academic and ranking communities of the imperative for greater accountability, reproducibility, and verifiability in university assessments. This trend towards open science metrics and transparent methodologies has the potential to fundamentally reshape the future of university rankings. It could exert considerable pressure on traditional, commercial rankers to adopt more transparent practices, or risk facing declining credibility and relevance. Ultimately, this movement fosters a more equitable and verifiable assessment landscape, empowering institutions and researchers to better understand, scrutinize, and even challenge ranking outcomes.
IV. University Rankings by Country/Region: The Canadian Case Study
Examining university rankings within a specific national context, such as Canada, provides valuable insights into how global methodologies are applied and complemented by national assessment frameworks.
A. Overview of Canadian University Rankings
Canada’s higher education system is evaluated by both the major global ranking bodies (QS, THE, ARWU) and prominent national publications, most notably Maclean’s. Maclean’s distinguishes its approach by categorizing Canadian universities into three distinct groups: Primarily Undergraduate, Comprehensive, and Medical Doctoral. This categorization is crucial as it acknowledges and accounts for the inherent differences in institutional missions, levels of research funding, diversity of program offerings, and the breadth and depth of graduate and professional programs across Canadian universities. This nuanced approach provides a more relevant and meaningful national comparison than a single, undifferentiated overall list.
Maclean’s draws its data from comprehensive and publicly available sources to ensure the robustness of its rankings. These sources include Statistics Canada, which provides numbers on faculty and student enrollment, total research income, and five key financial indicators for the fiscal year (operating budget, spending on student services, scholarships and bursaries, library expenses, and acquisitions). Data for social sciences and humanities research grants, as well as medical-science research grants, are obtained directly from the three major federal granting agencies: the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (SSHRC), the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC), and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR). Additionally, Maclean’s gathers information on numerous student and faculty awards from 50 different organizations and conducts a reputational survey. This survey canvasses the opinions of university faculty, senior administrators, and various business professionals across the country, asking them to rate Canada’s universities in areas such as Highest Quality, Most Innovative, and Leaders of Tomorrow.
AI researched.
Well,serious enough…
Opinion
We certainly reject the 51st State mentality.
https://youtube.com/shorts/2blNjxDa4pM?feature=share
- Start Small: Begin with manageable tasks or goals, and gradually expand your focus as you gain confidence and experience.
- Stay Mindful: Maintain awareness and attention to the present moment, allowing yourself to fully engage with each task or situation.
- Embrace the Big Picture: While focusing on the small details, keep the larger goals and objectives in mind to ensure alignment and progress.
Remember, taking up the small while being mindful of the large can help you navigate tasks and challenges with balance and purpose.
So, State visits are necessary things. The treaty room in the American White House is a very important place. many agreements have been signed there.
And many state visits by the respective heads of Nations are the public view of something that has already been negotiated hashed out by hard nosed bureaucrats on both sides and is ready for assigning and a public declaration.
Disappointed to see that the state visit lately of the two dominant North American nations was more of a personality driven game of dominance, ego, and The public was left shortchanged and because it was used in my view as a political somewhat weaponized clash.
These things may fit in a competing election, but once somebody is in the office there should be protocols that prevent this kind of thing and the hard work of some agreement accomplished beforehand by bureaucrats who don’t need to be reelected.
We as constituents should have already accepted the election results and we don’t need the competition of dog and pony at heads of States meetings. Both parties should have had some sort of agreement treaty or proclamation that fit both mandates.
Peace out, have a life…
It’s interesting to consider what it takes to become a politician. While there aren’t universally strict “qualifications” in the sense of required degrees for all political positions, there are definitely factors that play a significant role. Here’s a breakdown:
Core Considerations:
* Eligibility Requirements:
* These vary significantly depending on the specific political office (local, regional, national).
* Generally, they include citizenship, age requirements, and residency requirements. For example, to be a member of the United States House of Representatives, you must be 25 years old, a citizen for 7 years, and a resident of the state you are running in.
* In Canada, to be a candidate in a federal election you must be a Canadian citizen, and at least 18 years old.
* Skills and Qualities:
* Communication: Effective communication is crucial for conveying ideas, engaging with constituents, and participating in debates.
* Leadership: Politicians need to lead and inspire others, build consensus, and make difficult decisions.
* Interpersonal Skills: Building relationships with diverse groups of people is essential for political success.
* Knowledge of Public Issues: Understanding the issues facing your community and the broader society is vital for informed decision-making.
* Dedication and Perseverance: Political campaigns and careers can be demanding, requiring significant time, effort, and resilience.
* Experience and Education:
* While not always mandatory, experience in areas like law, business, public service, or community activism can be valuable.
* Education, particularly in fields like political science, economics, or law, can provide a strong foundation.
* Volunteering in political campaigns, or working within local political groups, is a very good way to gain valuable experience.
Could You Be One?
* Yes, in theory, anyone who meets the basic eligibility requirements can run for political office.
* However, success in politics requires a combination of factors, including:
* A strong desire to serve the public.
* The ability to connect with voters.
* The willingness to work hard.
* And, often, the ability to raise campaign funds.
In essence, while specific requirements exist for each position, a combination of personal attributes, experience, and a genuine desire to serve the public are key components to a political career.
Public figure
King Tides are the highest high tides of the year at a coastal location, significantly above the average high tide. They are a natural and predictable phenomenon that occurs once or twice annually in coastal areas. The scientific term for a King Tide is a perigean spring tide.
What causes King Tides?
King Tides happen due to a combination of astronomical factors:
* Alignment of the Earth, Moon, and Sun: The gravitational forces of the sun and moon have the greatest effect on Earth’s tides when these three bodies are aligned (during new and full moons). These are called spring tides, which occur about every two weeks.
* Moon’s Orbit: The Moon’s orbit around the Earth is elliptical, meaning there are times when the Moon is closer to the Earth (perigee) and farther away (apogee). When a new or full moon coincides with the Moon being at its closest point to Earth (perigean spring tide), the gravitational pull is stronger, resulting in higher tides.
* Earth’s Orbit: Similarly, the Earth’s orbit around the Sun is also elliptical. The Earth is closest to the sun (perihelion) in early January and farthest away (aphelion) in early July. When a perigean spring tide occurs around the time Earth is closest to the sun, it can further enhance the tidal range, leading to King Tides.
King Tides result in both the highest high tides and the lowest low tides of the year.
King Tide Situation in British Columbia
While I don’t have specific real-time information about a “current King Tide situation” as of today, April 30, 2025, King Tides are a recurring event in British Columbia, typically occurring during the winter months (November to February) and sometimes in the summer.
Here’s what is generally known about King Tides in BC:
* Timing: The highest risk of King Tides in BC usually falls between late December and early January. There can also be significant King Tide events in other winter months.
* Potential Impacts: King Tides can cause minor flooding in low-lying coastal areas. When combined with storm surges (sea level rise due to low atmospheric pressure and strong winds), they can lead to more significant coastal flooding and erosion.
* Sea Level Rise Connection: King Tides are not caused by climate change. However, they offer a glimpse into what future average high tides could look like as sea levels rise due to global warming. Observing King Tides helps communities understand and prepare for the long-term impacts of sea level rise on coastal infrastructure and ecosystems.
* Monitoring and Preparedness: Municipalities in coastal BC, such as Vancouver and Delta, often monitor King Tide forecasts and may take precautionary measures like closing sections of seawalls or providing sandbags to residents in flood-prone areas. They also use King Tide events to gather data and photos to help with flood hazard mapping and long-term adaptation strategies for sea level rise.
* Citizen Science: In the past, initiatives like the “King Tide Photo Initiative” in BC encouraged residents to photograph coastal areas during King Tides to document the extent of the flooding and visualize future sea levels.
For the most up-to-date information on any current or upcoming King Tide events in British Columbia, I recommend checking the following:
* Local News Outlets: They often report on anticipated King Tides and any associated risks or impacts.
* Tide Charts and Predictions: Websites that provide tide predictions for specific locations in British Columbia will show the dates and times of the highest tides of the year.
* Municipal Government Websites: Coastal municipalities often issue advisories or updates related to King Tides and potential flooding.
* Environment and Climate Change Canada: They provide weather warnings and information that could be relevant during King Tide events.
Keep in mind that even if a King Tide is predicted, the actual impact can vary depending on weather conditions such as wind and atmospheric pressure, which can either exacerbate or lessen the effects.
Try this
Resolving conflict within a country is a multifaceted and complex undertaking that requires a comprehensive and adaptable approach. There isn’t a single “best” way, as the most effective strategies depend heavily on the specific context, the root causes of the conflict, and the willingness of all parties to engage in peaceful resolution. However, some key principles and approaches consistently prove valuable:
1. Addressing Root Causes: Sustainable peace requires identifying and addressing the underlying issues that fuel the conflict. These can be political, economic, social, cultural, or a combination thereof. Strategies include:
* Promoting inclusive governance: Ensuring all groups have a voice in political processes and equitable access to power and resources.
* Economic development: Reducing inequality and creating opportunities for all segments of society.
* Social justice and reconciliation: Addressing historical grievances, promoting accountability for human rights abuses, and fostering understanding and empathy between communities.
* Strengthening the rule of law: Establishing impartial and effective legal systems that ensure justice and protect human rights.
2. Fostering Dialogue and Negotiation: Creating platforms for communication and negotiation between conflicting parties is crucial. This involves:
* Establishing inclusive dialogue processes: Ensuring that all relevant stakeholders, including marginalized groups, are represented.
* Providing skilled facilitation and mediation: Utilizing neutral third parties to guide discussions, build trust, and help identify common ground.
* Promoting Track I (official government-level), Track II (civil society and informal), and multi-track diplomacy: Engaging actors at various levels to create a comprehensive peace process.
3. Implementing Peacebuilding Initiatives: These are long-term efforts aimed at transforming relationships, institutions, and attitudes to prevent future conflict. Key components include:
* Security sector reform: Establishing accountable and rights-respecting security forces.
* Disarmament, demobilization, and reintegration (DDR) of ex-combatants: Providing pathways for former fighters to transition to civilian life.
* Transitional justice mechanisms: Truth commissions, reparations programs, and judicial processes to address past abuses.
* Education for peace: Promoting tolerance, empathy, and conflict resolution skills in schools and communities.
* Civil society strengthening: Supporting local organizations working on peacebuilding, human rights, and reconciliation.
* Interfaith and intercultural dialogue: Fostering understanding and cooperation between different religious and cultural groups.
* Psychosocial support and trauma healing: Addressing the emotional and psychological wounds of conflict.
4. Ensuring Inclusivity and Participation: Peace processes are more likely to be successful and sustainable when they involve all segments of society, particularly those most affected by the conflict, including women, youth, and minorities.
5. Utilizing International and Regional Support: External actors can play a vital role by:
* Providing financial and technical assistance: Supporting peacebuilding programs and institutions.
* Facilitating dialogue and mediation: Offering neutral platforms and expertise.
* Applying diplomatic pressure and targeted sanctions: Encouraging compliance with peace agreements and respect for human rights.
* Deploying peacekeeping operations: Providing security and stability in conflict-affected areas (with careful consideration of their mandate and impact).
6. Building Trust and Confidence: Overcoming deep-seated mistrust is essential. This requires:
* Transparency and accountability: Ensuring that peace processes and institutions operate openly and are held responsible for their actions.
* Confidence-building measures: Small-scale initiatives that foster cooperation and communication between communities.
* Consistent commitment to peace: Demonstrating a genuine willingness from all sides to find a peaceful resolution.
7. Adapting to the Specific Context: Each conflict is unique, and therefore, the resolution strategies must be tailored to the specific historical, political, social, and cultural dynamics at play. A flexible and adaptive approach is crucial.
In conclusion, the “best” way to resolve conflict in a country involves a holistic approach that addresses root causes, fosters dialogue, implements long-term peacebuilding initiatives, ensures inclusivity, leverages international support, builds trust, and adapts to the specific context. It is a long and often challenging process that requires commitment, patience, and the willingness of all parties to work towards a peaceful and just future.
We think that tonight’s election results depended a lot on the demonstration of the democratic principle of “responsiveness of government”
It is our hope at the proprietor review that this continues whether it’s a majority or minority government situation. Parliament remains responsive to the people. No matter how this mandate goes.
No weather alerts, seven day forecast
https://weather.gc.ca/en/location/index.html?coords=50.111,-120.790
RIP 44th Parliament of Canada, hello 45th.
The 44th Parliament of Canada was convened on November 22, 2021, following the federal election held on September 20, 2021. The election determined the 338 seats in the House of Commons. Therefore, at the beginning of the 44th Parliament, there were 338 seats in the House of Commons.Here’s a bit more information about the 44th Parliament: * Duration: November 22, 2021 – March 23, 2025. * It was a minority parliament, meaning no single party held a majority of the seats. * Prime Minister: Justin Trudeau (Liberal Party) until March 14, 2025, followed by Mark Carney (Liberal Party). * Government: Liberal Party. * Leaders of the Opposition: * Erin O’Toole (Conservative Party) until February 2, 2022. * Candice Bergen (Conservative Party, interim) until September 10, 2022. * Pierre Poilievre (Conservative Party) from September 10, 2022. * Other Recognized Parties in the House of Commons: Bloc Québécois, New Democratic Party (NDP), and Green Party. * Speaker of the House of Commons: * Anthony Rota until September 27, 2023. * Louis Plamondon (interim) from September 27, 2023, to October 3, 2023. * Greg Fergus from October 3, 2023.The distribution of seats in the House of Commons at the start of the 44th Parliament was as follows: * Liberal Party: 160 * Conservative Party: 119 * Bloc Québécois: 32 * New Democratic Party: 25 * Green Party: 2Over the course of the 44th Parliament, there were some changes in the number of seats held by each party due to resignations, by-elections, and members becoming independent. However, the total number of seats in the House of Commons remained 338. The 44th Parliament was dissolved on March 23, 2025, leading to the general election held on April 28, 2025. The results of this election will determine the composition of the upcoming 45th Parliament.
Good luck Bon Chance
The local A&W in Merritt BC, changed its signage to be more Canadian. Recently. The chain has over a thousand outlets in Canada. And on its side entry door it says Canadian owned and operated a turn to the inside facing away and not meant to be seen by the drive-thru customers.
American industry wants to crank it out.
I remember the go-to photo of the United States in the hilarious John Candy movie Canadian bacon.
Don’t be too cranky… K
Remember it’s parliament not anyone’s re this…
Good luck to all…
Kevin Griffiths
percypaschal
The Proprietor Review 