The Real Big Election... Canada!

[Jimbo07]

Say, are guys going to kick up a fuss when President Palin annexes the Yukon?

In all seriousness... there's no need. State what you want and we'll give it to you for a song, anyway. It's working for oil, water...

...

Unless I am quite mistaken, this is the first 3-page thread about Canadian politics!

 

[Madalch]

Say, are guys going to kick up a fuss when President Palin annexes the Yukon?

That depends. If the Conservatives are still in power, Stevie will send a nice note to the White House, apologizing for not having returned "that part of Alaska" sooner.

If anyone else is in power, then hell yes, we'll kick up a fuss. But a polite one.

 

[Horatius]

I'm a little more interested in the table above the one you pointed out, which shows the popular vote. If we had some sort of proportional representation, the Parliament would have looked like this:

Party|Seats (Proportional)|Seats (Actual)
Conservatives|112|124
Liberals|93|103
Bloc|32|51
NDP|54|29
Green|14|0
Other|3|0

Note how the Bloc is over-represented, because they run candidates in only one region. Also note that the NDP and the Greens are under-represented. The Greens in particular; despite getting more than 4% of the popular vote, they didn't get a single seat.

As I mentioned, our current setup allowed the Conservatives to form the government, despite the fact that nearly 65% of Canadians didn't vote for them!

Yes, but in the numbers you've given above, they'd still be the government, just with fewer seats. The only real difference would be if you could sustain a Liberal/Green coalition, as any other possible coalition could also occur under the current system. But even the L/G coalition wouldn't have more seats than the Conservatives.

Indeed, with a purely proportional system, I seriously doubt we'd ever see a single party majority government again.


I'm open to a discussion of new models for Parliament, but that discussion needs to be public, and willing to consider all sorts of options. In the last Ontario election, they tried to pass a referendum on a mixed riding/proportional system, but there was no public debate on what system should have been proposed in the referendum, and the model that was proposed had some major flaws in it, IMO.

 

[Madalch]

Indeed, with a purely proportional system, I seriously doubt we'd ever see a single party majority government again.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

Having a minority means having to stay in line instead of treating the country as your private little kingdom until you can't put off an election call any longer. Even Stevie (whom, you may have noticed, I despise, and trust no farther than I could throw him- and I've built a trebuchet for when I ever get the chance to see how far that is) has managed to not screw up so far in his term, and most of the things he has accomplished are things I agree with.

 

[Corsair 115]

Having a minority means having to stay in line instead of treating the country as your private little kingdom until you can't put off an election call any longer.

On the other hand, it can give the balance of power to some tiny, one-issue, possibly radical party. And it might mean a lot more federal elections.

 

[Horatius]

On the other hand, it can give the balance of power to some tiny, one-issue, possibly radical party. And it might mean a lot more federal elections.

Indeed. Was it Italy that was perpetually messed up because they could never form an actual government because of the proliferation of little parties that kept splitting the vote?

Concerns about keeping government in line are fine, but at the same time, they need to be able to do something useful, otherwise, why even have them? That's why I tend to favour the "Vote The Bastards Out" party. Keep them turning over, and they'll never get quite comfortable enough to become the sleazy corrupt scumbags they're inclined to be. We've done pretty good with turn over the last 20 years or so, let's not go back to the Trudeau "Natural Ruling Party" era, kthx?

 

[Jimbo07]

You say that like it's a bad thing.

It is with a weak opposition like that led by Singleissue Dion

Having a minority means having to stay in line instead of treating the country as your private little kingdom

Which is exactly what Our Good Buddy Steve has been able to accomplish by outmaneuvering the aforementioned weak opposition.

Even Stevie... has managed to not screw up so far in his term, and most of the things he has accomplished are things I agree with.

Really? Not even when he had to sack Ambrose? Or Bernier? Or gone to war with the bureaucracy (External Affairs, RCMP, Elections Canada)? Slashed funding for the arts? What legislation has he rammed through that you agree with? Why, despite Dion, can Harper not lift his party's approval above the mid 30s?

He hasn't screwed up politically, being very shrewd, but his policies are... well... messed up!

 

[Madalch]

Which is exactly what Our Good Buddy Steve has been able to accomplish by outmaneuvering the aforementioned weak opposition.

He hasn't tried to do anything about same-sex marriage, and he raised the age of consent past 14.

 

[FFed]

As much as I hate to, I think I will be voting Conservative. They are the least distasteful to me right now. Here is BC I already have a carbon tax, and getting another one is not something I would look forward to.

 

[Jimbo07]

As much as I hate to, I think I will be voting Conservative. They are the least distasteful to me right now. Here is BC I already have a carbon tax, and getting another one is not something I would look forward to.

So why not vote NDP, Green or your local pot party? None of them will form a government, anyway, and you won't have to say you supported the Conservatives!

ETA: Madalch, I wonder if he gets an effect of appeasing the more rabid parts of his base from the former with the latter?

 

[Madalch]

ETA: Madalch, I wonder if he gets an effect of appeasing the more rabid parts of his base from the former with the latter?

I actually hope so. Not that I want Stevie to get more support, but raising the age was something that needed to be done, and if it shuts up the Radical Rednecks, so much the better.

 

[Blue Mountain]

Indeed. Was it Italy that was perpetually messed up because they could never form an actual government because of the proliferation of little parties that kept splitting the vote?

Yes, Italy, and Israel too. However, Germany also uses a proportional system and they tend to have stable governments.

Keeping small, single-issue parties out of the Commons can possibly be handled by a system of "You need to get a minimum of X% of the popular vote to even be considered for a seat." How you set X is up for debate. Perhaps a seat minimum--if your party doesn't get enough of the popular vote to get, say, three seats, it's out of the running. There are also mechanisms such as preferential voting and instant runoffs that try to get a better feel for the will of the voters than our current "first past the post" system.

Disclaimer: I'm not a political science guy; I'm a systems analyst and computer programmer. Much smarter people than I have examined voting systems^WP in depth.

Concerns about keeping government in line are fine, but at the same time, they need to be able to do something useful, otherwise, why even have them? That's why I tend to favour the "Vote The Bastards Out" party. Keep them turning over, and they'll never get quite comfortable enough to become the sleazy corrupt scumbags they're inclined to be. We've done pretty good with turn over the last 20 years or so, let's not go back to the Trudeau "Natural Ruling Party" era, kthx?

You mean the Liberals aren't Canada's natural ruling party? I'm shocked, I tell you, shocked!

 

[Corsair 115]

Really? Not even when he had to sack Ambrose? Or Bernier? Or gone to war with the bureaucracy (External Affairs, RCMP, Elections Canada)? Slashed funding for the arts?

We can probably add to that list the incident with the medical isotopes and AECL; the persistent troubles with "in and out" campaign financing from the last election; and the Health Minister being virtually invisible during the current listeria outbreak. There are probably other examples that are slipping my mind at the moment.

I caught a Rex Murphy piece on the CBC News tonight about the forthcoming election. I thought it spot-on.

 

[Praktik]

I caught a Rex Murphy piece on the CBC News tonight about the forthcoming election. I thought it spot-on.

You can't knock his insight but you can knock his language. Jeebus, cut off a few syllables from every 3rd word and come down to earth Rex!!

 

[Jimbo07]

First poll has the Conservatives ahead by 10, 38 to 28%...

Looks like Singleissue Dion has blown it... can he come back?

 

[Blue Mountain]

We can probably add to that list the incident with the medical isotopes and AECL (remainder snipped)

As much as I dislike the our current Conservative government, the AECL debacle is one they inherited from the Liberals. They were the ones in power when the Chalk River reactor was being rebuilt--a project that was eventually cancelled.

 

[Jimbo07]

the AECL debacle is one they inherited from the Liberals.

... and the maritime helicopter fiasco goes all the way back (through every government) to the Mulroney era!

 

[Horatius]

First poll has the Conservatives ahead by 10, 38 to 28%...

Looks like Singleissue Dion has blown it... can he come back?

Hey, they haven't even called it yet!


I'm sure Singleissue Dion will find many more issues to blow it on in the coming weeks.

Alas, I'm off to Vegas for the first week of campaigning, and will hear absolutely nothing about any of this while I'm there.

 

[Corsair 115]

You can't knock his insight but you can knock his language. Jeebus, cut off a few syllables from every 3rd word and come down to earth Rex!!

I actually like that. It's a cut above the kind of television opinion pieces typically seen.

As much as I dislike the our current Conservative government, the AECL debacle is one they inherited from the Liberals. They were the ones in power when the Chalk River reactor was being rebuilt--a project that was eventually cancelled.

Perhaps so. But if the Conservatives are going to tout their strength as leaders, shouldn't they have strongly dealt with the situation before it became a big problem?

In any case, I was thinking more of how they fired the chair of the CNSC over the matter because she didn't agree with what the Conservative minister had to say about it.

 

[Fitter]

... and the maritime helicopter fiasco goes all the way back (through every government) to the Mulroney era!

But it was Crouton who cancelled the EH-101 with no plans to find a replacement. There is only one person to blame for that farce and it is the guy from Shawinigan.