|
|
Post by The New Guy on May 4, 2011 18:27:43 GMT -5
Senate reform just turns Canada into a lite version of the US system, which I can tell you, is seriously dysfunctional. There's nothing wrong with a traditional parliamentary system, where the population and preferences of the voters are expressed in the number of seats. Sometimes you have periods where too may parties split the votes and you end up with a string of minority governments like Canada has had, but that's not really a problem with the system per se. Ideally, you would have a situtation like in Britain where you have a centre-left party and a centre-right party battling it out between each other. Quebec will always be in a unique position and will shift loyalties between the major parties, or go with something like the BQ for a period of time. By granting each province an equal number of Senate seats, you end up over-representing less populated areas and thwarting the will of the majority. PEI should have the same voting power as Ontario for any given issue? Really? And what does that mean for laws passed by Parliament? Do they also need to be ratified in the Senate? So you could have a situatiion where Ontario, Quebec, and BC (what is that, 70% of the country) all vote in favor of an issue, but the rest of the provinces say no. That's unacceptable, IMO, and all you need to do is look at the US Senate as exhibit A. From where I sit, there's really not much wrong with Canadian politics. You have pretty much universal consensus on the key national issues (health care, pensions, general tax rates, GST) but the federal govt is way more limited than compared to the US. Provincial govts in Canada wield way more power than in the US. In Canada, I bet your tax dollars a split roughly even between provincial and federal taxes. In the US, I pay about 5x more per year in federal taxes than I do in state taxes. You're not thwarting the will of the majority, you're ensuring that that all regions have a balanced say in matters of country. Otherwise you have a tendency to focus on the most populated regions and let the others wither and die. Currently certain regions (namely Newfoundland, Saskatchewan, Alberta and B.C.) fund the welfare of the other provinces. If you are going to say "population = more senate seats" then why not "money = more senate seats". After all, Ontario is only able to support its larger population through the financial contributions of those four provinces. An equal voice in the Senate, a popular voice in the House. The House retains a dominant role - they can overrule the Senate with a large enough majority (say 204 votes) but the reigning party cannot simply force through whatever it wishes. It must be good for all of Canada, not just the most populous regions and not just the wealthiest regions. Not to pick things apart too much, but the problems and dysfunction in the American political system is now due more to the polarized and partisan nature of the political parties there. The Republicans refuse to budge, the Democrats refuse to budge - there is very little cooperation there. Conversely compromise and cooperation have been the order of the day since 2004. Of course, as I said, true senate reform is the pipiest of pipe dreams, so the attitude in Ottawa now would have little bearing. |
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on May 4, 2011 18:32:29 GMT -5
I agree with BH. I don't want to see another level of government. Abolish the senate, give the west and Ontario the proper amount of seats and call it a day. 322 elected people is enough for me and enough of a talent pool. I should say sufficient talent pool. Alright, adequate talent pool. Okay, fine, it's a pool of warm bodies.  That's certainly a valid point, but at the end of the day you'll still have regional parties - be the Ontarioan, Quebecois or otherwise - running ruckshod over political matters. My vision is of a small and compact senate - I think thirty nine senators is more than plenty and has us at a lean 347 elected officials. And as an added bonus - just for you - if you make those three electable every six years (one every other year) then you have a constant rotation of senators but you are well insulated from things like the Orange Crush, which would at most be able to capture 1/3 of the Senate in any given election and would probably peter out and die before it could do any lasting damage. |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on May 5, 2011 16:31:35 GMT -5
... over to you Mr Layton. =============================================================== NDP respects Quebec sovereignty, says newly-elected MP
Jessica Hume May 5, 2011 – 11:23 AM ETThe NDP respects sovereignty in Quebec. This according to the youngest MP in Canadian history, 19-year-old Pierre-Luc Dusseault, who, as of Monday, represents the Sherbrooke riding in Quebec. “I don’t think separatism is dead,” he said. “The NDP and I respect sovereignty.” Speaking with John Oakley on his Toronto morning radio show, Mr. Dusseault asserted the issue of Quebec’s role in Canada remains open and that the newly inflated representation Quebec has in parliament will be reflected in the way the province relates to the rest if Canada. “Sovereignty will be done in Quebec,” Mr. Dusseault said. “Quebeckers will decide if they want to be a country.” Since its sweeping victory in Monday’s election, observers have wondered how the surge in Quebec representation will affect dynamics within government. Dr. Kathy Brock, associate professor of political studies at Queen’s University, said support for separatism in La Belle Province has not dipped below 30%. NDP voters in Quebec were seduced by the Orange Crush because of its social democratic values, she said, rather than diminished interests in the sovereignty of the province. “Separatism in Quebec has not declined,” she said. “But that national outlet in Parliament is no longer there, so Quebec can make a legitimate argument that it’s an outsider now.” The ramifications of Mr. Dusseault’s comments have yet to be seen, but the timing of his comments is unfortunate, following two public relations faux pas suffered by the NDP in the few days since rise to Official Opposition status on Monday. MP-elect Ruth Ellen Brosseau has this week come under scrutiny for allegedly filing falsified nominations papers in Quebec, while the deputy leader of the NDP, Thomas Mulcair, raised eyebrows Wednesday when he announced he does not believe the U.S. possesses photographs of Osama bin Laden’s body. “I don’t think, from what I’ve heard, that those pictures exist and if they do I’ll leave that up to the American military,” he told CBC Power and Politics host Evan Solomon Wednesday. Mr. Mulcair was on damage control Thursday morning, and explained his comments had been taken out of context and that he was referring to whether a photo of Osama Bin Laden reaching for his gun exists or not. news.nationalpost.com/2011/05/05/ndp-respects-quebec-sovereignty-says-newly-elected-mp/ (link) |
|
|
|
Post by PTH on May 5, 2011 21:33:03 GMT -5
Can we also refuse the over-valued currency that's killing our manufacturing sector ? In short, people with money will be able to back up their point of view more than people without. In short, everyone counts, moreso if you're rich. But both crazy and non-crazy kill more with guns than without. 60% of whom didn't vote Conservative.... and with no other right-wing choices, it means 60% wanted a center or downright left type of government. |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on May 6, 2011 0:01:36 GMT -5
Can we also refuse the over-valued currency that's killing our manufacturing sector ? In short, people with money will be able to back up their point of view more than people without. In short, everyone counts, moreso if you're rich. But both crazy and non-crazy kill more with guns than without. 60% of whom didn't vote Conservative.... and with no other right-wing choices, it means 60% wanted a center or downright left type of government. Currency? You can thank the hero in US, aka obama who is churning out monopoly money. ANYONE can afford 10 buck for the party of their choice. Can't blame social and mental problems in inanimate objects. If 60% don't want Conservatives then 70% don't want NDP, 81% don't want Liberal and it appears only Duceppes mother wants Bloc. |
|
|
|
Post by seventeen on May 6, 2011 1:39:29 GMT -5
Currency? You can thank the hero in US, aka obama who is churning out monopoly money. I beg to differ. He's been the one put in that position by the American attitude exemplified by the first Doughhead Family, the Bushes. Everyone has a god given right to own their own home, even if they're unemployed lazy bums. Wrong attitude. Then add in pure greed, by investment bankers such as Goldman Sachs (who managed to adroitly avoid the worst and actually profit from it, with even fewer competitors than before). Course, Obama could have run a balanced budget and destroyed the US economy entirely. It was a fine balancing act to avoid a depression. Dubbya was forced into it at the start of the credit fiasco and Obama had to follow as well. You're right about the excess liquidity, but you're pointing the finger in the wrong direction with regard to the cause. Don't like him, HA? |
|
|
|
Post by franko on May 6, 2011 5:58:35 GMT -5
Can we also refuse the over-valued currency that's killing our manufacturing sector ? since the value of the dollar is tied to the price of crude [oil, that is, black gold, Texas tea] I'd be in favour of that. and people who believe in their cause. some people have the mistaken idea that only rich white Albertans vote for and give to the Conservative Party. Not so. Poor white and non-white non-Albertans [non-religious types too] also give . . . their $25 each adds up. the NDP knows how to raise funds too -- the Liberals need to learn how to as part of their revitalization. and with knives, and with cars . . . HA's answer would be mine. |
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on May 6, 2011 11:27:38 GMT -5
Currency? You can thank the hero in US, aka obama who is churning out monopoly money. I beg to differ. He's been the one put in that position by the American attitude exemplified by the first Doughhead Family, the Bushes. Everyone has a god given right to own their own home, even if they're unemployed lazy bums. Wrong attitude. Then add in pure greed, by investment bankers such as Goldman Sachs (who managed to adroitly avoid the worst and actually profit from it, with even fewer competitors than before). Course, Obama could have run a balanced budget and destroyed the US economy entirely. It was a fine balancing act to avoid a depression. Dubbya was forced into it at the start of the credit fiasco and Obama had to follow as well. You're right about the excess liquidity, but you're pointing the finger in the wrong direction with regard to the cause. Don't like him, HA? Don't beg when you differ....  If you really want to discuss this, you need to start from the beginning and CRA, Find out what that is, who implemented it, who supported it, and then we can talk. Worse still to the "Bush Did IT" mantra....there is a video that I'm too lazy to find where Bush is warning that banks have to be reigned in.....but the Democrats will have non of it since it's "housing poor America". I'm no Bush fan but "Bush Did It" mantra ignores or worse, tries to rewrite history. |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on May 6, 2011 12:17:43 GMT -5
One of the few positives to come out of this election. Well done ladies! ============================================================ Record number of women elected
By Meagan Fitzpatrick, CBC News Posted: May 3, 2011 4:55 PM ET Last Updated: May 3, 2011 6:22 PM ET There will be more female faces in the House of Commons following Monday's federal election that saw 76 women elected. In the 2008 election, 69 women were elected. One resigned last year, bringing the number down to 68 female MPs when the election was called in March. According to the unofficial results posted on Parliament's website, the NDP elected the most women MPs — 40 of them are among the 102 MPs who make up the new Official Opposition party. Twenty-seven of the women MPs are from Quebec. One out of the four Bloc Quebecois MPs elected is a woman, while the Liberals have six women in their reduced caucus of 34 MPs. The Conservative majority government has 28 women in its 167-member caucus. Green Party Leader Elizabeth May made history Monday night by winning her party's first ever seat in the House of Commons and she will be the only female federal leader on Parliament Hill. In total, women will sit in 25 per cent of the 308 seats in the House of Commons. Equal Voice, an organization dedicated to electing more women, called the results "a historic high" and said Canada now ranks in the top 40 countries for its female representation in Parliament. Sixty-nine was the previous record, according to the group. "It signifies that Canada is moving forward," said Equal Voice's national chair, Donna Dasko, in a statement. Equal Voice is now urging Prime Minister Stephen Harper to include a high number of women in his new cabinet. The previous one included Senator Marjory LeBreton and nine women MPs who were all re-elected with the exception of Josee Verner. Since her first election in 2006 she served as minister of international co-operation, official languages minister, heritage minister and minister for the status of women. She lost her Quebec seat to another woman, the NDP's Alexandrine Latendresse. The Liberals, who saw their total seat count reduced from 77 to 34, lost a number of experienced women MPs and some who were gaining prominence within the party and on Parliament Hill. Marlene Jennings, Martha Hall Findlay, Anita Neville, Maria Minna, Bonnie Crombie, Ruby Dhalla and Siobhan Coady will not be coming back to Ottawa. Among those who survived the historic Liberal defeat and kept their seats are Carolyn Bennett, Kirsty Duncan, Judy Foote, Hedy Fry, and Joyce Murray. There were a number of women running in some highly-anticipated and closely-watched races who were successful in their bids to become an MP — some for the first time, others for a second. In Toronto's Parkdale-High Park riding, the NDP's Peggy Nash got her seat back from Liberal Gerard Kennedy, who took it away from her in the 2008 election. Helena Guergis failed to keep her seat in Simcoe-Grey, running as an Indepedent Conservative candidate after getting kicked out of the Conservative caucus. But the riding will still be represented by a woman as Conservative Kellie Leitch sailed to victory. With the NDP now the official Opposition party, there will be opportunities for some of the 40 women in its caucus to heighten their profiles in federal politics. Among those who could play more prominent roles are Olivia Chow, Megan Leslie, Carol Hughes, Chris Charlton, Niki Ashton, Libby Davies, Linda Duncan and Irene Mathyssen. www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canadavotes2011/story/2011/05/03/cv-election-women.html# (link) |
|
