killer rin
Member
So, speech from the throne day. Anyone else going to be watching the CBC or CPAC stream?
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Canadian PoliGAF - 42nd Parliament: Sunny Ways in Trudeaupia
- Thread starter matthewwhatever
- Start date
- Status
gutter_trash
Banned
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...speech-what-you-need-to-know/article27601890/
Liberal Governments for life!
Goodbye Conservative Governments, you will not be missed
Liberal Governments for life!
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...speech-what-you-need-to-know/article27601890/
Goodbye Conservative Governments, you will not be missed
Liberal Governments for life!
I'll agree to that.
It felt like GOP influences were present in the past couple years of the CPC government.
They'd be better off splitting into 2 parties: one for hardcore cons, and one for centrists.
killer rin
Member
Well, if we get Proportional Representation as our new system. Conservatives will likely split back into Progressive and Reform, The Green Party come in as an actual party and we might see another party come in with one or two seats (aka, the position the greens are in now).
Simon Belmont
Banned
Why does everyone think the Greens will suddenly be relevant with MMP? They only got 3.5% of the vote last go around.
CitizenVectron
Member
People think this for 2 reasons:
1) Right now they generally poll higher (6-8% usually) until an election, at which point many of their supporters switch to NDP or Liberal as a strategic vote. If strategic voting no longer mattered under MMP, then the theory is that their numbers would go up (as well as NDP).
2) 5% of the seats in the HOC is 17 seats. That's enough to be the balance of power in many scenarios, making them more important.
And this, being an official party, might give them a lot more legitimacy in peoples eyes
Simon Belmont
Banned
Unless there's a floor on the amount of the vote required to get the seats. It's just as easy to see them still at 1 seat under either system.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
The presumption, based on empirical evidence that MMP and PR systems leas to greater numbers of ENEP, is that they would be represented. But even if they were not, the assumption is that under MMP, the fact that they aren't would be more indicative of their failings, not the system's.
Take for example New Zealand, which transitioned to MMP after the 1993 election. Starting with the post-war elections:
1946: Labour (like our Liberals) wins, National (like our Conservatives) get 2nd, no other parties are represented
1949: National wins, Labour gets 2nd, no other parties
1951: National, Labour, no one else
1954: National, Labour, no one else
1957: Labour, National, no one else
1960: National, Labour, no one else
1963: National, Labour, no one else
1966: National, Labour, and then Social Credit (like our Social Credit) get 1 seat!
1969: National, Labour, no one else
1972: Labour, National, no one else
1975: National, Labour, no one else
1978: National, Labour, Social Credit gets 1 seat
1981: National, Labour, SoCred gets 2 seats
1984: Labour. National, SoCred gets 2 seats
1987: Labour, National, no one else
1990: National, Labour, New Labour (their colour is orange) gets 1 seat
1993: National, Labour, Alliance (like a Green party, swallowed up New Labour) gets 2 seats, NZ First (anti-immigrant) gets 2 seats
---- MMP goes here ----
Now it should be noted that the overall number of seats expanded from 100 to 120 at this point:
1996: National, Labour, NZ first gets 17 seats, Alliance gets 13 seats, ACT (Libertarian-ish) gets 8 seats, United NZ (Centrist) gets 1
1999: Labour, National, Alliance gets 13, ACT 8, Green (a separate Green party) gets 7, NZ first gets 5
2002: Labour, National, NZ First 13, ACT 9, Green 9, United 8, Progressive 2
2005: Labour, National, NZ First 7, Green 6, Maori (NZ's election system has a really weird quirk I don't want to explain here) 4, United 3, ACT 2, Progressive 1
2008: National, Labour, Green 9, ACT 5, Maori 5, Progressive 1, United 1
2011: National, Labour, Green 14, NZ First 8, Maori 3, Mana (splinter of Maori) 1, ACT 1, United 1
2014: National, Labour, Green 14, NZ First 11, Maori 2, ACT 1, United 1
I'll also add that there hasn't been a single majority government post-MMP. They've all been coalitions of varying degrees of formality (often supply arrangements, which are basically just an agreement with another party not to tank the government prematurely).
Like most MMP system, NZ does have a floor. Like most MMP systems, NZ has policies to help minor parties--for example, if you don't clear the floor but win a seat in the ridings, you still win proportionate numbers of seats.
Under the NZ system, with absolutely NO vote switching (one of the mechanisms for the increased number of ENEP is that people will feel more comfortable voting for minor parties), Elizabeth May's Greens would have ~11 seats. We can assume it would get no fewer votes, and probably more. In 2011 they'd have had 21 seats; in 2008 they'd have had 0 (because they were just under 5%, which is the NZ threshold, and May didn't win a riding).
gutter_trash
Banned
I think I would like Mixed because there is nothing more infuriating than being stuck in a riding that swings hard one way against what you vote for.
MMP could be a nice compromise to allow people like me to feel represented without falling into the trappings of Proportional Representation that would plunge Canada into European Darkness Chaos
I am against pure Proportional Representation.
Being a dual citizen and knowing how stupid European countries can get out of hand, I don't want to live in perpetual minority government situations.
Minority Governments play short term politics and rarely get anything done with long term goals.
Like it or not; good majority governments who don't behave only out of electrolisam get shit done that benefits the long term
MMP could be a nice compromise to allow people like me to feel represented without falling into the trappings of Proportional Representation that would plunge Canada into European Darkness Chaos
I am against pure Proportional Representation.
Being a dual citizen and knowing how stupid European countries can get out of hand, I don't want to live in perpetual minority government situations.
Minority Governments play short term politics and rarely get anything done with long term goals.
Like it or not; good majority governments who don't behave only out of electrolisam get shit done that benefits the long term
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
Yeah the primary distinction between MMP and PR is not a difference in proportionality (if done right, the district seats are filled and then the list seats are used to fix proportionality), it's the fact that some members still have explicit districts and thus perform constituency service and represent regional interests. Which would make MMP appropriate for Canada where we'd expect it's important that regional interests be represented.
firehawk12
Subete no aware
If only we had a chamber that was supposed to explicitly represent regional interests...
If only we didn't. :/
I tend to think that any reform enacted is most likely to be one that leaves the existing districts mainly in place, because it's a lot easier to rally support for adding than subtracting, and if you scrap the existing districts you will automatically get large numbers of people on red alert (particularly in rural areas).
gutter_trash
Banned
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...s-to-create-own-gun-registry/article27578888/
I support Quebec's choice of making tougher Gun Control laws.
with all the banter in the US of Obama having his hands tied because of Republican congress, it feels good in Canada knowing that we don't have a stupid 2nd Amendment.
I support Quebec's choice of making tougher Gun Control laws.
It's not like there weren't people quite happy to see the long gun registry go. I am however glad that the government of Quebec isn't bowing to those people.
ProfessorMoran
Member
Dalton was corrupt as fuck, but that's the mo of the Ontario liberals, Wynne is inept on top of that when it comes to actually governing, in terms of campaigning the liberals are effective and ruthless.
You Are Viewtiful
Member
I agree with you on the campaigning and the Dalton part. People here are blaming PC/NDP for bad governing, and maybe I'm too young to remember that, but I don't think it's entirely the case. There is a lot of blame for Ontarians and Ontario media for buying into what Liberals are promising every election. The Liberals promised a pony and a subway stop in everyone's backyard and it went unchallenged, in fact people called Horwath (NDP leader) an orange Rob Ford for not matching those crazy promises. Liberal corruption was never part of the election debate in 2011 and 2014, everyone seems to get amnesia around election time. I'd say the problem isn't too long a memory, rather a too short one.
I don't know, I don't think the PC have anyone to blame but themselves for the last election loss. They could have won by literally not campaigning at all, but Hudak had to open his mouth and shoot himself in the foot. They could have the next election in the bag too if they had just elected a generic person to be their leader, but noooo, they had to put this whackjob in charge.
I'll probably vote NDP next election, because there's not much alternative.
I'll probably vote NDP next election, because there's not much alternative.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
"I will create jobs by firing the people who already have them.
Also, to the people I'm about to fire, vote for me."
Also, to the people I'm about to fire, vote for me."
You Are Viewtiful
Member
He was already second place before he said that though. That promise only turned a Liberal minority into a Liberal majority.
It sealed the deal and will probably haunt the party for quite a while since Brown is suppose to be worse on just about all fronts.
hydragonwarrior
Member
So is this Nannygate thing still going? Has Trudeau responded to it yet?
Simon Belmont
Banned
It never was a thing and I doubt he responds to it.
gutter_trash
Banned
everyone already forgot about it and it will be soon forgotten.
We are in month 1, you are not remembered for what you do in Month 1.
-------
Anyway, in the rumour milll, it seems that Mulcair decided on his own without consulting his party on his position on the Niqab and Zero Deficit during the campaign.
And that some NDP members will hold his feet to the fire for it, mainly his Zero Deficit stance that is considered to be Paul Martin-esque and made the NDP appear more to the Rights than the Trudeau Liberals last October.
Well you know Ontarians don't vote in a majority for Wynne. The election results just shake out that way to give Wynne full power to do whatever she wants. We know what the solution is for that.
The first four years of McGuinty were great. The rest are like, "well, it's either them or the Conservatives, should I bother voting or shoot myself in the head? Choices Choices"
Sapiens
Member
It's our fault, like 90% of it it, but I also blame the NDP for forcing the election and handing the Libs a majority. What was their internal polling showing? An NDP majority? Horwath is done. Is there no compelling leadership, politically, in Ontario at all??
Simon Belmont
Banned
John Tory isn't horrible, but even he couldn't help but shoot himself in the foot.
Sapiens
Member
He would have been a good Premiere - and we're probably in the darkest timeline right now with Wynne and all, but he had to say the DUMBEST thing about religious school funding. Idiot.
The gas plant revelations were bad enough that Horwath's hand was forced. I mean random boyfriend of high level govt employee being brought in to trash govt hard drives? How could anyone support that? There are limits.
Simon Belmont
Banned
The darkest timeline involves Hudak. We're not quite at rock bottom yet.
gutter_trash
Banned
what did he say about religious school funding?
IMO, the state should not pay one sent for religious indoctrination of children
Sapiens
Member
Still bad political strategy.
Supporting it was bad political strategy too (don't want that gas plant stink on you). Damned if she did Damned if she didn't.
Sapiens
Member
It's not like they were the gov't and it's not like they were even opposition. But they did hold some sway - which they abandoned because the NDP thought they had a chance - which they didn't.
Don't know if Horwath thought she had a chance (not a mind reader). Just pointing out that they being seen as the party that supported the Liberals over the gas plant would have been bad for them in the subsequent election also.
Ontario is currently forced to fund the Catholic School Board because of our constitution so he thought it would only be fair if other religions had that same deal. It's stupid, Ontario should be moving to end the Catholic Board funding.
The only positive thing currently is that the Catholic Board can't force the kids to go to mass.
Most Ontarians agree but the ones who don't are veerrry committed and verry likely to vote on this as their single issue.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
...ok?So Carolyn Bennett was wearing a T-shirt with text and pictorial in the House of Commons.
It's unusual and against the Decorum (proper attire section), is all I'm saying.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
The scarf behind her is the greater crime against fashion imho
gutter_trash
Banned
Thank God that Canadian politics is this boring when compared to our crazy cousins to the South, lol we get worked up about t-shirts and nannies
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
I can't imagine giving a shit about anything like that... lol
killer rin
Member
Wait, we're forced to have a Catholic School Board because the Constitution of Ontario says so? WTF?
Also we have a Constitution of Ontario? Or am I reading this wrong?
The Protestant/Catholic split was very important to some people back in the day.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked