-
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
TheRealTalker
Banned
question for poliGAF
Canada being a Federate is good or bad in your opinion...
Should it be a unitary system?
Is it possible with places like Quebec and are tax system?
Do you think we will be more stable if and future proof if we become unitary with also a change to our representative electoral system? Or will unitary cause for disruption and a rise for independence from certain provinces/territories?
Canada being a Federate is good or bad in your opinion...
Should it be a unitary system?
Is it possible with places like Quebec and are tax system?
Do you think we will be more stable if and future proof if we become unitary with also a change to our representative electoral system? Or will unitary cause for disruption and a rise for independence from certain provinces/territories?
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
How to spot political science homework. Intro Canadian Politics?
IMHO,
Canada benefits from its current arrangement of asymmetric federalism. Devolution is good because we have specific preference, industry, and population heterogeneity between provinces; national standards are good because they allow redistribution to lift all provinces. The asymmetry fits Canada's unique binational character. The administration of the Canada Health Act is a great example of how Canada gets it right. I personally would be open for additional asymmetries provided they serve the purpose of policy experimentation or of provinces wishing to provide beyond the national minimum (as opposed to opting out from contributing to higher quality of life for Canadians). Federalism should also be viewed in light of separatist sympathies and movements in Canada. I feel that stability is an overrated criteria for evaluating governance.
Geographically large unitary states are fairly uncommon, and the counter-examples are predominantly authoritarian regimes.
On the subject of electoral systems, it is unclear if you are referring to the house or the senate. My preference, in the absence of constitutional constraint, is to leave the senate essentially unreformed--perhaps save service length caps of 15 or so years--and seek to lower senate costs where possible (possibly by reducing seats through attrition). For the house, I would like to see reform. My preference would be some sort of MMP (maybe 2/3rds district seats and 1/3rd list seats) or PR with the district magnitude being a province or province-region. Provided this is not possible, I believe ranked ballot voting of any kind will help reduce the within-riding strategic vote incentives that have caused many on the right throughout the 90s and early 00s and many on the left since to be critical of the system.
IMHO,
Canada benefits from its current arrangement of asymmetric federalism. Devolution is good because we have specific preference, industry, and population heterogeneity between provinces; national standards are good because they allow redistribution to lift all provinces. The asymmetry fits Canada's unique binational character. The administration of the Canada Health Act is a great example of how Canada gets it right. I personally would be open for additional asymmetries provided they serve the purpose of policy experimentation or of provinces wishing to provide beyond the national minimum (as opposed to opting out from contributing to higher quality of life for Canadians). Federalism should also be viewed in light of separatist sympathies and movements in Canada. I feel that stability is an overrated criteria for evaluating governance.
Geographically large unitary states are fairly uncommon, and the counter-examples are predominantly authoritarian regimes.
On the subject of electoral systems, it is unclear if you are referring to the house or the senate. My preference, in the absence of constitutional constraint, is to leave the senate essentially unreformed--perhaps save service length caps of 15 or so years--and seek to lower senate costs where possible (possibly by reducing seats through attrition). For the house, I would like to see reform. My preference would be some sort of MMP (maybe 2/3rds district seats and 1/3rd list seats) or PR with the district magnitude being a province or province-region. Provided this is not possible, I believe ranked ballot voting of any kind will help reduce the within-riding strategic vote incentives that have caused many on the right throughout the 90s and early 00s and many on the left since to be critical of the system.
That was my first thought also. :lol
TheRealTalker
Banned
lol it isn't an assignment... I was just suffering the web and grew curious 
we have some sharing, unity based endeavors here and there so we dabble a little in the pond of not being a pure federalist country and I also agree on the points of a massive country like Canada, or Russia, or USA can't really be a fully unitary country due to its sheer size and differences but looking through some history points here and there and the evolution of migration and integration (with also the rise of global technology) I felt that maybe not in our life time but latter we may become more manageable and mixed to become more leaning on unitary as larger nation controlling may becoming more easier to manage... I also feel that socialist and diverse countries are still evolving with new struggles that will be hard at first to handle but latter will advance or political system and ability to new heights as we learn to adapt to changing scenarios and cultures.
I was indeed referring to the house. I like your ranked ballot voting proposal though it indeed would make it more representative towards the overall populous' views rather then splitting a certain view point vote to 3 or more parties that are all from one side of the same coin and have the other scale be only one party like CPC vs the NDP + Liberal split
I feel basically this
we have some sharing, unity based endeavors here and there so we dabble a little in the pond of not being a pure federalist country and I also agree on the points of a massive country like Canada, or Russia, or USA can't really be a fully unitary country due to its sheer size and differences but looking through some history points here and there and the evolution of migration and integration (with also the rise of global technology) I felt that maybe not in our life time but latter we may become more manageable and mixed to become more leaning on unitary as larger nation controlling may becoming more easier to manage... I also feel that socialist and diverse countries are still evolving with new struggles that will be hard at first to handle but latter will advance or political system and ability to new heights as we learn to adapt to changing scenarios and cultures.
I was indeed referring to the house. I like your ranked ballot voting proposal though it indeed would make it more representative towards the overall populous' views rather then splitting a certain view point vote to 3 or more parties that are all from one side of the same coin and have the other scale be only one party like CPC vs the NDP + Liberal split
That's what I heard.
I'm divided on my feelings about this. On one hand, I feel terrible for his family. On the other hand, he promised to run for mayor again in 2018.
TheRealTalker
Banned
speaking of electoral reform is the talks or procedure happening in the next few years or do we not have any date estimate for that?
Silent Chief
Member
On the subject of senate reform, I think the remuneration should be modeled after the House of Lords. No basic pay. Daily allocation for each day of attendance. Supplementary allocation for each day sitting on committees. Plane tickets are handed out, not reimbursed. Free food at the senate cafeteria, no other reimbursed meals.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
I'm probably a little less stingy than you are, but I am on-board with attendance-based pay unless someone has an excused absence. When the mid-90s Senate attendance scandals were reported (circa 97-98 if I remember correctly, I was younger then!) there was some discussion of this type of model. At that point Senators didn't even need to file attendance records!
Was that of the guy who was caught walking his Chihuahua in Mexico and had his picture splashed all over the news?
killer rin
Member
Depends on who you ask.
-If you listen to the Liberals, they say they are still deciding on how to put together the committees for it.
-If you ask the NDP, they are saying that at the current pace, there is no way in hell that we will have Electoral Reform within the 18 months they promised, let alone the next election.
-If you listen to the Conservatives, they are still dead set on blocking anything in the senate unless it is done through a referendum
Really? That's terrible, I actually kind of hoped the guy would be able to turn his life around.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
Mulcair seems doomed, but on the other hand there's really no one else viable out there at the moment. I don't think he's the right guy going forward but I don't see anyone else who is either. I like Cullen a lot, but he doesn't seem interested and I'm not sure if he's the right guy. He was also a moderate just like Mulcair.
When you look at the energy and excitement that Sanders has created in the United States you have to imagine that there's room for the NDP to move left and do well, but I don't see anyone on the NDP front bench that is capable of doing that right now.
In this last election the party basically ran in cruise control on Layton's old platform but without any of the Layton charm, and that didn't get them anywhere. Assuming that the Trudeau Liberals maintain a left lean, I think they'll need to put some serious time and effort into figuring out new policies they should be supporting and why they exist as a party. Pretty tough road ahead!
TheRealTalker
Banned
really? well that sucks
I hope he pulls through. I love that guy.
gutter_trash
Banned
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/senate-appointments-liberal-1.3496977
7 new Trudeau-appointed senators
hahahha André Pratte, editorial writer at La Presse is apointed;
hahahaha Separatists will get real salty today. (Pratte is big time Federalist)
7 new Trudeau-appointed senators
hahahha André Pratte, editorial writer at La Presse is apointed;
hahahaha Separatists will get real salty today. (Pratte is big time Federalist)
Ranked ballots really don't mean anything as ranked ballots can be used in AV which is terrible or STV or even MMP which are not.
Not just a big time federalist, but the most loyal soldier of the
142k for life as a reward for the hard work he's done on his knees over the years
Haha, holy shit:
Reform Members of Parliament hired a Mariachi band and served burritos in the lobby of the Senate to draw attention to the issue.
gutter_trash
Banned
hahahahahaha I can hear the Nationalists cry out about the ''Demarais'' having their hands on the strings whaaabmulance
gutter_trash
Banned
Conservatives have already done so in the past
Ranked ballot does not in any way make results more proportional. Local losers still lose, and their voters get no representation. In Canada our disproportionate results are not really generally the result of riding splits, they are the result of regional power bases distorting the overall result. Ranked ballots may change the outcome in some tens of seats, but overall the results would still be deeply disproportionate than they should be and the CPC would still win too many seats out west and the Bloc too many in Quebec.
gutter_trash
Banned
Marine Le Pen is in Montreal trying to court French nationals who live here to vote for as absentee ballots for the upcoming French elections of whatever
Guess what happened?
members of the Youth wing of the Parti Quebecois openly greeted her and went to see her.
http://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/p...cyberpresse_vous_suggere_4962642_article_POS1
PKP however disavowed her and was not happy about the members of the Youth wing goign to see her
Guess what happened?
members of the Youth wing of the Parti Quebecois openly greeted her and went to see her.
http://www.lapresse.ca/actualites/p...cyberpresse_vous_suggere_4962642_article_POS1
PKP however disavowed her and was not happy about the members of the Youth wing goign to see her
i) Trying to read that in French was both more difficult and sad than I thought and I feel a good way to relearn some french again
2)I'm not sure if the PQ youth wing and the PQ leader being at odds over a FN leader is a good or bad thing.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
According to PKP, these young people are not actually affiliated with the PQ in any official capacity and represent only themselves, so unless he's lying, I'm not sure calling them the "youth wing of the PQ" is in any way accurate. They're just random young nationalists.
Edit: another article here mentions a PQ spokesperson saying they were not part of any official youth wing.
Edit: another article here mentions a PQ spokesperson saying they were not part of any official youth wing.
According to the ceeb, the it seems she wasn't given the cold shoulder by just PKP:
Apparently it's undemocratic and childish to protest now?
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
Her reaction to the protesters is the most childish of them all, really. "Go to bed boys, ta ta". Like... really?
You Are Viewtiful
Member
I like how she calls everyone who disagrees with her "intellectual terrorists". It just can't get more stereotypically European far-right than that.
Fascists don't understand democracy so her comments aren't too surprising.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
I have no idea why Marine Le Pen would be allowed to enter the country, to be perfectly honest.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
Well, why wouldn't she be? Unless she has a criminal record I'm not aware of, but I don't think we stop people from entering based on their shitty political opinions.
Simon Belmont
Banned
Well, why wouldn't she be? Unless she has a criminal record I'm not aware of, but I don't think we stop people from entering based on their shitty political opinions.
Sure we do. WBC and George Galloway were kept out.
Well, why wouldn't she be? Unless she has a criminal record I'm not aware of, but I don't think we stop people from entering based on their shitty political opinions.
There is a precedent set for that already, thanks to our previous government
matthewwhatever
Member
WBC is a hate group, and Galloway made a donation to Hamas, who were on Canada's list of terrorist organizations at the time (and probably still are). The National Front may have some pretty appalling policies, but I don't think there are any grounds to keep Marine Le Pen out. Jean-Marie Le Pen probably could've been kept out, since being a Holocaust denier is generally frowned upon, but just holding dumb political views doesn't cross that line.
It does make me wonder if someone like Trump would be allowed into the country, though. There's a pretty strong case to be made that his comments on Muslims and Mexicans violate s.319 of the Criminal Code. Hopefully his political success stops short of him becoming President, because a POTUS not being allowed into Canada would put a definite crimp in the relationship.
I think if nothing else she's treading a thin line as far as hate is concerned. Fuck Galloway though.
Don't they have diplomatic immunity? I'm pretty sure dictators and the like are allowed to go into any country using diplomatic immunity (provided the ICC isn't after them).
So the writ was dropped last Wednesday, officially beginning the provincial election in Manitoba (they've all been campaigning before that).
The parties have been making promises everyday so here is what we have so far.
Green
Also in the news, Immigration Minister John McCallum was in Winnipeg last week and said:
"I will have no involvement in the provincial election," McCallum said. "I don't even have time today, if I wanted to, but no, I am staying neutral." So that was a bit of a burn to the Manitoba Liberals.
I did the vote compass, which I recommend you guys try since it gives you a good sense of the political landscape of Manitoba. It was a stark reminder of why I cannot even consider PC, as much as I hate Selinger's NDP. I'll vote strategically against PC but it will be futile because the latest polls guarantee PCs a majority government.
The parties have been making promises everyday so here is what we have so far.
Green
- Guaranteed income plan
- Roll back PST to 7% (NDP raised it to 8% a few years ago)
- Public votes on major tax increases
- Cut ambulance fees in half
- More jobs, economic growth for northern Manitoba
- Tackle long wait times in Manitoba hospitals
- Full-day kindergarten
- Free ambulance rides for low income seniors
- Rebate for low-emission cars
- invest in drug treatment program
- Millions in funding to enhance programs at Manitoba schools
- Raise minimum wage ($0.50 increase annually), tackle poverty
- Make university more affordable
Also in the news, Immigration Minister John McCallum was in Winnipeg last week and said:
"I will have no involvement in the provincial election," McCallum said. "I don't even have time today, if I wanted to, but no, I am staying neutral." So that was a bit of a burn to the Manitoba Liberals.
I did the vote compass, which I recommend you guys try since it gives you a good sense of the political landscape of Manitoba. It was a stark reminder of why I cannot even consider PC, as much as I hate Selinger's NDP. I'll vote strategically against PC but it will be futile because the latest polls guarantee PCs a majority government.
Interesting proposal from the PCs concerning votes on major tax increases. A very similar policy was tried in California and it resulted in financial armageddon because the populace would vote for services they wanted but never for the tax increases necessary to fund those services.
PumpkinSpice
Banned
That tax thing really is just a poison pill for future governments so that it's impossible to run services beyond the bare minimum that libertarians-esque conservatives want.
PumpkinSpice
Banned
The utility in doing it is that they will ride a wave of popular support for this tax cut into office.
It worked for Stephen Harper.
I agree. I support bringing the PST back to 7% but there should never be votes on tax increases. People can choose whether they want a tax increase or not when they vote in an election. Now a party that promises a billion things and needs more revenue will not be able to secure it and live up to their promises. I really hope the PCs reconsider.
Has this been done in any other province in Canada?
firehawk12
Subete no aware
Worked for King Ralph!
Ugh, don't get my started on Ralph Klein. Nothing he did was beneficial to the Albertan economy. He just happened to be in office for the second oil boom and took all the credit for it.
Er, well, Alberta never had a PST to lower. His tax decrease thing was introducing the flat tax on his way out.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked