• 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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sounds like you can forget electoral system reform. The reason for this change of heart ? We beat Stephen Harper under the existing system, says Trudeau, so FPTP is working perfectly fine.

If you ever had any doubt the motivation for this promise was anything but gaming the system in their favor.

In French here: http://www.ledevoir.com/politique/canada/482514/la-reforme-electorale-n-est-plus-garantie

I don't know that they're going to abandon reform but whatever they come up with I really doubt they're going to have time to implement it before the next election.
 

maharg

idspispopd
Boy isn't it great that Trudeau thinks people like Trudeau enough to not want him to follow through on his promises.
 

Pedrito

Member
Just hold a referendum and blame the costs on the Cons. If it fails (it will), the Libs still benefit from FPTP. Win-win...

Also, can we laugh at Ezra for crying to Trudeau after being denied a media accredition by the UN for the COP22 in Marrakesh? I hope they still go so we can see Sheila v-logging her first trip to Islamopolis. It also cracks me up that the name of their cameraman in the accreditation request is Alex Jones.
 
they must have done internal polling and came to the conclusion that a Referendum result would end in the same manor as it did in BC and Ontario provincially... and decided to go ''fuck it''

I seriously believe that those type of people in BC and Ontario who voted against electoral reform are even worse in the Prairies and in Quebec
 

Dr.Acula

Banned
As long as Trudeau legalises pot, he'll get a conditional pass. I don't even use pot, I just don't think Canada should waste resources on pot arrests and prosecutions.
 

Apathy

Member
As long as Trudeau legalises pot, he'll get a conditional pass. I don't even use pot, I just don't think Canada should waste resources on pot arrests and prosecutions.

I'm in the same boat, let people have their weed. It'll also bring in some good cash flow for the government and it will at least stop treating grown adults as children if they want to smoke up. Maybe next they can go and push for legalizing prostitution as well to make that field safer for the people that want to participate in it.
 

Sibylus

Banned
Sounds like you can forget electoral system reform. The reason for this change of heart ? We beat Stephen Harper under the existing system, says Trudeau, so FPTP is working perfectly fine.

If you ever had any doubt the motivation for this promise was anything but gaming the system in their favor.

In French here: http://www.ledevoir.com/politique/canada/482514/la-reforme-electorale-n-est-plus-garantie

If this is the position he and his government holds despite the committee and his majority, fuck him.
 

SRG01

Member
Sounds like you can forget electoral system reform. The reason for this change of heart ? We beat Stephen Harper under the existing system, says Trudeau, so FPTP is working perfectly fine.

If you ever had any doubt the motivation for this promise was anything but gaming the system in their favor.

In French here: http://www.ledevoir.com/politique/canada/482514/la-reforme-electorale-n-est-plus-garantie

From the English translation on iPolitics (http://ipolitics.ca/2016/10/19/trudeau-backing-away-from-voting-system-change/): "“Under Stephen Harper, there were so many people unhappy with the government and their approach that people were saying, ‘It will take electoral reform to no longer have a government we don’t like’. But under the current system, they now have a government they’re more satisfied with and the motivation to change the electoral system is less compelling,” he said"

From that... he's kind of right. I wrote this on my friend's FB feed:

"But it's actually true though. The CPC -- a good third of the vote -- keep repeating their calls for a referendum, the NDP doesn't seem to be interested in anything other than complete prop-rep, and only about a *fifth* of the populace is actually aware of the electoral reform process as referenced by the article. And I say this as a fairly strong supporter of electoral reform.

I always like to say that Harper wasn't voted out and neither were the Liberals voted in because of that singular issue. It was a complex long-winding election, of which the Liberals won on multiple fronts."
 
IMO, from a partisan point of view. The problem with Proportional is perpetual minority governments

I want Liberals in power for life and the Electoral system that I want in place is the one that guarantees Liberal majorities
 

Kifimbo

Member
IMO, from a partisan point of view. The problem with Proportional is perpetual minority governments

I want Liberals in power for life and the Electoral system that I want in place is the one that guarantees Liberal majorities

Then, drop the pretense you want to live in a democracy. You just want a dictatorship.
 

BeesEight

Member
Then, drop the pretense you want to live in a democracy. You just want a dictatorship.

Was going to comment on it too but this sums it up perfectly.

First Past the Post is simply a broken system that we should not be clinging to for any reason. Perpetual minority governments aren't inherently bad and certainly no more than majority especially considering a party can get a majority on approximately 30% of the overall vote. Because it totally makes sense we should have a democratic system that gives a majority of political power to a party that pulls in a minority of votes.

If a party can not obtain a majority of support from the people it should not have majority representation in the house. Period. Full stop. I don't care if it's Trudeau or the second coming of Christ.

I don't really care as much about Trudeau's other campaign promises (though if he backs out of addressing C-51 I'll be spitting acid) but we desperately need electoral reform and I'll hold my nose if that gets passed.

So help me if the Liberals back out of this promise I'll be livid. It was hard getting my conservative family to vote liberal but I feel it will be way easier to sway them from Liberal votes if we've got nothing but a trail of broken promises and just pot legalization to show for Trudeau's majority.
 
minority governments don't work. You have shortsightedness front and center with short term candy getting bantered about in front of the electorate

hard choices that take time to implement require majority governments. Major changes that help and improve people's lives

minority governments would slow everything down to a halt and everyone will be in infinite electoral mode forever

some times, it's good to have a 4 year majority, sit back and let government work.... even when we don't like it
 

Pedrito

Member
Marie Vastel, who broke the story, was on TV just now. She explained that Trudeau actually sounded disappointed when he said that, in a sense that the relative popularity of the current government means that the population isn't really interested in an electoral reform right now, which makes it difficult.

It sounds less outragous in that context.
 

Vibranium

Banned
I want voting reform. If the Liberals don't do it I will be pissed, wouldn't be surprised with what he's said though. I hope people can pressure Trudeau.
 

Azih

Member
minority governments don't work. You have shortsightedness front and center with short term candy getting bantered about in front of the electorate
The Canada Pension plan, universal healthcare, the flag are all products of a minority government.

They rarely work in winner take all elections as the system gives no incentive to inter party cooperation. But they work just fine with PR where they do.

I'll give Trudeau the benefit of the doubt. He's right that people focus on results rather than process. When the result was Harper there was more of a demand for reform. When the result was Trudeau there is less. Never mind that it is the process itself that is perverse.

Somebody like Harper should never again have carte blanche while being supported by less than 40% of the voters. That's what PR prevents.
 
minority governments don't work. You have shortsightedness front and center with short term candy getting bantered about in front of the electorate

hard choices that take time to implement require majority governments. Major changes that help and improve people's lives

minority governments would slow everything down to a halt and everyone will be in infinite electoral mode forever

some times, it's good to have a 4 year majority, sit back and let government work.... even when we don't like it

Some of our best governments were minority governments. How the fuck else do you think we got Healthcare, Pensions, the Student Loan Program, Same-Sex Marriage and our flag.

Fuck this "Minority Governments are bad" bullshit.
 

Kifimbo

Member
Marie Vastel, who broke the story, was on TV just now. She explained that Trudeau actually sounded disappointed when he said that, in a sense that the relative popularity of the current government means that the population isn't really interested in an electoral reform right now, which makes it difficult.

It sounds less outragous in that context.

The opposite side of the coin is being popular makes it easier to actually pass less popular reforms.
 

Azih

Member
The opposite side of the coin is being popular makes it easier to actually pass less popular reforms.
Yeah but that requires a lot of political will. Trudeau might have it but do Liberal MPs that know it means them not having easy rides back to reelection in safe winner take all seats?
 

Pedrito

Member
The opposite side of the coin is being popular makes it easier to actually pass less popular reforms.

In theory, but we all know how it will go:

If the Libs decide on a new voting sytem, they'll get called dictators by their opponents and 30-35% of the population for the next decade at least.

If it goes to a referendum, it will fail because the population likes the status quo unless people are really pissed and right now they're not. So only conservatives will go voting in mass.
 
In theory, but we all know how it will go:

If the Libs decide on a new voting sytem, they'll get called dictators by their opponents and 30-35% of the population for the next decade at least.

If it goes to a referendum, it will fail because the population likes the status quo unless people are really pissed and right now they're not. So only conservatives will go voting in mass.

But once again, it depends on the reform. If its a form of Proportional Representation, even if they forced it through with no referendum the NDP and Greens will be on their side to gang up on the Conservatives calling "Dictator-als!". In which case its only the 20-30% that wasn't going to vote Liberal anyways.

Meanwhile, if its a form of AV or Ranked, then the Liberals get the trifecta of NDP, Greens and Conservatives screaming dictatorship into the next election.
 
Does anybody else have a conservative MP who is suddenly starting really reasonable mail? Like asking for my opinions and letting me know about events in the community?

Really refreshing after the borderline propaganda I used to get.
 
The Canada Pension plan, universal healthcare, the flag are all products of a minority government.

They rarely work in winner take all elections as the system gives no incentive to inter party cooperation. But they work just fine with PR where they do.

I'll give Trudeau the benefit of the doubt. He's right that people focus on results rather than process. When the result was Harper there was more of a demand for reform. When the result was Trudeau there is less. Never mind that it is the process itself that is perverse.

Somebody like Harper should never again have carte blanche while being supported by less than 40% of the voters. That's what PR prevents.
Okay, Pearson's minority government with Douglas was a the one good minority government we've had but those were the 1960s, different way of doing politics.

Today it's too partisan
Some of our best governments were minority governments. How the fuck else do you think we got Healthcare, Pensions, the Student Loan Program, Same-Sex Marriage and our flag.

Fuck this "Minority Governments are bad" bullshit.
it was Chrétien and minister Cauchon who did most of the heavy lifting on Sam Sex Marriage.
Martin just happened to be PM when the Supreme Court rendered judgment; + Martin was more socially Conservative while Chrétien was more socially Liberal on many issues.
 
I think the best form of electoral system would be the mixed-proportional thing that is in many countries, such as Germany.

I too would like that, but after trying to discuss it with family, elders, and friends it seems many people find it too complicated. Though to go from FTFP to PR to MPR might work
 

Azih

Member
Okay, Pearson's minority government with Douglas was a the one good minority government we've had but those were the 1960s, different way of doing politics.

Today it's too partisan
And the way of doing politics will change again when the incentives provided by the electoral system change.
 

Tiktaalik

Member
Yeah time to lower your electoral reform expectations...

Trudeau Hints At Flip In Electoral Reform Pledge

OTTAWA — Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is backtracking on his promise to change the electoral system, his opponents charged Wednesday.

After campaigning last year on assurances that “2015 will be the last federal election conducted under the first-past-the-post voting system,” Trudeau appears to backpedal in an interview with Quebec newspaper Le Devoir.

“If we are going to change the electoral system, people must be open to it,” Trudeau is quoted telling the newspaper in an interview to mark the one-year anniversary of his Liberal party’s election victory.

The prime minister said he plans to look at how consultations have unfolded, then gauge the public's reactions.

“We are not going to prejudge what would be necessary [to change the electoral system]. But when we say, [we want] substantial support, that means something,” he said.

Trudeau goes on to suggest that now that the Conservatives are no longer in power, there is less need for electoral change.

“Under Mr. [Stephen] Harper, there were so many people who were upset with the government and his approach that people were saying ‘it takes electoral reform to no longer have a government we dislike,’” Trudeau is quoted saying. “But under the current system, they now have a government with which they are more satisfied. And the motivation to want to change the system is less compelling.”

In Parliament, NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair accused the prime minister of breaking his electoral pledge.

“It's quite obvious that Mr. Trudeau no longer believes that the 2015 election should be the last election under the unfair first-past-the-post system,” Mulcair said.

“Canadians do want change…Mr. Trudeau even got a little bit less percentage of vote than Mr. Harper did, so the unfair system is still there.

“The only thing that's changed is that Mr. Trudeau believes that he's such a good choice that the system doesn't have to be changed anymore,” Mulcair said.

Under the current first-past-the-post electoral system, the Liberals last year won 184 seats — 54 per cent of the seats in the House of Commons — with only 39.5 per cent of the votes.

Conservative interim leader Rona Ambrose said Trudeau’s comments represent “a real shift” in his viewpoint.

“You know, much before any election was held, the prime minister was so clear that there needed to be electoral reform.” But now, Ambrose, whose party doesn’t support a change, said: “I think what Mr. Trudeau is doing is listening to Canadians.”

Ninety per cent of the people the Tories consulted across the country said they want a referendum before any reforms, she said. “Mr. Trudeau is on the wrong side of this issue, so maybe he’s backing down.”

Former NDP leader Ed Broadbent, a man who has been championing electoral reform for more than five decades, expressed his extreme disappointment with the prime minister.

“It’s a complete betrayal of what many Canadians believed was a genuine promise, to get rid of what he and his minister have described as an ‘antiquated’ electoral system,” Broadbent told The Huffington Post Canada.

“I deeply regret it, because he is the first leader in my lifetime of another party that has promised electoral reform.This is just very cynical betrayal that a lot of people thought would happen,” Broadbent added.

“It’s perhaps the most significant backing down of any promise he has made since he got elected — ironically on his own anniversary of his election.”

Democratic Institutions Minister Maryam Monsef has said the Liberals are seeking the “broad support of Canadians” to change the electoral system but she hasn’t defined what that means.

The Liberal government hasn’t ruled out holding a referendum — something the Tories have repeatedly demanded — but Trudeau told students at the University of Ottawa in April that referendums are a good way of ensuring that nothing changes.

“Many of the people … who propose that absolutely we need a referendum, well, they know that the fact is that referendums are a pretty good way of not getting any electoral reform,” he said.

In recent weeks, the NDP has emerged from their consultations saying that Canadians want some form of proportional representation, that a party’s seat count in the Commons should reflect the percentage of votes obtained.

Chief Electoral Officer Marc Mayrand has also said the broadest possible consensus is needed before any changes are made to the way MPs are elected.

“Not a single government, whatever the majority is, should be able to unilaterally change the rules of election," he told reporters last month.

Trudeau is quoted telling Le Devoir that there are “different levels” of changes.

Smaller changes may require a lower level of support, and larger changes may need broader approval, the prime minister suggested.

“What’s a big change? What’s a small change? All those reflections, that is why we need to have rigorous and intelligent conversations with Canadians.”

This spring, the government convened an all-party parliamentary committee to review a wide variety of reforms, including online voting. The committee, which recently returned from cross-country consultations, has until Dec. 1 to issue a report. Monsef, who has also concluded her own consultations, is expected to table legislation next spring.

Trudeau told Le Devoir he won’t commit to abiding by the committee’s recommendations, saying only that it will be a useful tool to frame the government’s decision-making.

“Unfortunately, whether you want to or not, the great preoccupation for political parties is their immediate survival and their capacity to finance themselves,” Trudeau told the newspaper. “So, yes, I’m going to listen attentively to their concerns. I’m going to keep them in mind, absolutely. It is important work [that the committee] is trying to do. But it is not the only work that is being done in this larger reflection.”

Last April, when speaking to the university students, Trudeau took a much firmer stance. He said there was a “fairly clear desire out there to improve our electoral system.”

While the current first-past-the-post electoral system worked “pretty good for me this time,” and it would be tempting to claim it is too complicated to change it now, the prime minister said it still remains “a priority to me.”

“Quite frankly, political parties shouldn’t be able to appeal to narrow constituencies and suddenly wield enough power to run the entire country,” he added.

You see the electoral system was only broken when the Conservatives were in charge and we couldn't elect Liberals. Now that we have a Liberal government everything is totally fine.
 
Canadians dreaming of importing cheaper cheese will have to continue dreaming on

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-eu-ceta-brussels-friday-1.3815332

Freeland:
"Canada worked really hard, and me personally, I worked very hard," she said in French, expressing Canada's disappointment — as well as her own — at this turn of events.

"It's become evident for me, for Canada, that the European Union isn't capable now to have an international treaty even with a country that has very European values like Canada. And even with a country so nice, with a lot of patience like Canada."
eu-canada-trade.jpg

this sole European guy here from Wallonia Belgium halted stalled everything `(typical of what Beligium politicians do, deadlock forever)

LOL EU
 
If the NDP wouldn't even commit to any specifics, it's hard to critique Trudeau too much for sounding iffy about reform. Like Mayrand said before the Committee, there should be broad consensus support for change, and it's pretty clear that right now there's not.

Personally, I think Kady O'Malley has the best read on it: Trudeau isn't killing the idea of reform, but he is signalling to the NDP and the Greens that if they want anything, they're going to have to stick their necks out a little too. There's no point in him wasting loads of political capital on something that has so little upside.

Besides, if Forum is to be believed -- which, as always, is a massive if -- Canadians generally don't know or care about the issue. 60% of people apparently don't even know what system we have now, and of the 40% who do, you have to think it's a small minority that are motivated by the issue. I've always thought that the electoral reformers' problem is that they beg the question: they take it as givens that FPTP self-evidently doesn't work and that people are clamouring for change, when the reality is that most people either don't care or don't think the issues reformers raise are particularly pressing in the big scheme of things.
 

pr0cs

Member
You see the electoral system was only broken when the Conservatives were in charge and we couldn't elect Liberals. Now that we have a Liberal government everything is totally fine.
How does the song go?
Here's the new boss.... Same as the old boss.
Won't make a lick of a difference tho, people voted to get rid of Harper not to elect someone new.
A shame but not unexpected that the libs would drop most of their platform promises. I fully expect them to drop legalization as well, citing the issue too complicated 'for now' due to different international laws or some bullshit excuse. They'll happily resurrect it come voting time again tho of course
 

Ether_Snake

安安安安安安安安安安安安安安安
This undermines the EU (again), it shows countries would be better off signing their own individual agreements.
 

Kyuur

Member
Do we have an equivalent of the whitehouse.gov petition here? I want to let them know I'm not okay with not changing the voting system, and I don't think my MP is the best way considering they're CPC (and they actually already polled me about it previously).
 
This undermines the EU (again), it shows countries would be better off signing their own individual agreements.
as much as I wished the EU worked and functioned properly, there continues to be lots disjointed differences that hinders their success

Belgium has been in deadlock for years internally. Now they have deadlocked the EU out of the Canadian trade deal.

what a mess. We are still held hostage by our dairy cartel.

Cheesy jokes aside, as a dually. I really wanted this deal to pass
 
Do we have an equivalent of the whitehouse.gov petition here? I want to let them know I'm not okay with not changing the voting system, and I don't think my MP is the best way considering they're CPC (and they actually already polled me about it previously).

Knock yourself out. You can search to see if there are any petitions already out there about it, but right now it doesn't look like there are any that have to do with our voting system.

If you want to start a new petition, here are the steps for having it recognized. It's a lot more convoluted than it used to be. I remember when the House just had paper petitions, and it was just a matter of getting people to sign them, then finding an MP to present it to the House. Now there are a few more steps.
 

Tapejara

Member
If the NDP wouldn't even commit to any specifics, it's hard to critique Trudeau too much for sounding iffy about reform. Like Mayrand said before the Committee, there should be broad consensus support for change, and it's pretty clear that right now there's not.

Personally, I think Kady O'Malley has the best read on it: Trudeau isn't killing the idea of reform, but he is signalling to the NDP and the Greens that if they want anything, they're going to have to stick their necks out a little too. There's no point in him wasting loads of political capital on something that has so little upside.

Besides, if Forum is to be believed -- which, as always, is a massive if -- Canadians generally don't know or care about the issue. 60% of people apparently don't even know what system we have now, and of the 40% who do, you have to think it's a small minority that are motivated by the issue. I've always thought that the electoral reformers' problem is that they beg the question: they take it as givens that FPTP self-evidently doesn't work and that people are clamouring for change, when the reality is that most people either don't care or don't think the issues reformers raise are particularly pressing in the big scheme of things.

This my feeling on Trudeau's comments as well. I think that he - at the very least on a personal level - wants electoral reform. I certainly hope we can get there one day, and hopefully Trudeau will continue to pursue it.
 

SRG01

Member
If the NDP wouldn't even commit to any specifics, it's hard to critique Trudeau too much for sounding iffy about reform. Like Mayrand said before the Committee, there should be broad consensus support for change, and it's pretty clear that right now there's not.

Personally, I think Kady O'Malley has the best read on it: Trudeau isn't killing the idea of reform, but he is signalling to the NDP and the Greens that if they want anything, they're going to have to stick their necks out a little too. There's no point in him wasting loads of political capital on something that has so little upside.

Besides, if Forum is to be believed -- which, as always, is a massive if -- Canadians generally don't know or care about the issue. 60% of people apparently don't even know what system we have now, and of the 40% who do, you have to think it's a small minority that are motivated by the issue. I've always thought that the electoral reformers' problem is that they beg the question: they take it as givens that FPTP self-evidently doesn't work and that people are clamouring for change, when the reality is that most people either don't care or don't think the issues reformers raise are particularly pressing in the big scheme of things.

I've always seen electoral reform as a niche issue, for policy wonks like myself and others. Most of the populace aren't even aware nor do they even care.

It's a catchy sound bite to latch onto, especially during periods of discontent. But the fact that unpopular governments can be voted out shows that FPTP does express the will of the populace.

as much as I wished the EU worked and functioned properly, there continues to be lots disjointed differences that hinders their success

Belgium has been in deadlock for years internally. Now they have deadlocked the EU out of the Canadian trade deal.

what a mess. We are still held hostage by our dairy cartel.

Cheesy jokes aside, as a dually. I really wanted this deal to pass

Dairy prices in Canada are a joke. Pizza companies are already shipping in "pizza kits" from the US and throwing away ingredients because it's still cheaper to get their cheeses in that way.

The irony behind all this is that many European regions were also afraid of increased Canadian competition too, so that protectionist mindset swings both ways.
 

gabbo

Member
I've always seen electoral reform as a niche issue, for policy wonks like myself and others. Most of the populace aren't even aware nor do they even care.

It's a catchy sound bite to latch onto, especially during periods of discontent. But the fact that unpopular governments can be voted out shows that FPTP does express the will of the populace.
There has to be a way to describe the issue to people in terms that are easir to understand, because it's not hard to find people around election time who arent really pleased (party affiliation aside) with hte idea that getting less than 50% of the popular vote gets you a majority
 

maharg

idspispopd
I've always seen electoral reform as a niche issue, for policy wonks like myself and others. Most of the populace aren't even aware nor do they even care.

On the contrary, I think that people *do* care, and if explained to them they *do* understand how broken the system is. But it requires some actual leadership from the very people who have the most to lose (politicians who win in the system we have), because the real problem is most people don't believe it will ever happen. Sadly, we are clearly not getting real leadership here and now. Predictably, the Liberals made it all about them.

It's a catchy sound bite to latch onto, especially during periods of discontent. But the fact that unpopular governments can be voted out shows that FPTP does express the will of the populace.

This is just bullshit. We can see that the eventual culmination of this kind of juking back and forth between a constrained set of two choices just leads to stasis. We can see it in the evolution of US politics and we can see it in many provinces, where even extremely unpopular governments last decades. Look at how people in Ontario look at their political body in this thread: Liberals are awful, but we can't give anyone else a chance because once we tried the NDP and they screwed up and we tried the PCs and they screwed up, so.... eh, devil you know or something. This is, I expect, where federal politics are going to get stuck for a long time now.
 
Electoral Reform has to happen in parliament not by Referendum.

if they send it via Referendum, it gets sent to die just like it did in Ontario and BC.
 
Electoral Reform has to happen in parliament not by Referendum.

if they send it via Referendum, it gets sent to die just like it did in Ontario and BC.

Or a BC happens where a referendum get sent out to die with ridiculous requirements (60% in a majority of ridings), it almost makes the threshold (57% with more than 60% in most ridings), and then the government calls a second referendum where they fearmonger the hell out of it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom