canadian government held in contemp

fife

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2 ... tempt.html

what do my fellow Canadians think about this. do you see this as a major issues and why. will an election come from this?

sparky_fry

fife wrote:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2011/03/21/pol-privilege-contempt.html

what do my fellow Canadians think about this. do you see this as a major issues and why. will an election come from this?

Of course this is a major issue, but not so unexpected. This is how Harper runs the government. Will an election come from this? probably. Will there be a change in the government? Probably not. Until the liberals change leadership this is Harpers country. I am by no means a Harper supporter, but the alternative is even less appealing.

lukin2006

fife wrote:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2011/03/21/pol-privilege-contempt.html

what do my fellow Canadians think about this. do you see this as a major issues and why. will an election come from this?

Not a major issue for me. The budget coming down today would probably had enough goodies in the budget to satisfy the opposition to make it tough for them to vote against it and bring about an election.

The opposition are just looking for ways to get an election and to make it look like Harper's fault. I could be wrong but he is playing Layton and Iggy like a fiddle. Harper wants and election, he has double digit support in the most recent polls.

Conservatives best party to deliver trustworthy government: election poll

Read more: http://www.canada.com/Conservatives+bes ... z1HLAi9wIy


http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/can ... story.html

This was done while the contempt of parliament hearings were taking place.

I am personally more concerned about the economy, jobs, taxes, inflation, interest rates and so on. Not wether politicians can get along. If anyone has watched how they carry on in the house of commons, they are all in contempt.

bytterman

sparky_fry wrote:

fife wrote:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2011/03/21/pol-privilege-contempt.html

what do my fellow Canadians think about this. do you see this as a major issues and why. will an election come from this?

Of course this is a major issue, but not so unexpected. This is how Harper runs the government. Will an election come from this? probably. Will there be a change in the government? Probably not. Until the liberals change leadership this is Harpers country. I am by no means a Harper supporter, but the alternative is even less appealing.

The contempt ruling is just one issue among many. The budget could very well force the election, unless Layton or Duceppe support it. I suppose we'll know by tomorrow on the budget part (Layton has said at least 24 hours to read/think about it, unlike the Liberals), and by the end of the week for anything else. But I agree that little will change, and that Ignatieff is the likely reason, so it's deja vu all over again. My real hope for this campaign is that they do the intelligent thing with the debates; Layton isn't going to be PM, Duceppe can't, and May doesn't even have a seat (where is she running this time?), so let's have one debate solely between Harper and Ignatieff, then we can do the direct comparison without Layton questioning the PMs fashion sense...

If we had a US style system of directly electing the boss, I'd give short odds on none-of-the-above being our next PM.

lukin2006

bytterman wrote:

sparky_fry wrote:

fife wrote:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2011/03/21/pol-privilege-contempt.html

what do my fellow Canadians think about this. do you see this as a major issues and why. will an election come from this?

Of course this is a major issue, but not so unexpected. This is how Harper runs the government. Will an election come from this? probably. Will there be a change in the government? Probably not. Until the liberals change leadership this is Harpers country. I am by no means a Harper supporter, but the alternative is even less appealing.

The contempt ruling is just one issue among many. The budget could very well force the election, unless Layton or Duceppe support it. I suppose we'll know by tomorrow on the budget part (Layton has said at least 24 hours to read/think about it, unlike the Liberals), and by the end of the week for anything else. But I agree that little will change, and that Ignatieff is the likely reason, so it's deja vu all over again. My real hope for this campaign is that they do the intelligent thing with the debates; Layton isn't going to be PM, Duceppe can't, and May doesn't even have a seat (where is she running this time?), so let's have one debate solely between Harper and Ignatieff, then we can do the direct comparison without Layton questioning the PMs fashion sense...

If we had a US style system of directly electing the boss, I'd give short odds on none-of-the-above being our next PM.

How can leave 2 guys out of the debate that have over 60 seats, or whatever they have?

bytterman

lukin2006 wrote:

How can leave 2 guys out of the debate that have over 60 seats, or whatever they have?

Duceppe because he doesn't run a national campaign. I admit Layton is much harder to justify (and maybe I haven't justified Duceppe either), but every additional person getting air-time from the moderator reduces the time given to either of the potential PMs; I just don't think that Layton or May have any shot, for better or worse. There has been some talk in the media about having debates with fewer participants, although mainly in the G&M if my memory isn't completely shot. I'd actually like to see a debate among potential finance ministers, but it might be tricky.

polaris_x

it's only a major issue in that it continues to show that the Harper Conservatives are governing with an exclusive agenda ...

it's not so much in the grand scheme of things as decisions get made based stricly on polling ... which is absolutely absurd ... this minority gov't is dysfunctional primarily for these reasons:

* Harper refuses to come to the centre
* Liberals have no balls and are still controlled by the old-school powers that sent them in flames
* The populace are extremely polarized

We used to be a country that believed in certain principles - we no longer share those beliefs and this is the result ...

lukin2006

bytterman wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

How can leave 2 guys out of the debate that have over 60 seats, or whatever they have?

Duceppe because he doesn't run a national campaign. I admit Layton is much harder to justify (and maybe I haven't justified Duceppe either), but every additional person getting air-time from the moderator reduces the time given to either of the potential PMs; I just don't think that Layton or May have any shot, for better or worse. There has been some talk in the media about having debates with fewer participants, although mainly in the G&M if my memory isn't completely shot. I'd actually like to see a debate among potential finance ministers, but it might be tricky.

Duceppe has the majority of support in Quebec, just can't see leaving him out of the debate. I really don't see much changing with an election call, other than it costing us 300 million. I also think if the opposition was seriously they would have attached a no confidence to these contempt hearings, which they did not.

bytterman

lukin2006 wrote:

bytterman wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

How can leave 2 guys out of the debate that have over 60 seats, or whatever they have?

Duceppe because he doesn't run a national campaign. I admit Layton is much harder to justify (and maybe I haven't justified Duceppe either), but every additional person getting air-time from the moderator reduces the time given to either of the potential PMs; I just don't think that Layton or May have any shot, for better or worse. There has been some talk in the media about having debates with fewer participants, although mainly in the G&M if my memory isn't completely shot. I'd actually like to see a debate among potential finance ministers, but it might be tricky.

Duceppe has the majority of support in Quebec, just can't see leaving him out of the debate. I really don't see much changing with an election call, other than it costing us 300 million. I also think if the opposition was seriously they would have attached a no confidence to these contempt hearings, which they did not.

I can certainly think of better ways for us to spend tax dollars than on an election that will accomplish the status quo. I suspect the opposition feels that the public doesn't view the contempt issue as an election-forcer, but that's a complete gut feeling on my part. Also the Liberals have a scandal-filled recent past (albeit on different grounds) so for them it's easier to carve the Tories about corporate taxes and F-35s. Would love to be wrong but I suspect voter turnout might not be too strong...

lukin2006

bytterman wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

bytterman wrote:

Duceppe because he doesn't run a national campaign. I admit Layton is much harder to justify (and maybe I haven't justified Duceppe either), but every additional person getting air-time from the moderator reduces the time given to either of the potential PMs; I just don't think that Layton or May have any shot, for better or worse. There has been some talk in the media about having debates with fewer participants, although mainly in the G&M if my memory isn't completely shot. I'd actually like to see a debate among potential finance ministers, but it might be tricky.

Duceppe has the majority of support in Quebec, just can't see leaving him out of the debate. I really don't see much changing with an election call, other than it costing us 300 million. I also think if the opposition was seriously they would have attached a no confidence to these contempt hearings, which they did not.

I can certainly think of better ways for us to spend tax dollars than on an election that will accomplish the status quo. I suspect the opposition feels that the public doesn't view the contempt issue as an election-forcer, but that's a complete gut feeling on my part. Also the Liberals have a scandal-filled recent past (albeit on different grounds) so for them it's easier to carve the Tories about corporate taxes and F-35s. Would love to be wrong but I suspect voter turnout might not be too strong...

I agree voter turn out won't be strong, around 40%. I suspect Iggy really don't want an election, I suspect if he loses, then he'll be replaced. I keep hearing Bob Rae's name as a possible replacement, so Harper must just salivate at that prospect.

I have maintained that for things to change all three national parties need a change in leadership with fresh faces and fresh ideas, not faces like Rae.

bytterman

lukin2006 wrote:

I agree voter turn out won't be strong, around 40%. I suspect Iggy really don't want an election, I suspect if he loses, then he'll be replaced. I keep hearing Bob Rae's name as a possible replacement, so Harper must just salivate at that prospect.

I have maintained that for things to change all three national parties need a change in leadership with fresh faces and fresh ideas, not faces like Rae.

It's gotten to the point of farce in some respects. The opposition is so weak as to be laughable, precisely what Chretien faced but in the other direction. Replacing Ignatieff with Rae is admitting a mistake, but can Rae win an election, given his history in Ontario? Also have to wonder who's next for the NDP, because Jack's been at this a long time. And it has to be close to time for Harper if it's another minority, and again the question is who's next?

I need to look at the riding map too (when not at work perhaps...). I think that it's changing this time with more representation for ON, AB, and maybe BC (all of which is about bloody time, it's ridiculous that the maritimes is so over-represented). That might alter voter turnout a bit, although I tend to agree with your prediction. Shall we start a pool?



Edit: the bill that would have brought that change was scrapped in December 2010...

polaris_x

lukin2006 wrote:

I agree voter turn out won't be strong, around 40%. I suspect Iggy really don't want an election, I suspect if he loses, then he'll be replaced. I keep hearing Bob Rae's name as a possible replacement, so Harper must just salivate at that prospect.

I have maintained that for things to change all three national parties need a change in leadership with fresh faces and fresh ideas, not faces like Rae.

the liberals tried that ... but a $1 million negative attack ad on stepahane dion was eaten up by our not too bright public ... and that was that ...

in ontario we had a chance to vote for proportional representation which is the foundation of much of the problems we have federally ... but that didn't make it either ...

Drowned Out

lukin2006 wrote:

The opposition are just looking for ways to get an election and to make it look like Harper's fault. I could be wrong but he is playing Layton and Iggy like a fiddle. Harper wants and election, he has double digit support in the most recent polls.
.

So if Harper is knowingly goading the opposition into a non-confidence vote (and election), why would the opposition be the ones guilty of looking for ways to get an election? Wouldn't that just be Harper playing games in order to make it look like the opposition was at fault for another election?


edit: I'm an ijit - bad quote...:oops:

bytterman wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2 ... vance.html

The Conservatives have called the NDP into an "important" budget meeting, a spokesperson for the NDP said Tuesday, possibly indicating a last-minute push to earn the party's support.

An email from an NDP official says the governing Conservatives sent the request, calling it an "important meeting" between Minister of State for Finance Ted Menzies, NDP finance critic Thomas Mulcair and deputy finance critic Chris Charlton.

The meeting was set for 1 p.m. ET, around the time the parties usually get briefed on the budget's contents.

Release of the budget is set for 4 p.m.

"This is highly unusual. New Democrats were available before to discuss our budget priorities," the spokesperson said in the email.

"It looks like the Conservatives are feeling the heat surrounding their ethical problems and now want to make a last-minute pitch for their budget."

"Despite the last-minute nature of the request and its timing, we have agreed to the meeting."

Dimitri Soudas, spokesman for Prime Minister Stephen Harper, however, says the meeting is the usual budget briefing meeting.

Earlier Tuesday, NDP Leader Jack Layton wouldn't say whether his party would support the federal budget, despite leaks indicating he'll get some of his wishes.

Leaks to the media Monday hinted at a budget the NDP could support, with several of the party's demands covered.

But Layton wants to see the whole budget once it's tabled, and will talk to his MPs before deciding whether the party will support it.

"We're going to study the document and see whether it's evident what needs to be done or whether we need some further discussion," Layton told CBC News Network. "Of course there's rumours of all kinds everywhere around this place right now. I wouldn't believe too many of the rumours if I were you."

Layton says it may be clear as soon as they read the budget whether the Conservatives have responded to the NDP's proposals.

Budget details leaked
CBC News has learned the Conservative government's budget will include student loan forgiveness for rural doctors and nurses, $400 million to renew a home energy retrofit program and a new program to link veterans with job training opportunities.

According to a government source, the budget will provide for student loan forgiveness of up to $40,000 for doctors and up to $20,000 for nurses in remote or rural areas.

The source said the budget will also include $50 million for Waterloo's Perimeter Institute and $4 million for Thunder Bay's Regional Research Institute.

The source said the budget will have four main themes: job creation; families and communities; research, innovation and training; and "preserving Canada's fiscal advantage."

One of those training initiatives, the source said, is to help Canadian Forces veterans find apprenticeship opportunities in the construction industry.

Layton met with Harper last month and said the NDP wanted to see the home retrofit program renewed, as well as a plan for more doctors.

He also asked for the government to take the five per cent GST off home heating bills and for changes to the Canada Pension Plan. Finance Minister Jim Flaherty has said another NDP wish, an increase in the guaranteed income supplement for seniors, will be in the budget.

But a deal to compensate Quebec for implementing the harmonized sales tax (HST) that the Bloc Québécois wants to see in Tuesday's budget is not done yet and won't be part of the budget, according to Flaherty.

Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles Duceppe demanded to know in question period Monday whether the budget will include $2.2 billion in compensation for Quebec for harmonizing its provincial sales tax with the GST in the 1990s. Quebec and Ottawa have been working on a deal for months, similar to the ones reached with Ontario and British Columbia.

Duceppe said Quebec's finance minister has sent a draft agreement to Flaherty and the province is waiting for him to sign off on it. It has already taken far too long for the federal government to conclude the negotiations, Duceppe said.

NDP MP Thomas Mulcair suggested Monday the Conservatives are deliberately stalling on reaching a deal for political reasons.

He said the Conservatives might be withholding the money for Quebec in Tuesday's budget because it would mean the Bloc Québécois would be more inclined to vote for it. While the Conservatives need the support of an opposition party to pass the budget, the Conservatives don't want to be seen as being propped up by a separatist party, Mulcair suggested.

He also suggested the Conservatives might be holding on to news about a deal until a campaign is underway, if one is triggered in the next few days. The government faces possible non-confidence motions in addition to budget votes in the coming days.

Flaherty told the House of Commons that negotiations are going well and that progress has been made but there is still more work to do. "We will continue our negotiations," he said.

Earlier in the day, Flaherty held the traditional pre-budget day photo op, posing for the cameras but letting no details slip on the government's fiscal plan for the year.

It's tradition for the finance minister to buy a new pair of shoes to wear on budget day, but Flaherty opted to have an old pair repaired at an Ottawa store.

On Tuesday at 4 p.m. Flaherty will deliver his sixth federal budget as finance minister in Prime Minister Stephen Harper's cabinet. It's not expected to be a blockbuster; Flaherty and Harper have warned it will contain little in the way of major new spending programs.

However, what could be a lacklustre budget might still spark the government's downfall, depending on how the parliamentary calendar shapes up this week.

If the opposition parties decide they want to bring down the government, they could do it on the first vote related to the budget, but a non-confidence motion related to a committee finding that the government should be found in contempt of Parliament might come first. If successful, that would bring down the government before its budget could be passed.

'Stay on course'
Flaherty said Monday the government will continue to follow its plan to get the country back to a balanced budget in the coming years.

"One of the goals of the budget is to make sure we stay on course, that we maintain the fiscal track that we set out in the fall economic update, that we move back to a balanced budget but at the same time, make some investments to promote economic growth, jobs," Flaherty said during the photo-op on Monday.

He wouldn't say whether he thought there would be enough in the budget to persuade one of the opposition parties to support it. The Conservatives need the votes from at least one of the three parties in order to stay in power and avoid an election.

It is possible the government could fall this week on a non-confidence motion, based on a report from a Commons committee that found the government in contempt of Parliament, before Flaherty's budget is even debated by the House.

Flaherty has dropped hints about the government doing more to support senior citizens, though he hasn't specified how it might do that. The CBC's Greg Weston reported last week that the budget would include a $700-million increase in old age security payments. The average Guaranteed Income Supplement is currently worth $455 per month and the average basic old age security cheque amounts to $493



More flip-flopping from Harper about how democratic coalitions are....

lukin2006

polaris_x wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

I agree voter turn out won't be strong, around 40%. I suspect Iggy really don't want an election, I suspect if he loses, then he'll be replaced. I keep hearing Bob Rae's name as a possible replacement, so Harper must just salivate at that prospect.

I have maintained that for things to change all three national parties need a change in leadership with fresh faces and fresh ideas, not faces like Rae.

the liberals tried that ... but a $1 million negative attack ad on stepahane dion was eaten up by our not too bright public ... and that was that ...

in ontario we had a chance to vote for proportional representation which is the foundation of much of the problems we have federally ... but that didn't make it either ...

Do you think that proportional representation wasn't well explained when offered to Ontario?

lukin2006

Drowned Out wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

The opposition are just looking for ways to get an election and to make it look like Harper's fault. I could be wrong but he is playing Layton and Iggy like a fiddle. Harper wants and election, he has double digit support in the most recent polls.
.

So if Harper is knowingly goading the opposition into a non-confidence vote (and election), why would the opposition be the ones guilty of looking for ways to get an election? Wouldn't that just be Harper playing games in order to make it look like the opposition was at fault for another election?


edit: I'm an ijit - bad quote...:oops:

bytterman wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2 ... vance.html

The Conservatives have called the NDP into an "important" budget meeting, a spokesperson for the NDP said Tuesday, possibly indicating a last-minute push to earn the party's support.

An email from an NDP official says the governing Conservatives sent the request, calling it an "important meeting" between Minister of State for Finance Ted Menzies, NDP finance critic Thomas Mulcair and deputy finance critic Chris Charlton.

The meeting was set for 1 p.m. ET, around the time the parties usually get briefed on the budget's contents.

Release of the budget is set for 4 p.m.

"This is highly unusual. New Democrats were available before to discuss our budget priorities," the spokesperson said in the email.

"It looks like the Conservatives are feeling the heat surrounding their ethical problems and now want to make a last-minute pitch for their budget."

"Despite the last-minute nature of the request and its timing, we have agreed to the meeting."

Dimitri Soudas, spokesman for Prime Minister Stephen Harper, however, says the meeting is the usual budget briefing meeting.

Earlier Tuesday, NDP Leader Jack Layton wouldn't say whether his party would support the federal budget, despite leaks indicating he'll get some of his wishes.

Leaks to the media Monday hinted at a budget the NDP could support, with several of the party's demands covered.

But Layton wants to see the whole budget once it's tabled, and will talk to his MPs before deciding whether the party will support it.

"We're going to study the document and see whether it's evident what needs to be done or whether we need some further discussion," Layton told CBC News Network. "Of course there's rumours of all kinds everywhere around this place right now. I wouldn't believe too many of the rumours if I were you."

Layton says it may be clear as soon as they read the budget whether the Conservatives have responded to the NDP's proposals.

Budget details leaked
CBC News has learned the Conservative government's budget will include student loan forgiveness for rural doctors and nurses, $400 million to renew a home energy retrofit program and a new program to link veterans with job training opportunities.

According to a government source, the budget will provide for student loan forgiveness of up to $40,000 for doctors and up to $20,000 for nurses in remote or rural areas.

The source said the budget will also include $50 million for Waterloo's Perimeter Institute and $4 million for Thunder Bay's Regional Research Institute.

The source said the budget will have four main themes: job creation; families and communities; research, innovation and training; and "preserving Canada's fiscal advantage."

One of those training initiatives, the source said, is to help Canadian Forces veterans find apprenticeship opportunities in the construction industry.

Layton met with Harper last month and said the NDP wanted to see the home retrofit program renewed, as well as a plan for more doctors.

He also asked for the government to take the five per cent GST off home heating bills and for changes to the Canada Pension Plan. Finance Minister Jim Flaherty has said another NDP wish, an increase in the guaranteed income supplement for seniors, will be in the budget.

But a deal to compensate Quebec for implementing the harmonized sales tax (HST) that the Bloc Québécois wants to see in Tuesday's budget is not done yet and won't be part of the budget, according to Flaherty.

Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles Duceppe demanded to know in question period Monday whether the budget will include $2.2 billion in compensation for Quebec for harmonizing its provincial sales tax with the GST in the 1990s. Quebec and Ottawa have been working on a deal for months, similar to the ones reached with Ontario and British Columbia.

Duceppe said Quebec's finance minister has sent a draft agreement to Flaherty and the province is waiting for him to sign off on it. It has already taken far too long for the federal government to conclude the negotiations, Duceppe said.

NDP MP Thomas Mulcair suggested Monday the Conservatives are deliberately stalling on reaching a deal for political reasons.

He said the Conservatives might be withholding the money for Quebec in Tuesday's budget because it would mean the Bloc Québécois would be more inclined to vote for it. While the Conservatives need the support of an opposition party to pass the budget, the Conservatives don't want to be seen as being propped up by a separatist party, Mulcair suggested.

He also suggested the Conservatives might be holding on to news about a deal until a campaign is underway, if one is triggered in the next few days. The government faces possible non-confidence motions in addition to budget votes in the coming days.

Flaherty told the House of Commons that negotiations are going well and that progress has been made but there is still more work to do. "We will continue our negotiations," he said.

Earlier in the day, Flaherty held the traditional pre-budget day photo op, posing for the cameras but letting no details slip on the government's fiscal plan for the year.

It's tradition for the finance minister to buy a new pair of shoes to wear on budget day, but Flaherty opted to have an old pair repaired at an Ottawa store.

On Tuesday at 4 p.m. Flaherty will deliver his sixth federal budget as finance minister in Prime Minister Stephen Harper's cabinet. It's not expected to be a blockbuster; Flaherty and Harper have warned it will contain little in the way of major new spending programs.

However, what could be a lacklustre budget might still spark the government's downfall, depending on how the parliamentary calendar shapes up this week.

If the opposition parties decide they want to bring down the government, they could do it on the first vote related to the budget, but a non-confidence motion related to a committee finding that the government should be found in contempt of Parliament might come first. If successful, that would bring down the government before its budget could be passed.

'Stay on course'
Flaherty said Monday the government will continue to follow its plan to get the country back to a balanced budget in the coming years.

"One of the goals of the budget is to make sure we stay on course, that we maintain the fiscal track that we set out in the fall economic update, that we move back to a balanced budget but at the same time, make some investments to promote economic growth, jobs," Flaherty said during the photo-op on Monday.

He wouldn't say whether he thought there would be enough in the budget to persuade one of the opposition parties to support it. The Conservatives need the votes from at least one of the three parties in order to stay in power and avoid an election.

It is possible the government could fall this week on a non-confidence motion, based on a report from a Commons committee that found the government in contempt of Parliament, before Flaherty's budget is even debated by the House.

Flaherty has dropped hints about the government doing more to support senior citizens, though he hasn't specified how it might do that. The CBC's Greg Weston reported last week that the budget would include a $700-million increase in old age security payments. The average Guaranteed Income Supplement is currently worth $455 per month and the average basic old age security cheque amounts to $493



More flip-flopping from Harper about how democratic coalitions are....

I think he's playing games, doesn't mean the opposition has to take the bait. I do believe that he can go either way on the election issue. Whether there is an election next month or next year, is the opposition going to become effective?

I was wrong on the budget, I thought there would be enough in it to keep at least 1 party happy. So it looks like we vote, and very likely the same or similar results.

polaris_x

lukin2006 wrote:

Do you think that proportional representation wasn't well explained when offered to Ontario?

it wasn't well explained nor was it discussed much leading up to the election ... having said that - i'm not convinced ontarians are engaged enough as a whole to care ...

lukin2006

polaris_x wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

Do you think that proportional representation wasn't well explained when offered to Ontario?

it wasn't well explained nor was it discussed much leading up to the election ... having said that - i'm not convinced ontarians are engaged enough as a whole to care ...

I don't think the Liberals and PC's are interested in it all that much, that might likely cost them support.

polaris_x

lukin2006 wrote:

I don't think the Liberals and PC's are interested in it all that much, that might likely cost them support.

definitely ...

it's at the federal level where we most need it I think ...

lukin2006

polaris_x wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

I don't think the Liberals and PC's are interested in it all that much, that might likely cost them support.

definitely ...

it's at the federal level where we most need it I think ...

My guess is the same federally, the big 2 parties have no interest, a binding referendum should be held on the issue.

DinghyDog

-

Kel Varnsen

lukin2006 wrote:

polaris_x wrote:

lukin2006 wrote:

Do you think that proportional representation wasn't well explained when offered to Ontario?

it wasn't well explained nor was it discussed much leading up to the election ... having said that - i'm not convinced ontarians are engaged enough as a whole to care ...

I don't think the Liberals and PC's are interested in it all that much, that might likely cost them support.

I read the description of that kind of representation and it sounded like a bad idea to me. I mean sure some of the seats would go to small parties based on the percentage of total votes they get. But at the same time if there is a pool of seats that are based on voting percentage, most of them are going to go to the major parties. And who do you think they are going to put in those seats. It is not going to be actual politicians who are accountable to the people, it is going to be the hackiest party hacks that ever hacked. And with those people at least some of them are going to get to keep their seats for ever. I would prefer less appointed politicians not more. And in federal politics we already have a senate full of appointed politicians, which is basically a nice retirement package for anyone who has been super loyal to the ruling party for a long enough time.