Re the ERRE Methinks it is High Time to boot the VERY corrupt CBC and Mr Prime Minster Trudeau "The Younger" in his fancy nasty arse

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-trudeau-electoral-reform-critics-1.3813714

Content disabled.

David Raymond Amos

@Darren MacDonald So do ya think CBC is gonna block my comment again?

If not Perhaps folks should listen to what I told the Liebrano chair ERRE in Fat Fred City just before Thanksgiving?? My words can be found at 19:03 mark of this ERRE hearing.

http://parlvu.parl.gc.ca/XRender/en/PowerBrowser/PowerBrowserV2/20161007/-1/25706?useragent=Mozilla/5.0%20(Windows%20NT%206.1;%20WOW64;%20Trident/7.0;%20SLCC2;%20.NET%20CLR%202.0.50727;%20.NET%20CLR%203.5.30729;%20.NET%20CLR%203.0.30729;%20Media%20Center%20PC%206.0;%20.NET%20CLR%201.1.4322;%20.NET4.0C;%20.NET4.0E;%20InfoPath.3;%20rv:11.0)%20like%20Gecko

It appears that I was absolutely correct about what I said Franny Baby your beancounting Liebrano buddy from Montreal N'esy Pas Mr Prime Minister Trudeau "The Younger" ???

13 minutes ago 

David Raymond Amos 

Content disabled.

@Darren MacDonald To Mr Prime Minister Trudeau "The Younger" ya think even the greedy lawyer Hubby Lacroix and his many mindless minions would have figured out by now what I have been up to.

It seems that all your fellow snobby lawyers from Montreal and the Governor General's daughter Alex cannot understand a CROWN Corp's mandate to be non partisan even after Hubby's old buddy Harper has run off and hid under a rock in Alberta with his political puppet master the Evil Yankee Tommy Boy Flanagan N'esy Pas Minister Melanie Joly?

Methinks that Hubby Baby is to dumb to even read his emails.I bet his minions who do read them are too scared to tell the boss that they know that I have been mirroring the true story of CBC's obvious wrongs within a blog for many months. Hence everybody and his dog within CBC are playing as dumb as posts which quite frankly is not hard for a greedy CBC employee to do N'esy Pas? Well CBC can bet dimes to dollars that this comment will be emailed around the world and back then posted with the aforesaid blog in a heartbeat. Trust their Evil Yankee hero Hillary and her pal Trump will be on the list of people to get my email.

Folks should consider it just another one of those things a fierce but ethical political animal does that CBC and legions of journalists, bloggers, lawyers, cops and politicians have FAILED to appreciate since 2002 EH Rotten Ralphy Goodale?.

1 hour ago

http://www.cbc.ca/radio/thecurrent/the-current-for-october-11-2016-1.3798971/liberals-need-to-stick-to-their-promise-of-electoral-reform-ndp-s-nathan-cullen-1.3798972

Monday October 10, 2016

Liberals need to stick to their promise of electoral reform: NDP's Nathan Cullen

NDP's Nathan Cullen believes the government should introduce a new electoral system for the next one or two elections on a trial basis. (Adrian Wyld/Canadian Press)

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau campaigned on a promise that the 2015 election would be the last to use the current first-past-the-post voting system. He has since tasked a committee to look at how to best implement a new system, but it is still unclear what that reform might look like, and when should it happen.

The vice-chair of the special committee on electoral reform, Nathan Cullen, argues action by the government on voter reform is critical. Underlying all other policy decisions, Cullen thinks moving away from our current voting system "is one of the biggest issues" facing the current government.

'I believe in voter equality. Every vote cast in the country, regardless of who you vote for and where you vote, should matter. Say about 18 million people voted in our last election? More than half of those votes went towards electing nobody.' - Nathen Cullen speaking with The Current's Piya Chattopadhyay

Yet, veteran political journalist Susan Delacourt  says electoral reform is not something to rush into.
Delacourt points out that both the NDP and Conservatives are leaderless, making the likelihood of transitioning to a new electoral system far more difficult.

'The arguments that we need a new electoral system are quite compelling. The problem is the timing.' - Susan Delacourt

The Current Transcript for October 11, 2016

Host: Piya Chattopadhyay

SOUNDCLIP

JUSTIN TRUDEAU: We made the commitment that this was going to be the last election held under the first-past-the-post system and we are committed to doing that.

PIYA CHATTOPADHYAY: That was Prime Minister Justin Trudeau last May in the house, making it clear electoral reform was on the way. But what that reform might look like and when should it really happen are questions a committee charged with trying to design the system of how Canadians will vote in the future federal elections is looking into. In a few moments, I will speak with the vice chair of that committee. Also today...

Liberals need to stick to their promise of electoral reform: NDP's Nathan Cullen

Guests: Nathan Cullen, Susan Delacourt

SOUNDCLIP
This first-past-the-post does not make sense at all. It’s easy to put your x on the paper, but it’s impossible to explain the logic of how equal groups could have such disproportionate representation. That’s not modern democracy.
[crowd chatter]
I’ll be very let down if it doesn’t change because, you know, we’ve been talking about this for decades. It’s time to get the job done.
I believe I was 19 the first election that I was eligible to vote. Honestly, in each one of those I haven’t felt that my votes counted.
[crowd chatter]

PIYA CHATTOPADHYAY: Some thoughts of some concerned voters at electoral consultation meetings in Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island. One of many such consultations happening across our country. The special committee on electoral reform is traveling far and wide educating Canadians and listening to their concerns about changing the way we vote. The Liberal government promised that the 2015 election would be the last to use the current first-past-the-post voting system. So now comes the hard job, of figuring out what that new system might look like. Nathan Cullen is a vice-chair of the Special Committee on Electoral Reform and the NDP’s critic for democratic reform. He’s in our Ottawa studio. Hello.

NATHAN CULLEN: Good morning.

PC: So you have spent months traveling the country talking about electoral reform with this special committee. Sounded like people in PEI were pretty into it. But what’s the interest been like?

NATHAN CULLEN: The interest has been really good, we’ve had I think 17,000 online submissions to the committee’s website, the deadline was last Friday. Where also many, I think most, with the exception of perhaps most Conservatives have held town halls or online forums, different discussions with Canadians across the country over the last number of months. So the interest is high, it’s one of those issues that for many people they don’t necessarily wake up in the morning thinking about, yet underlines every other issue that we do think about. Whether it’s the environment, the economy, war and peace, and all those other things that parliaments decide. So it might be one of the biggest issues this parliament decides on in the next few years, yet it gets not as much attention as some of the other ones, obviously.

PC: And as you heard from that tape from Charlottetown, I mean, people don’t like the first-past-the-post system, not everyone, but a lot of people. Why do you think our system needs to go the first-past-the-post system?

NATHAN CULLEN: Well, because I think, well, I believe in voter equality. And by that I mean that every vote cast in the country, regardless of who you vote for and where you vote should matter, should have some meaning. And the problem with our system right now is that say, about 18 million people voted in the last election, more than half of those votes went towards electing nobody. Where essentially, voices of Canadians, their expressed wish when they went into the ballot box with that power, yet that wish is not represented anywhere in our parliament. And that seems to me like just a basic flaw of the system. Which was designed in the 1200s and served well and serves well generally. With maybe the current example the United States right now not being a good one, but if you have two parties first-past-the-post is understandable, because one gets a little bit more than the other and then they move on. But thankfully, and many Canadians are expressing this these days, that we have multiple choices in Canada not just two parties to choose from.

PC: And so if not first-past-the-post then what? What are other leading voting alternatives?

NATHAN CULLEN: Well, if you look around the world, most successful democracies use something called proportional. So, a proportional system, and that means if you get about 20 per cent of the vote, you get about 20 per cent of the seats, and consequently 20 per cent of the power. And that's a more accurate description of what people want. And the ballot’s usually quite simple, the ones we're looking at anyways. You have one vote for a local candidate and a second vote for a party, and that second vote is what helps make up for the distortions that go under the first-past-the-post system, and it gets you a parliament that's more reflective of what people actually wanted. And again, it's what most countries that have been successful and have great indicators for economy and social justice, use a system like that.

PC: So there are, I mean, different machinations to proportional voting. But overall, is the system that you just described the one that the NDP would favour?

PC: Yeah, we've had this on the policy books as a party for probably 35 years now. Parliament's been discussing this almost for a century by the way. It's incredible how long, if you go back through the records, we just keep talking about it and I'm very glad we have this commitment to actually finally get it done and evolve Canada's voting system into this century. Well, at least this century. So we have a mixed member, so it's a bit of a hybrid, where you have about maybe two thirds or more of the parliament directly elected, and then another third that come off proportional lists and that makes up for the distortions that go under our current system.

PC: Now, the federal Conservatives want a referendum before making any changes to our electoral system, the NDP does not? Why not?

NATHAN CULLEN: Well, we've said there might be a middle ground. It's more I would suggest the Liberals and Greens that have said absolutely not, I think on the Liberal side. We think that there may be a place where we can see the system in place for a couple of elections, then have a vote put during an election, so it doesn't cost 300 or 350 million. And also, that way it gives voters an opportunity to actually see the system at work. We know there's a lot of resistance, and it's natural, to change to the unknown and these systems as you know get really complicated quickly. And a lot of people turn away and say I don't understand, and if I don't understand something it's a natural Canadian reaction to say no. So the thought is, bring in a new system that's got broad support and then try it out, make sure that the results are what people want. And if they don't, there's a kind of like a sunset clause built into the bill, so that it will automatically revert back to first-past-the-post. Unless we have a kind of a confirming referendum, rather than one where people throw out something that could be quite good because they simply haven't had any experience with it.

PC: Sounds a little less democratic than a referendum. Sort of saying let's just do this thing, rather than holding a referendum.

NATHAN CULLEN: Well, one could argue, and I think Mr. Trudeau and others have argued, that about 64, 65 per cent of the parliament got elected. The MPs that are in there right now got elected on a promise to change the voting system. It wasn't some kind of hidden agenda, it was front and centre. Others say it wasn't the top issue, Mr. Trudeau and others got elected for different reasons, which is probably also true. So we're trying to strike a middle ground and say a referendum is a democratic test. It's a bit of a blunt instrument and they don't tend to do well. We didn't put other questions like the women's right to vote or First Nations voting in Canada to a referendum for a good reason. I'm not sure that, you know, Canadian men in 1921 would’ve necessarily passed such a referendum. I'm hoping they would have, but I have my doubts. We know referendum have a confirming value, they tell us what you want. But we also see in Colombia and in the UK under Brexit, referendums also give you answers to questions you never asked. They're not something that you have, it's not a pure empirical test but it's a confirmation. And we think, try the new voting system out, put it to that confirmation so that Canadians know, absolutely know, they'll have the ultimate say on what happens with our voting system, because it belongs to them, it doesn't belong to the politicians.

PC: Nathan Cullen, thank you for your time, appreciate it. Thank you for the interest, appreciate it. Nathan Cullen is a vice chair of the Special Committee on Electoral Reform and also the NDP’s critic for democratic reform. He was in our Ottawa studio. While the Electoral Reform Committee is traveling the country listening to Canadians. Marc Mayrand, Canada's chief electoral officer, has suggested that electoral reform is not something to rush into. Susan Delacourt is a columnist with iPolitics and the Toronto Star. She's been watching all of this from Ottawa. And that's where she is today. Hi Suzanne.

SUSAN DELACOURT: Good morning.

PC: So what did Mark Mayrand say about the electoral reform process?

SUSAN DELACOURT: Well, basically he said that there is a principle that you can't just have one party forcing electoral change on a country, that's just, it's an international principle, it's a longstanding one. In fact, it's something that the Liberals in opposition argued quite forcefully when the Conservatives brought in their very unpopular electoral reform legislation a few years ago. He also said, and again, this is not new, that if we wanted to have a new electoral system in place by 2019 as the Liberals promised, that he would have to have everything in place by next spring.

PC: Mm.

SUSAN DELACOURT: So basically that rules out a referendum. It would play into, I actually like Nathan Cullen’s idea of try it out and referendum later. But I think Mayrand, in my view, as I was listening to him, was actually giving the Liberals a way out of this promise.

PC: And particularly, the timing if this had to get moving by this spring, the NDP and the Conservatives are leaderless, essentially. So does that play into this? I mean, is this really the time to be bringing in electoral reform when these parties, you know, can't represent their constituents effectively or at least don't have a leader, they’re going to change leaders soon enough.

SUSAN DELACOURT: Yeah, imagine that this becomes an issue during the leadership, and differing candidates within the NDP or the Conservatives have different positions on what kind of electoral system we need or want. It's very hard to get from a declaration of here's our new electoral system, to parties that won't even have leaders in place. The Conservatives choose their leader at the end of May, which is technically still spring. But the New Democrats don't choose their leader until fall. So, again, politically it's very hard to see how you can inflict electoral reform on parties that don't even have leaders or fixed positions on it yet. Although as Nathan Cullen says, the NDP promise is long standing, but who's to say they won't have a new leader who will have a different position?

PC: Mm. And Susan, as you've been looking at this, I mean, when you look around, you know, other western democracies, what countries have made the process of electoral reform effective?

SUSAN DELACOURT: Well, a lot have. And, you know, I think it's a reasonable expectation that we want to change our electoral system. New Zealand is the one that they cite most often, which did have a referendum. But I think that Canada is in a unique position right now with the timing of this. I think the principle and the idea of it are, I'm an old constitutional reporter, so I've been hearing about these things for a long time as well too, and I think the arguments that we need a new electoral system are quite compelling. The problem is the timing.

PC: Mm. And another challenge as Nathan Cullen mentioned and, you know, won't surprise you at all it is that Canadians are more interested or at least seemingly in sort of, you know, taxes and foreign policy and other things that affect us in our day to day lives. Is the apparent lack of interest a reason to pull back on electoral reform now?

SUSAN DELACOURT: Well, you know, I wrote a whole book about the consumerization of politics and the idea that just because people want something is not necessarily a reason to give it to them. And the reverse is true too, that principle politics is more than about supplying people what they want or avoiding what they don't want. That being said, if the Liberals are looking for a way to buy some time on this, sheer political calculation would say that they're not going to a pay huge price for this, because it just hasn't been a front of mind. Now, when I've written this, the reaction has been the public is interested, the media isn't.

PC: And yet here we are.

SUSAN DELACOURT: And here we are, yes. [chuckles]

PC: [laughs]

SUSAN DELACOURT: Actually, I am very interested in this, but I was hearing Liberals talk as long ago as this summer. And I will say not people close to the prime minister, this is just sort of Liberals at large talking about, would they pay a price for not doing this? So I think that is out there already.

PC: And do you think, because as we heard at the top of the show Susan, you know, and the prime minister said look last year 2015, that federal election, last time of first-past-the-post federally. Do you think that Justin Trudeau now regrets having made this a platform on his campaign a year ago?

SUSAN DELACOURT: It was interesting. As I wrote last week, I walked into that press conference late and I walked in precisely at the moment where he was saying that, and I thought why is he doing this? I think maybe the Liberals will recall when he made that promise in June 2015, were third place in the polls, a distant third in the polls. And I think he was trying to convey to Canadians that he would shake up everything. That he was the, you know, their slogan was real change. But it was never clear to me what constituency they were after, because it's as we say, it wasn’t a huge issue before the election, it certainly wasn't an issue in the election. I don't recall it even coming up during the debates.

PC: Susan, we'll have to leave it there. Thank you.

SUSAN DELACOURT: Thanks Piya.

PC: Susan Delacourt is a columnist with iPolitics and the Toronto Star. We reached her in Ottawa. We asked for an interview with Maryam Monsef, the Minister of Democratic Institutions, but she was unavailable.

Critics accuse Justin Trudeau of electoral reform flip-flop for 'selfish' political gain

Prime minister insists he is 'deeply committed' to consultation process on changes to voting system

By Kathleen Harris, CBC News Posted: Oct 20, 2016 4:44 PM ET

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was dogged by questions about electoral reform during a visit to the new Amazon Fulfillment Centre in Brampton, Ont., on Thursday, October 20, 2016. (Nathan Denette/Canadian Press) 

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is facing growing calls to confirm his commitment to overhauling Canada's voting system.

After promising electoral reform in last fall's election and launching a comprehensive public consultation process, Trudeau muddied the waters this week in a media interview marking his first year in office.

• Diminished desire for electoral reform?
• Critics question commitment to reform
• Consultations kick in to high gear

Asked today if he is backtracking on his promise, Trudeau said he remains "deeply committed" to reforms, but conceded it's a challenge to find consensus among a broad spectrum of public opinion.

He is awaiting recommendations from the special committee of MPs studying electoral reform.

Confusion created

 I'm not going to preclude the arguments that they will be making and the conclusions that will be drawn. I will simply say I look forward to hearing those perspectives and looking at how Canadians wish to move forward," he said.

But Green Party Leader Elizabeth May urged Trudeau to clarify his commitment to reform the system in time for the next election.

"He has created this level of confusion by suggesting there may not be the same demand for electoral reform. I can assure him there is," she said.

'Crazy argument'

In an interview with Le Devoir this week, Trudeau appeared to be wavering.

Trudeau told the newspaper that Canadians were pushing hard for electoral reform as a way to get rid of a government it did not like — the Conservatives. But now that the Liberals are in office, the "motivation" to change the electoral system is less compelling.

"Fundamentally, it's a crazy argument," said Conservative democratic reform critic Scott Reid. "Stop and think about this: He said one year after the election, I'm super popular so we don't need to have this discussion now."

Reid and fellow members of the special committee studying the issue are now scratching their heads over whether their work is all for nought.

'Selfish' reasons

 

The NDP's democratic reform critic Nathan Cullen accused Trudeau of changing tack for "selfish" reasons.

"Canadians in part elected this government on promises like this, and to very cynically start breaking them just because you have a lot of Facebook followers is pretty arrogant and misguided," he said.

Katelynn Northam of advocacy group Leadnow said there is also much grassroots concern that Trudeau may be backing off the promise. More than 400 members have already made phone calls to Liberal MPs or the Prime Minister's Office, and another 4,000 have sent emails so far.

"Many members of Leadnow voted Liberal in 2015 because of the party's commitment to voting reform — and tens of thousands of people have since joined our Vote Better campaign for proportional representation in the last year," she told CBC News. "It's clear that people do care about voting reform and they expect this promise to be kept."

Real Change?

The Liberal campaign platform, called Real Change, promised to "make every vote count."

"We are committed to ensuring that 2015 will be the last federal election conducted under the first-past-the-post voting system … Within 18 months of forming government, we will introduce legislation to enact electoral reform," it reads.

Kicking off consultations in May, Minister of Democratic Institutions Maryam Monsef described the current system as deeply flawed.

"In a multi-party democracy like Canada, first past the post distorts the will of the electorate. It's part of why so many Canadians don't engage in or care about politics," she said at the time. "While there's no such thing as a perfect electoral system, we can do better."


To encourage thoughtful and respectful conversations, first and last names will appear with each submission to CBC/Radio-Canada's online communities (except in children and youth-oriented communities). Pseudonyms will no longer be permitted.

By submitting a comment, you accept that CBC has the right to reproduce and publish that comment in whole or in part, in any manner CBC chooses. Please note that CBC does not endorse the opinions expressed in comments. Comments on this story are moderated according to our Submission Guidelines. Comments are welcome while open. We reserve the right to close comments at any time.

236 Comments

Darren MacDonald

A lot of people bought what he sold but fortunately refunds are available in 2019.

4 hours ago

 

Show 14 older replies

 

David Gloag

@Darren MacDonald
Breaking promises this big will break him as PM.

33 minutes ago

 

Content disabled.

David Raymond Amos

@Darren MacDonald So do ya think CBC is gonna block my comment again?

If not Perhaps folks should listen to what I told the Liebrano chair ERRE in Fat Fred City just before Thanksgiving?? My words can be found at 19:03 mark of this ERRE hearing.

http://parlvu.parl.gc.ca/XRender/en/PowerBrowser/PowerBrowserV2/20161007/-1/25706?useragent=Mozilla/5.0%20(Windows%20NT%206.1;%20WOW64;%20Trident/7.0;%20SLCC2;%20.NET%20CLR%202.0.50727;%20.NET%20CLR%203.5.30729;%20.NET%20CLR%203.0.30729;%20Media%20Center%20PC%206.0;%20.NET%20CLR%201.1.4322;%20.NET4.0C;%20.NET4.0E;%20InfoPath.3;%20rv:11.0)%20like%20Gecko

It appears that I was absolutely correct about what I said Franny Baby your beancounting Liebrano buddy from Montreal N'esy Pas Mr Prime Minister Trudeau "The Younger" ???

13 minutes ago

bill chagwich

Canadians to this man mean nothing

3 hours ago

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/conservatives-referendum-electoral-reform-1.3805241

Conservatives say their constituents want a referendum on electoral reform

90 per cent of responses to MP mailouts support a public vote as a pre-requisite to reform

By Aaron Wherry, CBC News Posted: Oct 14, 2016 2:31 PM ET

Conservative MP Scott Reid says Conservative MPs say their constituents favour holding a referendum before electoral reform is implemented. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Adrian Wyld (Adriean Wyld/Canadian Press) 

Federal Conservatives say their constituents overwhelmingly support the party's position that a referendum must be held before electoral reform can be implemented.

At an announcement Friday, Conservative MP Scott Reid — his party's democratic reform critic — shared results of a survey mailed by 59 Conservative MPs over the last few months. Reid said the mailout asked constituents whether they agreed or disagreed that a referendum must be held before the federal government implements a new electoral system.

According to Reid, more than 81,000 responses were received and 90.6 per cent of those responses agreed that a referendum was a pre-requisite for reform.

Reid said the question of whether a referendum is necessary has not been sufficiently addressed by other consultations.

More useful than town halls

The Conservatives' position is that the mail survey was more useful than soliciting public opinions via town hall meetings, which can draw a self-selecting audience of only those who are most interested in the issue of reform, he said.

"To fill in the gap, the Conservative caucus has conducted the largest, and only unbiased, exercise in determining the views of Canadians on whether there should be a referendum prior to the adoption of a new electoral system," Reid said.

A report detailing the Conservative survey will be filed with the special House of Commons committee studying electoral reform.

Reid said the Conservative party is open to considering reform, but that it does not officially favour any particular option.

Earlier this week, federal New Democrats reported that their own consultations and surveys found overwhelming support for proportional representation.

Reid, a member of that committee studying reform, said he hopes consensus amongst the MPs and represented parties can be achieved, but that a referendum is a "bottom line" requirement for Conservatives.

Justin Trudeau's Liberals promised during last year's campaign that the 2015 election would be the last conducted under the first-past-the-post system.

The special committee has been examining the issue and hearing testimony through the summer and early fall. Committee members must report back to the House with their recommendations by December 1.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ndp-electoral-reform-1.3801615

Canadians want proportional representation when it comes to electoral reform, NDP says

New Democrat MPs present report based on party's own public consultations

By Aaron Wherry, CBC News Posted: Oct 12, 2016 2:56 PM ET

Nathan Cullen presented a report from New Democrats on Wednesday that suggests Canadians support proportional representation. (Adrian Wyld/Canadian Press)

NDP MPs say that the Canadians they've heard from on electoral reform support proportional representation, but also want to maintain local representation.

Nathan Cullen, the NDP's democratic reform critic, presented a report on Wednesday that summarizes the consultations New Democrats have undertaken over the last few months. And the findings, Cullen said, set out "clear benchmarks" that will determine whether NDP MPs can support a new electoral system.

Cullen, a member of the special House of Commons committee studying electoral reform, also told reporters that he remains hopeful that consensus among committee members can be found in support of a "made-in-Canada" system.

New Democrats say their report is the result of more than 40 town hall meetings, as well as telephone and online surveys and mailouts. Including a petition for proportional representation that received 15,000 signatures, the NDP says it heard from 37,000 Canadians.

According to the NDP, 84.3 per cent of respondents supported the notion that "a party's seats in Parliament should reflect the percentage of votes they received," while 81.7 per cent agreed that "having a local representative is important to me."

Canadians also want parties to work together to choose a new system: 79.1 per cent agree that "working collaboratively and having cross-party support for a new system is vital."

The NDP has traditionally supported the idea of moving to a mixed-member proportional system for electing MPs, but the submission from the NDP caucus does not endorse any particular model.

Canadians were less enthusiastic about lowering the voting age — 34 per cent supported lowering the age to 16, while 49 per cent were opposed — or implementing mandatory or online voting, the NDP says.

As part of the motion that created the special committee on electoral reform, all MPs were invited to consult with their constituents on the issue and report back to the committee.

The special committee has until December to deliver its recommendations, but Cullen says the testimony it has heard is supportive of proportional representation.