https://twitter.com/DavidRayAmos/status/828334705061814272
David Raymond Amos
ROUND THREE
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/gould-first-past-the-post-1.3970658
491 Comments
Darren MacDonald
How on earth can she defend the PM's broken promise. Anybody?
David Raymond Amos
@Darren MacDonald I sorta answered that question to the chair of ERRE committee on Oct 7th
David Raymond Amos
@David Raymond Amos
Mr. David Amos:
I have two other points, because I don't think you can pull this off. I don't think it will happen.
The Chair:
Well, I'm hoping we do.
Mr. David Amos:
Here is my suggestion. You guys are going north.
The Chair:
Yes.
Mr. David Amos:
Look how parliamentarians are elected in the Northwest Territories. There is no party, and I like that.
The Chair:
That's true. We were just up in Yellowknife, in fact, and we learned all about that. That's why it's good for us to be travelling the country. But, sir, I—
Mr. David Amos:
I have one more suggestion.
The Chair:
One more.
Mr. David Amos:
Mr. Harper changed the Canada Elections Act and I still couldn't vote.
The Chair:
Yes, I was in the House when that happened.
Mr. David Amos:
Anyway, that said, when you alter the Canada Elections Act, make it. The biggest problem we have is, look at the vast majority of people who, like me, have never voted in their life. Apathy rules the day.
The Chair:
Except that you've put us on to an idea about Iceland—
Mr. David Amos
Let me finish. I suggest that you make voting mandatory, such as Australia does. Make it that if you don't vote, it costs you money, just like if you don't report to Statistics Canada.
The Chair:
Well, we're talking about that. That is part of our mandate, to look at mandatory voting and online voting.You already had your last suggestion.
Mr. David Amos:
Put in the line, “none of the above”, and if “none of the above” wins—
The Chair:
That's right, we've heard that, too.
Mr. David Amos:
Well, I haven't.
The Chair:
We've heard that in our testimony.
Mr. David Amos:
You and I will be talking again, trust me on that one, by way of writing.
ROUND TWO
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/wherry-trudeau-electoral-reform-promise-betrayal-1.3962386
WOW It now appears that the comment thread under @Ralph Smith just went "Poof"
1622 Comments
Ralph Smith
Liberals will say anything to get your vote!
Remember, we will scrap the GST?
Instead raised it to 7%.
Remember, we will scrap the GST?
Instead raised it to 7%.
David Raymond Amos
@Ralph Smith Do tell does the
CBC or Mr Prime Minister Trudeau "The Younger' anyone else particularly
Nathan Cullen and Elizabeth May recall what I told the ERRE Committee
in Fredericton NB on October 7th, 2015???
Content disabled.
David Raymond Amos
@Ralph Smith
A few days ago Prime Minister Trudeau "The Younger" backed out of a
major election promise with an amazing amount of blatantly obvious you
know what to support his reasons. I noticed Nathan Cullan had no problem
whatsoever calling him a liar on CBC. So i knew then a Hell was about
to break loose. Early on within a CBC comment section on the topic i saw
that whatever further comments that CBC would allow me to make would be
lost in a blizzard of rants by upset left wing Canadians or the legions
gloating Conservatives and all the Trolls with strange names on both
sides of the fence would definitely chime in. @Ralph Smith
Whereas CBC often blocks my comments for political reasons rather than ethical reasons, I figured that I should not waste my precious time writng stuff that would not be read. Furthermore it would be rather redundant of me to repeat what CBC did and didn't allow me to post already within a much earlier comment sections.
So I opted to post one comment in the most liked comment thread to see if I was still blocked by CBC. Then awhile later after reading a bunch of comments I picked one Conservative to respond to and after being ignored I said no more as I watched the storm unfold in the CBC website. It appears to be still raging today. N'esy Pas?
Anyway if you care here is where I put my two bits worth in on Feb 1st. My comments can be found buried deep within the "most liked" thread of "@Mario Doucet"
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-electoral-reform-mandate-1.3961736
And here is from two months ago Look under the "most liked" thread of "@Paul Bigras". Those words are a matter of Parliamentary History and rather prophetic even if I have to say so myself.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/electoral-reform-tire-fire-1.3876961
Veritas Vincit
JOHN MCTAGGART
Why all the fuss and fake outrage?
Look at B.C. Look at Ontario.
Both failed to pass electoral reform.
Am I shocked?
No!
It was never going to happen.
Look at B.C. Look at Ontario.
Both failed to pass electoral reform.
Am I shocked?
No!
It was never going to happen.
David Raymond Amos
@JOHN MCTAGGART What about the LIEBrano nonsense Prince Edward Island????
JOHN MCTAGGART
@David Raymond Amos
LIEBrano
What the heck is that?
LIEBrano
What the heck is that?
Darby Boon
@JOHN MCTAGGART - "Why all the fuss and fake outrage?"
I didn't vote Liberal but I know some who did. It wasn't for Trudeau's experience or wealth of knowledge (lol), it was for electoral reform and/or pot. He outright failed at the first and has cause nothing but problems with the other by not at least decriminalizing it. He's useless, they're useless. And they're costing Canada a fortune while groping around in the dark trying find something to go right.
I didn't vote Liberal but I know some who did. It wasn't for Trudeau's experience or wealth of knowledge (lol), it was for electoral reform and/or pot. He outright failed at the first and has cause nothing but problems with the other by not at least decriminalizing it. He's useless, they're useless. And they're costing Canada a fortune while groping around in the dark trying find something to go right.
Darby Boon
@JOHN MCTAGGART - "What the heck is that?"
Google it.
Google it.
David Raymond Amos
@JOHN MCTAGGART The neo con
lawyer/journalist Ezra Levant coined the phrase many moons ago within
his Western Journal I believe. It is a play on words that relates the
fictional mobsters the Sopranos to the Liberals telling lies about all
the payola that inspired the Gomery Inquiry. Methinks think Levant came
up with at about the same time that I first ran for a seat in the 38th
Parliament and years after he gave up his chance for seat on the hill so
that his buddy Harper could get back in as the leader of the newly
minted Alliance Party. Anyway I liked it so that is what I have called
the profound liars in Red Coats ever since
David Raymond Amos
@Darby Boon Perhaps
you should Google me as well
David Raymond Amos
@JOHN MCTAGGART I agree with
@Darby Boon in that is the reasons why lots of folks who never voted
before voted LIEbrano last time. However everybody and his dog with half
a clue between their ears had had enough of Harper and his corporate
cohorts. Remember the "Orange Wave" ?
Years later the NDP proved to many that they were far too wacky for many to support. Now nobody wants to be their leader. Go figure. What amazed me while I was running for a seat in the 42nd Parliament was why couldn't the people could not see that Trudeau "The Younger" was pulling their leg particularly after he had supported Bill C51. It seemed to mean old me that too many folks just wanted selfies with old Pierre's pretty boy who was gonna make smoking dope legal while we voted him back in next time in a different fashion Methinks putting fluoride in the water was not for the benefit of "We The People" Small wonder politicians drink bottled water and it is more expensive that gasoline in lots of places EH?
Content disabled.
David Raymond Amos
@Darby Boon @JOHN MCTAGGART
FYI I made this comment within the top thread an hour ago and not one soul noticed. Too too Funny Indeed
"Do tell does the CBC or Mr Prime Minister Trudeau "The Younger' anyone else particularly Nathan Cullen and Elizabeth May recall what I told the ERRE Committee in Fredericton NB on October 7th, 2015???"
FYI I made this comment within the top thread an hour ago and not one soul noticed. Too too Funny Indeed
"Do tell does the CBC or Mr Prime Minister Trudeau "The Younger' anyone else particularly Nathan Cullen and Elizabeth May recall what I told the ERRE Committee in Fredericton NB on October 7th, 2015???"
Content disabled.
David Raymond Amos
@JOHN MCTAGGART @Darby Boon
Oh My Now that CBC is blocking my comments again I will quit and revert
to Blogging, Tweeting and Emailing my indignation to their Crown Corp
bosses, Mr Prime Minister Trudeau "The Younger" and his political
opposition as per my MO.
I am certain that you two lawyers above all understand why I must do so N'esy Pas Hubby Baby Lacroix and Minister Joly?
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/gould-first-past-the-post-1.3970658
Seven months after her predecessor described the current electoral system as "antiquated," and one week after the Liberal government abandoned its pursuit of reform, the new minister of democratic institutions defended first-past-the-post during an appearance before a House of Commons committee.
"The first-past-the-post system may not be perfect — no electoral system is," Karina Gould said Tuesday during an appearance before the procedure and House affairs committee.
"But it has served this country for 150 years and advances a number of democratic values that Canadians hold dear, such as strong local representation, stability and accountability."
The decision to abandon the Liberal Party's commitment to implement a new electoral system was "difficult" but "responsible," Gould said, citing a lack of consensus around the options.
Last July, while appearing before a special committee on electoral reform, Gould's predecessor was notably more critical in her review of first-past-the-post.
"Some have pointed out that Canada is a mature, successful democracy whose citizens enjoy a high standard of living and a level of political freedom that is the envy of the world. They question why we would consider changing such a successful democracy," Maryam Monsef said.
"Although I accept the premise of that thought, I do not agree with the conclusion. Simply pointing out that something works is not a reason not to try to make it better. First-past-the-post is an antiquated system designed to meet the realities of 19th-century Canada and not designed to operate within our multi-party democracy.
"We require an electoral system that provides a stronger link between the democratic will of Canadians and election results."
Gould said the public consultations on the issue — including hearings conducted by the special committee, a national tour by Monsef and an online survey — were "one of the largest and farthest-reaching consultations ever undertaken by the government of Canada."
Most of Gould's hour before Tuesday's committee dealt with other matters within her mandate, including the threat of foreign hacking and establishing an independent commission to organize party leader debates during elections.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/wherry-trudeau-electoral-reform-promise-betrayal-1.3962386
I am certain that you two lawyers above all understand why I must do so N'esy Pas Hubby Baby Lacroix and Minister Joly?
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/gould-first-past-the-post-1.3970658
With electoral reform off the table, minister defends first-past-the-post
Former minister had described current system as 'antiquated'
By Aaron Wherry, CBC News Posted: Feb 07, 2017 4:18 PM ET
Minister of Democratic Institutions Karina Gould stands
during Question Period in the House of Commons on Feb. 1, 2017. (Fred
Chartrand/Canadian Press)
Seven months after her predecessor described the current electoral system as "antiquated," and one week after the Liberal government abandoned its pursuit of reform, the new minister of democratic institutions defended first-past-the-post during an appearance before a House of Commons committee.
"The first-past-the-post system may not be perfect — no electoral system is," Karina Gould said Tuesday during an appearance before the procedure and House affairs committee.
"But it has served this country for 150 years and advances a number of democratic values that Canadians hold dear, such as strong local representation, stability and accountability."
The decision to abandon the Liberal Party's commitment to implement a new electoral system was "difficult" but "responsible," Gould said, citing a lack of consensus around the options.
Gould defends electoral status quo0:16
Last July, while appearing before a special committee on electoral reform, Gould's predecessor was notably more critical in her review of first-past-the-post.
"Some have pointed out that Canada is a mature, successful democracy whose citizens enjoy a high standard of living and a level of political freedom that is the envy of the world. They question why we would consider changing such a successful democracy," Maryam Monsef said.
"Although I accept the premise of that thought, I do not agree with the conclusion. Simply pointing out that something works is not a reason not to try to make it better. First-past-the-post is an antiquated system designed to meet the realities of 19th-century Canada and not designed to operate within our multi-party democracy.
- Trudeau's promise of electoral reform: From 'we can do better' to accusations of betrayal
- Liberal fears of proportional representation and a referendum killed Trudeau's reform promise
- Opposition accuses Trudeau of 'betrayal' as Liberals abandon promise of electoral reform
"We require an electoral system that provides a stronger link between the democratic will of Canadians and election results."
Gould said the public consultations on the issue — including hearings conducted by the special committee, a national tour by Monsef and an online survey — were "one of the largest and farthest-reaching consultations ever undertaken by the government of Canada."
Most of Gould's hour before Tuesday's committee dealt with other matters within her mandate, including the threat of foreign hacking and establishing an independent commission to organize party leader debates during elections.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/wherry-trudeau-electoral-reform-promise-betrayal-1.3962386
Trudeau's promise of electoral reform: From 'we can do better' to 'betrayal'
How did months of consultation end in abandoning election promise?
By Aaron Wherry, CBC News Posted: Feb 05, 2017 5:00 AM ET
Justin Trudeau announced his promise to change Canada's
first-past-the-post electoral system in June, 2015, less than two months
before an election campaign that saw him win a majority government.
(Sean Kilpatrick/Canadian Press)
Justin Trudeau once seemed very interested in changing the way federal elections are conducted in this country.
"I believe fundamentally that we can do better," he said during a forum at the University of Ottawa last April, 10 months after he first vowed that a Liberal government would move past the current federal electoral system. "We can have an electoral system that does a better job of reflecting the concerns, the voices of Canadians from coast to coast to coast, and give us a better level of governance."
It was, he said, a priority for him and for a lot of Canadians who believe, "we need to make sure that going forward we have the best possible electoral system."
Less than a year later, he stands accused of deceit, cynicism and betrayal, after a new mandate letter issued to Minister of Democratic Institutions Karina Gould announced the government would not be pursuing electoral reform.
"What Trudeau proved himself today was to be a liar, was to be of the most cynical variety of politician," the NDP's Nathan Cullen said on Wednesday.
"We are in a time of dangerous politics. You must never do anything as a politician who understands what's at stake that feeds cynicism," mused Green party leader Elizabeth May. "Cynicism has enough to feed itself. It is work to feed hope. It is work to feed faith. And when you break faith you will reap what you sow."
What happened?
In abandoning their commitment, the Liberals have identified three primary concerns.
First, there is the lack of "consensus" on the issue, the electoral system being something on which there should be widespread agreement.
Efforts certainly were made to hear from all and sundry: a special committee conducted hearings and travelled the country, the minister embarked on a national tour, MPs hosted dozens of public forums, and postcards were mailed to 14 million households to promote an online survey.
But the original Liberal promise was not just to consult widely in hopes that a consensus would naturally emerge. And though consensus might not have been possible to achieve in this case, the sort of debate that would have demonstrated as much never really took shape.
Appearing in question period on Wednesday, Trudeau floated a second
issue: That moving to a system of proportional representation could have
made it easier for "extremist" parties to win seats in the House of
Commons.
As Cullen noted to a CBC reporter on Friday, vote thresholds — in Germany, for instance, a party must win five per cent of the national vote to qualify for a seat in the legislature — can be used to limit how many parties are represented. And perhaps there is a larger philosophical debate to be had about whether a political system should even be engineered to limit the spectrum of political views.
But fragmentation is not an unreasonable concern.
Proportional representation, in which seats are allotted in proportion to the national popular vote, could result in smaller parties gaining representation. Canada is, as noted by a senior Liberal this week, a large and regionally diverse country. The implications for the federal party system deserve careful consideration.
Unfortunately, this debate was not openly held. Except within the testimony of academics at the special committee, the political and public discourse never got to that point, the Liberals preferring to keep the discussion focused on values.
Not until Wednesday afternoon, an hour after his commitment was declared null and void, did Trudeau categorically assert his preference for preferential voting and publicly pit it against the NDP's desire for proportional representation.
Early on, the basic idea of preferential voting was criticized in some circles for its design and identified as a system that might favour the Liberals. And the prime minister is said to have kept an open mind about proportional representation.
But not until the matter was moot did this take prominence as a significant impasse.
The Conservatives, meanwhile, demanded a national referendum.
And Trudeau also worried aloud last week that a referendum would be
"divisive."
That too is worthy of consideration. Though provincial proposals for electoral reform have generally been put to referendums, a national vote could break along provincial lines or otherwise stoke regional or political divisions.
The senior Liberal noted that in establishing a threshold for reform, the government could have set a precedent for future referendums, particularly on Quebec sovereignty.
But such considerations might have given Trudeau pause before that day in June 2015 when he promised reform. If he had misgivings about proportional representation or if a referendum was likely to be fraught, he might have avoided making what otherwise seemed to be an open-ended commitment.
After the promise was made, Canadians might have expected a fuller debate.
That might have at least made the promise's demise easier to understand.
"We are moving forward in a way that will focus on the things that matter to Canadians," Trudeau said in the House on Wednesday. "That is what Canadians elected us to do."
Voters who were invested in electoral reform might be deeply disappointed and even some who were only vaguely interested might be left with a bad impression. But electoral reform is perhaps not foremost among the concerns for the average Canadian.
The government no doubt has many other things to worry about. If the Liberals manage to keep most of their other promises, this episode might not become emblematic of a prime minister whose commitments can't be trusted.
But on Wednesday, Cullen called Trudeau directly to account.
"I was a bit surprised that it wasn't Mr. Trudeau out here, somehow lacking the courage and fortitude to make this announcement himself," the New Democrat said.
Doing better in this case might have meant a personal and extended accounting from the prime minister himself.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/so-much-for-electoral-reform-1.3963514
Fear of both proportional representation, including the possible
emergence of fringe or even alt-right parties, and a potentially
divisive national referendum led Justin Trudeau's government to abandon
his promise of electoral reform, according to a senior Liberal source.
In the lead-up to the 2015 election, Trudeau pledged that a Liberal government would ensure a new electoral system was in place for the next federal vote.
The Liberals regularly repeated that promise through their first 15 months in office, but on Wednesday the government announced electoral reform was no longer a priority.
In question period, Trudeau acknowledged his long-standing personal support for a preferential ballot — which allows voters to rank candidates — but the prime minister "was open to having his mind changed," says a senior Liberal, speaking on condition of anonymity.
"But the more he thought about proportional representation, the more he thought it was exactly the wrong system for a big, regionally and culturally diverse country."
In the House, Trudeau said reform might produce "an augmentation of extremist voices in the House," a potential result that is sometimes associated with proportional representation.
The Liberal cabinet is said to have been overwhelmingly opposed to proportional representation, which aims to allot seats in the legislature in proportion to the national popular vote. Ministers, the source says, believed Canada was better served with broader "big tent" parties.
The source added the ministers were concerned that proportional representation could open the door to smaller regional or fringe parties in the House of Commons, including the alt-right, a loosely defined political movement that includes white nationalists and white supremacists.
The spectre of such a party holding the balance of power in Parliament is said to have been raised.
Cabinet also decided, while meeting in Calgary last month, that it would be irresponsible to hold a referendum.
The Liberals had not previously ruled out the possibility, but during an appearance in July before the special committee on electoral reform, Minister of Democratic Institutions Maryam Monsef said referendums "can and have often led to deep divisions within Canadian and other societies, divisions which have not been easily healed."
In question period on Thursday, Trudeau similarly referred to a potential referendum as "divisive."
The senior Liberal notes that in establishing a vote threshold for the implementation of reform, the government could have also set a precedent for future referendums.
An electoral-reform referendum that needed only a simple majority to be accepted could, for instance, be cited to justify a similar threshold in any future referendum on Quebec sovereignty, something that would undermine the Liberal position that separation shouldn't be so simple.
All previous national votes on specific issues — prohibition in 1898,
conscription in 1942 and the Charlottetown Accord in 1992 — have
divided along provincial lines.
Beyond the government's lament that no "consensus" on the issue of electoral reform had been achieved, the prime minister's comments in the House suggested a concern about the risk of moving forward.
"It would be irresponsible for us to do something that harms Canada's stability," Trudeau said Wednesday.
"The fact of the matter is that I am not going to do something that is wrong for Canadians just to tick off a box on an electoral platform," he later added. "That is not the kind of prime minister I will be."
During question period on Friday, NDP democratic reform critic Nathan Cullen responded to Liberal concerns about fringe or alt-right parties.
"In their desperate attempt to justify their betrayal on electoral reform, Liberals are reaching for any excuse, however ridiculous or absurd," Cullen said.
"Donald Trump got elected on first-past-the-post with no problem. A fair voting system is the actual antidote to such campaigns like his.... Proportional representation elects more women, more diverse parliaments and forces parties to work together and bring a country like Canada together."
Cullen alleged that the Liberals abandoned electoral reform "not because it was a threat to Canadian unity, but because it was a threat to the Liberal party."
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.
1044 Comments Commenting is now closed for this story.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/fair-vote-canada-electoral-1.3963361
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has let Canadians down by abandoning his election promise to end the current first-past-the-post voting system, says the president of Fair Vote Canada.
Réal Lavergne, head of the non-profit group that advocates for voting system reform, told Radio-Canada that yesterday's decision to scrap electoral reform was a violation of the prime minister's promise to usher in "open and transparent government."
"We are extremely disappointed. We had high hopes for this government," Lavergne said.
"The Liberals broke a sacred and simple election promise … in a cynical move to keep winning undeserved majority governments," said Unifor's national president, Jerry Dias, in a release.
The president of Canada's largest private sector union said the decision amounts to the breaking of a "sacred and simple" election promise.
"More than just voting for electoral reform, Canadians wanted an end to political games we have seen coming out of Ottawa for far too long," Dias said. "What they got … instead was just more of the same."
Katelynn Northam, of the electoral advocacy group Leadnow, questioned what Trudeau's U-turn means for other promises made by the prime minister.
"If Trudeau is willing to betray voters on his signature election promise, what does that mean for his other commitments?" Northam said in a statement.
Northam also suggested the current political climate warrants a voting system shakeup — now more than ever.
"A Trump-style candidate could never win over a majority of Canadian voters — but in our broken first-past-the-post system, a hateful candidate could win with as little as 35 per cent of the vote."
Lavergne said young people "appear to be particularly outraged" by the government's electoral reform backtrack.
And while the Liberal government has ended its plan to make the 2015 election the last using a first-past-the-post system, electoral reform groups say they will continue to push for change.
"The fight for proportional representation isn't over. A majority of Canadians do want electoral reform, and we'll keep fighting until we win," Northam wrote.
Fair Vote Canada organized a protest outside Trudeau's Montreal constituency office Thursday evening. Other demonstrations are planned for Calgary, Toronto and Vancouver.
"I believe fundamentally that we can do better," he said during a forum at the University of Ottawa last April, 10 months after he first vowed that a Liberal government would move past the current federal electoral system. "We can have an electoral system that does a better job of reflecting the concerns, the voices of Canadians from coast to coast to coast, and give us a better level of governance."
It was, he said, a priority for him and for a lot of Canadians who believe, "we need to make sure that going forward we have the best possible electoral system."
Less than a year later, he stands accused of deceit, cynicism and betrayal, after a new mandate letter issued to Minister of Democratic Institutions Karina Gould announced the government would not be pursuing electoral reform.
"What Trudeau proved himself today was to be a liar, was to be of the most cynical variety of politician," the NDP's Nathan Cullen said on Wednesday.
- Liberal fears of PR and referendum killed reform promise
- Voting reform groups 'disappointed' by broken Liberal promise
- Opinion: Revenge of the comment section: So much for reform
"We are in a time of dangerous politics. You must never do anything as a politician who understands what's at stake that feeds cynicism," mused Green party leader Elizabeth May. "Cynicism has enough to feed itself. It is work to feed hope. It is work to feed faith. And when you break faith you will reap what you sow."
What happened?
Lack of consensus and concern about PR
In abandoning their commitment, the Liberals have identified three primary concerns.
First, there is the lack of "consensus" on the issue, the electoral system being something on which there should be widespread agreement.
Efforts certainly were made to hear from all and sundry: a special committee conducted hearings and travelled the country, the minister embarked on a national tour, MPs hosted dozens of public forums, and postcards were mailed to 14 million households to promote an online survey.
But the original Liberal promise was not just to consult widely in hopes that a consensus would naturally emerge. And though consensus might not have been possible to achieve in this case, the sort of debate that would have demonstrated as much never really took shape.
NDP Democratic Reform critic Nathan Cullen
says the prime minister's abandonment of electoral reform reveals him to
be 'of the most cynical variety of politician.' (Adrian Wyld/Canadian
Press)
As Cullen noted to a CBC reporter on Friday, vote thresholds — in Germany, for instance, a party must win five per cent of the national vote to qualify for a seat in the legislature — can be used to limit how many parties are represented. And perhaps there is a larger philosophical debate to be had about whether a political system should even be engineered to limit the spectrum of political views.
But fragmentation is not an unreasonable concern.
A debate that never happened
Proportional representation, in which seats are allotted in proportion to the national popular vote, could result in smaller parties gaining representation. Canada is, as noted by a senior Liberal this week, a large and regionally diverse country. The implications for the federal party system deserve careful consideration.
Unfortunately, this debate was not openly held. Except within the testimony of academics at the special committee, the political and public discourse never got to that point, the Liberals preferring to keep the discussion focused on values.
Not until Wednesday afternoon, an hour after his commitment was declared null and void, did Trudeau categorically assert his preference for preferential voting and publicly pit it against the NDP's desire for proportional representation.
Early on, the basic idea of preferential voting was criticized in some circles for its design and identified as a system that might favour the Liberals. And the prime minister is said to have kept an open mind about proportional representation.
But not until the matter was moot did this take prominence as a significant impasse.
In the face of opposition anger Wednesday,
Justin Trudeau offered concerns about a 'divisive' referendum and the
rise of 'extremist' parties to explain his decision to drop electoral
reform. (Fred Chartrand/Canadian Press)
That too is worthy of consideration. Though provincial proposals for electoral reform have generally been put to referendums, a national vote could break along provincial lines or otherwise stoke regional or political divisions.
Precedent for future referendums
The senior Liberal noted that in establishing a threshold for reform, the government could have set a precedent for future referendums, particularly on Quebec sovereignty.
But such considerations might have given Trudeau pause before that day in June 2015 when he promised reform. If he had misgivings about proportional representation or if a referendum was likely to be fraught, he might have avoided making what otherwise seemed to be an open-ended commitment.
After the promise was made, Canadians might have expected a fuller debate.
That might have at least made the promise's demise easier to understand.
Trudeau tries to move forward
"We are moving forward in a way that will focus on the things that matter to Canadians," Trudeau said in the House on Wednesday. "That is what Canadians elected us to do."
Voters who were invested in electoral reform might be deeply disappointed and even some who were only vaguely interested might be left with a bad impression. But electoral reform is perhaps not foremost among the concerns for the average Canadian.
The government no doubt has many other things to worry about. If the Liberals manage to keep most of their other promises, this episode might not become emblematic of a prime minister whose commitments can't be trusted.
But on Wednesday, Cullen called Trudeau directly to account.
"I was a bit surprised that it wasn't Mr. Trudeau out here, somehow lacking the courage and fortitude to make this announcement himself," the New Democrat said.
Doing better in this case might have meant a personal and extended accounting from the prime minister himself.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/opinion/so-much-for-electoral-reform-1.3963514
Revenge of the comment section: So much for electoral reform
The Liberals have broken their promise for electoral reform, and many Canadians aren't happy
CBC News Posted: Feb 03, 2017 9:37 AM ET
This week, the Liberals announced its promise of electoral
reform was dead. (Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press)
Justin Trudeau's promise of electoral reform is dead.
Back in 2015, the Liberals said unequivocally that that federal election would be the last one under first-past-the-post. They repeated that pledge over and over — as recently as late last year. But then on Wednesday, Canada's new democratic institutions minister made it clear that changing Canada's electoral system is not in her mandate.
The Liberals are now flailing to explain their about-face to angry voters, some of whom have launched targeted email campaigns to voice their concerns. Many CBC commenters are similarly upset about the Liberals' broken promise, while others think they never intended to honour it in the first place.
- Larry Lippard
What would a national referendum do for this? Not much clarity to be had there. It was a rash promise from Trudeau, if not a disingenuous one, to say there would be change. But calling someone a liar for changing their position in the face of such a reality is just as juvenile as the promise itself.
- Peter Stephenson
- Ken Adams
Proportional representation disproportionately empowers the minority parties on the edges of the spectra. The outcome could be a more severe polarisation of our parliament. We could also see parliamentary paralysis: a highly fragmented spread of parties with limited consensus, multiple and ever-changing backroom alliances, frequent elections and neutered leadership.
First-past-the-post is probably the least worst option.
- Ian Anderson
- Ed Toogood
The Liberals made it quite clear then that our democracy was broken, yet now they say these same Canadians don't care. Trudeau also said, "Canadians are beyond taking their elected representatives at their word when it comes to integrity. " Oh really Trudeau? Well, let's just wait and see!
- Jim McIntyre
- Ralph Jacobs
- Lauren Sikkema
- John Chow
- Joe Renaud
- Doug Race
If fringe parties want to get more of a voice in parliament they need to:
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.
1244 Comments Commenting is now closed for this story.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-reform-promise-referendum-1.3963533
Back in 2015, the Liberals said unequivocally that that federal election would be the last one under first-past-the-post. They repeated that pledge over and over — as recently as late last year. But then on Wednesday, Canada's new democratic institutions minister made it clear that changing Canada's electoral system is not in her mandate.
The Liberals are now flailing to explain their about-face to angry voters, some of whom have launched targeted email campaigns to voice their concerns. Many CBC commenters are similarly upset about the Liberals' broken promise, while others think they never intended to honour it in the first place.
It's over
The honeymoon is over for Trudeau and the Liberals. Since coming to power, they have given the Canadian people lies, deceit and deception. Disgraceful.- Larry Lippard
Who's calling the shots?
Each party favours the kind of reform (or no reform) that would best suit its prospects for increased power. For the Tories: that's no change—their only hope; Liberals: preferential second ballot—seeing as they would be most people's second choice; NDP and Greens: proportional—for influence based on national, not local, voting.What would a national referendum do for this? Not much clarity to be had there. It was a rash promise from Trudeau, if not a disingenuous one, to say there would be change. But calling someone a liar for changing their position in the face of such a reality is just as juvenile as the promise itself.
- Peter Stephenson
Interesting timing
Notice how the Liberals waited until after Trudeau's listening tour to make this announcement? How convenient.- Ken Adams
Potential parliamentary paralysis
I'm not an advocate for first-past-the-post, but I am concerned about the commenters who seem to think that proportional representation is the panacea and road to the only true for of democracy. A new voting system would change the voting patterns of the electorate.Proportional representation disproportionately empowers the minority parties on the edges of the spectra. The outcome could be a more severe polarisation of our parliament. We could also see parliamentary paralysis: a highly fragmented spread of parties with limited consensus, multiple and ever-changing backroom alliances, frequent elections and neutered leadership.
First-past-the-post is probably the least worst option.
- Ian Anderson
Conservative-lite
The Liberals got what they wanted. They stole the promise and the votes from the NDP, then pretended that Canadians didn't want electoral reform. What do we have? The status quo, phony majorities at 39 per cent of the popular vote, which obviously is just fine by them, just like it's fine by the Conservatives. Well, thanks a lot, Conservative-lite.- Ed Toogood
Trusting Trudeau's word
Back in 2015, before he was prime minister, Trudeau said his plan "was the result of years of hard work and thousands of conversations with experts, members of other governments who have led the way, and most importantly, everyday Canadians."The Liberals made it quite clear then that our democracy was broken, yet now they say these same Canadians don't care. Trudeau also said, "Canadians are beyond taking their elected representatives at their word when it comes to integrity. " Oh really Trudeau? Well, let's just wait and see!
- Jim McIntyre
Here for the pot
It doesn't matter how many people are cheesed off and say they'll never vote for this guy again. Come 2019, just before the election, Trudeau will announce weed is legal and all of this will be forgotten, and he'll be re-elected.- Ralph Jacobs
Message from rural Ontario
I live in rural Ontario, and we are farmers. We have a small voice, and our concerns are much different from those of the majority of Canadians that live in urban centers. We were hoping that electoral reform would mean that we would be not only heard, but also represented. Apparently, that isn't going to happen.- Lauren Sikkema
It's about the promise, not the reform
I didn't care too much about electoral reform myself. However, when a political leader campaigns on a major issue like this and then backs out, it is entirely damaging to their credibility. And Prime Minister Trudeau had a pretty thin veneer of credibility to begin with.- John Chow
No support, no reform
I get that there is political hay to be made here, but I, for one, am quite OK with the idea that if a consensus could not be found for a new system, we stick with the old system. Electoral reform, just like electoral boundaries, should be done with the support of a broad majority. That support did not form around any one particular alternative so the status quo remains.- Joe Renaud
It works just fine
If it isn't broke, don't try to fix it. We have had a working and fair election system for over 100 years. It works! If some don't like it: too bad.- Doug Race
A recipe for winning
I'm quite happy with the system the way it is. I see no need to make changes. Proportional representation has been tried and failed elsewhere. It usually results in frequent arguments, and frequent elections. No thanks.If fringe parties want to get more of a voice in parliament they need to:
- Be more popular among more people.
- Run candidates who are not just party faithfuls, but also electable.
- Dial back the anger and the fringe rambling. It gets tedious.
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.
1244 Comments Commenting is now closed for this story.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-reform-promise-referendum-1.3963533
Liberal fears of proportional representation and a referendum killed Trudeau's reform promise
Senior party source explains government’s decision to scrap important campaign pledge
By Aaron Wherry, CBC News Posted: Feb 03, 2017 5:00 AM ET
This week, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau abandoned his
campaign promise to replace the first-past-the-post voting system. A
senior Liberal source shared some of the decision-making details with
CBC News. (Sean Kilpatrick/Canadian Press)
In the lead-up to the 2015 election, Trudeau pledged that a Liberal government would ensure a new electoral system was in place for the next federal vote.
The Liberals regularly repeated that promise through their first 15 months in office, but on Wednesday the government announced electoral reform was no longer a priority.
'Wrong system'
In question period, Trudeau acknowledged his long-standing personal support for a preferential ballot — which allows voters to rank candidates — but the prime minister "was open to having his mind changed," says a senior Liberal, speaking on condition of anonymity.
"But the more he thought about proportional representation, the more he thought it was exactly the wrong system for a big, regionally and culturally diverse country."
- Voting reform groups 'disappointed' by abandoned Liberal promise
- Opposition accuses Trudeau of 'betrayal' as Liberals abandon promise
In the House, Trudeau said reform might produce "an augmentation of extremist voices in the House," a potential result that is sometimes associated with proportional representation.
The Liberal cabinet is said to have been overwhelmingly opposed to proportional representation, which aims to allot seats in the legislature in proportion to the national popular vote. Ministers, the source says, believed Canada was better served with broader "big tent" parties.
The source added the ministers were concerned that proportional representation could open the door to smaller regional or fringe parties in the House of Commons, including the alt-right, a loosely defined political movement that includes white nationalists and white supremacists.
The spectre of such a party holding the balance of power in Parliament is said to have been raised.
'Deep division'
Cabinet also decided, while meeting in Calgary last month, that it would be irresponsible to hold a referendum.
The Liberals had not previously ruled out the possibility, but during an appearance in July before the special committee on electoral reform, Minister of Democratic Institutions Maryam Monsef said referendums "can and have often led to deep divisions within Canadian and other societies, divisions which have not been easily healed."
In question period on Thursday, Trudeau similarly referred to a potential referendum as "divisive."
The senior Liberal notes that in establishing a vote threshold for the implementation of reform, the government could have also set a precedent for future referendums.
An electoral-reform referendum that needed only a simple majority to be accepted could, for instance, be cited to justify a similar threshold in any future referendum on Quebec sovereignty, something that would undermine the Liberal position that separation shouldn't be so simple.
The Liberals were concerned that by
establishing a vote threshold for the implementation of electoral
reform, the government could have also set a precedent for future
referendums — including on Quebec sovereignty. (Canadian Press/Paul
Chiasson)
Beyond the government's lament that no "consensus" on the issue of electoral reform had been achieved, the prime minister's comments in the House suggested a concern about the risk of moving forward.
"It would be irresponsible for us to do something that harms Canada's stability," Trudeau said Wednesday.
"The fact of the matter is that I am not going to do something that is wrong for Canadians just to tick off a box on an electoral platform," he later added. "That is not the kind of prime minister I will be."
During question period on Friday, NDP democratic reform critic Nathan Cullen responded to Liberal concerns about fringe or alt-right parties.
"In their desperate attempt to justify their betrayal on electoral reform, Liberals are reaching for any excuse, however ridiculous or absurd," Cullen said.
"Donald Trump got elected on first-past-the-post with no problem. A fair voting system is the actual antidote to such campaigns like his.... Proportional representation elects more women, more diverse parliaments and forces parties to work together and bring a country like Canada together."
Cullen alleged that the Liberals abandoned electoral reform "not because it was a threat to Canadian unity, but because it was a threat to the Liberal party."
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.
1044 Comments Commenting is now closed for this story.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/fair-vote-canada-electoral-1.3963361
Voting reform groups 'disappointed' by abandoned Liberal promise
Advocacy groups organize protests following election pledge U-turn
By Brendan Burke, CBC News Posted: Feb 02, 2017 7:23 PM ET
President of Fair Vote Canada, Réal Lavergne, says
electoral reform could still happen sometime down the road, but only
through governments with 'political courage.' (CBC)
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has let Canadians down by abandoning his election promise to end the current first-past-the-post voting system, says the president of Fair Vote Canada.
Réal Lavergne, head of the non-profit group that advocates for voting system reform, told Radio-Canada that yesterday's decision to scrap electoral reform was a violation of the prime minister's promise to usher in "open and transparent government."
"We are extremely disappointed. We had high hopes for this government," Lavergne said.
- Electoral reform — a promise that was born sickly: Urback
- Opposition accuses Trudeau of 'betrayal' over voting reform
- Monsef escapes the Liberal adventure in electoral reform
"The Liberals broke a sacred and simple election promise … in a cynical move to keep winning undeserved majority governments," said Unifor's national president, Jerry Dias, in a release.
The president of Canada's largest private sector union said the decision amounts to the breaking of a "sacred and simple" election promise.
"More than just voting for electoral reform, Canadians wanted an end to political games we have seen coming out of Ottawa for far too long," Dias said. "What they got … instead was just more of the same."
Katelynn Northam, of the electoral advocacy group Leadnow, questioned what Trudeau's U-turn means for other promises made by the prime minister.
"If Trudeau is willing to betray voters on his signature election promise, what does that mean for his other commitments?" Northam said in a statement.
Northam also suggested the current political climate warrants a voting system shakeup — now more than ever.
"A Trump-style candidate could never win over a majority of Canadian voters — but in our broken first-past-the-post system, a hateful candidate could win with as little as 35 per cent of the vote."
Fight not over
Lavergne said young people "appear to be particularly outraged" by the government's electoral reform backtrack.
And while the Liberal government has ended its plan to make the 2015 election the last using a first-past-the-post system, electoral reform groups say they will continue to push for change.
"The fight for proportional representation isn't over. A majority of Canadians do want electoral reform, and we'll keep fighting until we win," Northam wrote.
Fair Vote Canada organized a protest outside Trudeau's Montreal constituency office Thursday evening. Other demonstrations are planned for Calgary, Toronto and Vancouver.
Young voters disappointed after Liberals bail on electoral reform7:40
No comments:
Post a Comment