D August 20th, 2009
Ahhh! Not Britain or Canada! Noo!
And why can’t private health insurance companies compete with a government health plan? Oh, cause they need to make profits… riiiight.
Oh, and I had no idea people die from cancer.
Good thing Pat is keeping me ‘informed’.
Em December 4th, 2008
Yes, proportional representation. We should be so lucky. Here’s a chart for those who want to see the numbers of what our Parliament could (should?) look like with proportional representation.
|
Party |
Actual number of seats |
Percentage of popular vote |
Proportional number of seats |
Percentage of screwage* |
|
Conservative |
143 |
37.63 |
115 |
+24 |
|
Liberal |
77 |
26.24 |
80 |
-3.8 |
|
Bloc |
49 |
9.97 |
30 |
+63 |
|
NDP |
37 |
18.20 |
56 |
-33 |
|
Independent |
2 |
.65 |
2 |
0 |
|
Green |
0 |
6.80 |
20 |
-100 |
|
Other |
0 |
0.51 |
1 ** |
? |
* Screwage being equal to number of actual seats minus number of proportional seats divided by number of proportional seats. Positive values indicate an advantage, negative indicate screwage.
**Assuming the “Other” vote was undivided, which is not true. Hence the question mark.
D December 4th, 2008
So she prorogued parliament until Jan 26th. Harper has used the Governor General to suspend the parliament in Canada for a couple of months.
But let’s forget all of that and look at some big ideas beyond this whole mess.
The stunning response from alot of non-political people has very much floored me over the last two days. It is very encouraging to see so many different people discussing opinions and ideas.
However, I have noticed that among many of the commentators there is a very present fear. A lot of Canadians have been spooked by the idea that the government can change hands so ‘easily’, or the revival of the scary ’separatists’, or those ’socialists’. The goal of this article is to encourage people to take a step back, a deep breath, and evaluate where we stand in not only Canadian history but in our understanding of democratic systems in general. To dial back our reactionary fear to this situation, and instead look towards the future and what kinds of electoral changes we can implement in Canada over the course of the next 10 years.
Canadians, when compared to many governments around the world, have been fortunate to have such a stable government for so many years, and that has likely contributed largely to the growing apathy among the voting citizenry. With the suddenness of a possible coalition many Canadians are experiencing a great deal of uncertainty, and asking questions of how this is possible. Our parliamentary system aside, the larger issue is that Canadians who are so used to non-confrontational politics were now sitting in the cross-hairs of a huge decision, and are under informed and reacting emotionally. These emotions and lack of facts on how our parliamentary system works are clouding our judgment. The coalition stepped on the anthill and everyone was running around frantically wondering what happened and what to do next.
So what changes can be made to our system to improve what so many perceived as a ‘lack of democracy’. This ‘undemocratic action’ is an outright fabrication of the uninformed, but we need to acknowledge their fears and move forward. We can educate them, but really an hour on wikipedia can teach them all they need. Maybe we need some changes to the system itself. Maybe the Governor General’s role is outdated. Maybe there are better electoral systems to represent our citizens.
So in the interest of self-education I suggest you re-learn our parliamentary system, and then consider some other electoral systems that may be possible successors to our current “first past the post” system. Some of these systems actually do represent the idea that “every vote counts” – not just the 40% of votes that built this minority Conservative government.
We need to educate ourselves, and develop an understanding of how our country works and the alternatives to those ideas so that 10 years from now we are mentally ready for dramatic change.
Next time, let’s be prepared with rational arguments, and less emotional reactions.
Em December 2nd, 2008
While it is not un-Canadian or unconstitutional to form a coalition and be handed Parliament by the Governor General, I would argue that it is undemocratic. Just as Harper should not have been allowed to dodge his own law by asking Michelle Jean to dissolve Parliament, neither should a conveniently formed coalition (who showed no interest in uniting the left vote during or before the election) be allowed to bypass the vital step of actually being elected as the governing power of the country. My problem is that an unelected, appointed official should not have anything to do with forming our Parliament. She should be a figurehead, nothing more. Giving her power allows for these outrageous decisions to be made. These are the remnants of the days before 1982, when we were still the Dominion of Canada.
I find it absolutely ludicrous that the Liberals and NDP feel that this is the best course of action for a country in financial turmoil, AND before the Conservatives have even introduced their budget. It is clearly nothing more than a power grab. What further worries me is that it is being led by a man who is planning to step down in five months. Where does that leave us next year? And this coalition agreement lasts a mere 18 months. Where does that leave us in 2011? The “party” would be forced to stay together in order to stay in power.
One of my main questions is how the Bloc came to be involved in it. I have my doubts that Gilles went for beers with Jack and Stephane, had a heartfelt talk, and left with two new friends and a common enemy. No, this is the only possible way for this monoprovincial party to once again overrepresent itself, and this time in a position of greater power than the seatwarmers of the last several decades. And it is unfortunately the only possible way for the coalition to become a majority. I would not be surprised to find that the Bloc has been promised something in return for their participation; and based on their reasonable demands in the past, it may be something beyond simply a share in the power.
Scheming to use outdated power structures to gain control of the country is not democratic by any definition. When I first learned about the structure of our constitutional monarchy, I remember wondering at the considerable power the Governor General held. I was told that it was not something he or she would ever execute in a significant way. But now, she has been forced to use it by the underhanded actions of our nation’s leaders. I would rather see another unecessary election than a government appointed by the representative of the figurehead of a country that has no day-to-day power or interest in the governance of our nation.
D December 2nd, 2008
There are a lot of people in my area that are insisting that the coalition of Lib/NDP/Bloc is undermining democracy, and spreading disinformation to that effect. But at the end of the day let’s make sure we get our facts straight.
Never mind the fact that if you add up the popular vote of the Lib/NDP/Bloc it comes out to ~60% of the votes cast in 2008.
This is not undemocratic under our Canadian system – it just doesn’t happen very often.
As to the governor general’s big decision, she can:
Let’s face it, this is a tumultuous time for Canadian politics, but another election will not solve anything. This rag tag group needs a chance to either make great decisions in government, or screw up totally and give Harper the majority that he so longs for.