Canada General Discussion (2019-) (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 01:41:46 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  International General Discussion (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  Canada General Discussion (2019-) (search mode)
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 12
Author Topic: Canada General Discussion (2019-)  (Read 181350 times)
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,069


« on: August 22, 2020, 10:02:32 PM »
« edited: August 22, 2020, 10:07:01 PM by Frank »

Stephen McNeil is the only Liberal in Canada right now with the profile of a 'fiscal conservative.'  I predict the next Liberal leadership race (the sooner the better) will be between 'Red Liberal' Chrystia Freeland and 'Blue Liberal' Stephen McNeil.

Canada has not had a Premier lead a Federal political party since Bob Stanfield led the Progressive Conservatives.  Dave Barrett came close to winning the NDP leadership in 1989 but by then he hadn't been Premier of British Columbia for 14 years anyway.

The Progressive Conservative leadership race won by Stanfield in 1967 was something of a star packed field.  In addition to Stanfield, Manitoba Premier Duff Roblin also ran as did former British Columbia Progressive Conservative leader Davie Fulton (though things didn't work out for him provincially.)

Unfortunately for the P.Cs, John Diefenbaker also ran to try to hold the job. I can imagine he made the convention something of a nightmare.
Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,069


« Reply #1 on: October 20, 2020, 12:50:49 PM »

Can Canadians explain to me why when Harper prorogued parliament when he held a minority it was this travesty of democracy that made international news, and when Trudeau did it to stop investigation of the WE Charity scandal from hurting the Liberal Party further in a minority parliament (as well as going back on a campaign promise) it's not even discussed here on this thread or board I believe, or makes larger news?

Hmm, I could've sworn I grumbled about this on the thread... anyway to answer your question:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_bias

Ridiculous. Virtually all of the Canadian media leans to the right, so, if there is any bias it would be against the Liberals.
Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,069


« Reply #2 on: October 20, 2020, 01:40:17 PM »

Can Canadians explain to me why when Harper prorogued parliament when he held a minority it was this travesty of democracy that made international news, and when Trudeau did it to stop investigation of the WE Charity scandal from hurting the Liberal Party further in a minority parliament (as well as going back on a campaign promise) it's not even discussed here on this thread or board I believe, or makes larger news?

Hmm, I could've sworn I grumbled about this on the thread... anyway to answer your question:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_bias

Ridiculous. Virtually all of the Canadian media leans to the right, so, if there is any bias it would be against the Liberals.

Everyone in this Canada general political discussion thread is a right-leaning Canadian media member?

There's a few posts about Bill Morneau resigning and then nothing.

I don't know why it wasn't mentioned here.  But, I'd hardly call the Canadians here as reflective of all Canadians or the Canadian media.
Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,069


« Reply #3 on: October 20, 2020, 05:17:01 PM »

Can Canadians explain to me why when Harper prorogued parliament when he held a minority it was this travesty of democracy that made international news, and when Trudeau did it to stop investigation of the WE Charity scandal from hurting the Liberal Party further in a minority parliament (as well as going back on a campaign promise) it's not even discussed here on this thread or board I believe, or makes larger news?

Harper move cancelled three months of Parliament sitting.
Trudeau move postponed the end of summer recess by a week.

Harper also prorogued Parliament to prevent an imminent defeat of his government with the other parties poised to take power, that wasn't the case with this prorogation.

It was still wrong, because the purpose of the Liberals was clearly to shut down the investigation into the WE charity scandal, but the anti-Democratic nature is much less serious.
Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,069


« Reply #4 on: October 21, 2020, 11:18:46 AM »

Can Canadians explain to me why when Harper prorogued parliament when he held a minority it was this travesty of democracy that made international news, and when Trudeau did it to stop investigation of the WE Charity scandal from hurting the Liberal Party further in a minority parliament (as well as going back on a campaign promise) it's not even discussed here on this thread or board I believe, or makes larger news?

Harper move cancelled three months of Parliament sitting.
Trudeau move postponed the end of summer recess by a week.

Harper also prorogued Parliament to prevent an imminent defeat of his government with the other parties poised to take power, that wasn't the case with this prorogation.

It was still wrong, because the purpose of the Liberals was clearly to shut down the investigation into the WE charity scandal, but the anti-Democratic nature is much less serious.

I find that explanation disingenuous. The Prime Minister's family are involved in a corruption scandal, the Finance Minister falls on a knife never admitting blame, and we're going to whisk that away? It was clearly a move to stop the Trudeau government from falling when they only hold a minority to start with. They couldn't do what they did with SNC Lavelin and just vote to not investigate because they didn't have a majority.

The Boys in Short Pants podcast Twitter had a funny line when Morneau was fined $300 post-fact for violating the Canada Elections Act. "I got a $280 ticket for jaywalking once. It was -20C I was wearing a T-shirt and trying to catch a cab. Don't judge my life choices."


Who is 'we'  (in the we're going to whisk that away)  If you mean Atlas, I don't know why it wasn't mentioned.  I already pointed out the people who post here on Canadian politics aren't necessarily representative.  If you mean why was it not discussed in the Canadian media, it was all over the Canadian media.

The obvious other point, which hasn't been brought up, is that in this time of Covid, it's not a surprise the public at large would pay less attention to political maneuverings.

I'm also not sure that there were any crimes with the 'We' Charity scandal either.  There were regulatory violations which count as 'breaking the law' but I'm not sure there is anything punishable with either jail or large fines that might have occurred here.  If you want to get into a discussion why some things are crimes, but other very similar things aren't, that's a whole other discussion.
Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,069


« Reply #5 on: October 21, 2020, 01:37:26 PM »
« Edited: October 21, 2020, 03:30:34 PM by Frank »


 No election.

Justin Trudeau's likely response to Jagmeet Singh "Thank...You...So...Very...Much (bastard.)"
Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,069


« Reply #6 on: October 22, 2020, 07:39:20 PM »
« Edited: October 22, 2020, 07:44:00 PM by Frank »

It looks like the Liberals are doing everything they can to force an election. There is a precedent for a modern winter election.  The 1980 election following the defeat of the Joe Clark government was held on February 18, 1980, but, back them, campaigns were two months long, so it would have been called sometime in December.

Pierre Trudeau started his victory speech with the line "Fellow Canadians, mecheres  amis, well, welcome to the 1980s."
Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,069


« Reply #7 on: October 22, 2020, 07:48:40 PM »

It looks like there might not be a chance to assemble a high profile slate of candidates, but who would be your dream slate of new Conservative candidates to run alongside Erin O'Toole, who is clearly a big step up from Andrew Scheer?  To be sure, many of mine would be high profile retreads, but some new candidates as well.

From west to east
1.James Moore
2.Mike Bernier (assuming the B.C Liberals lose)
3.Rona Ambrose
4.Gary Mar
5.Brad Wall
6.Brian Bowman
7.Jim Baird
8.Lisa Raitt
9.Michel Fortier
10.Bernard Lord
11.Peter MacKay
Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,069


« Reply #8 on: November 16, 2020, 07:17:16 PM »
« Edited: November 16, 2020, 07:22:21 PM by Frank »

It looks like there might not be a chance to assemble a high profile slate of candidates, but who would be your dream slate of new Conservative candidates to run alongside Erin O'Toole, who is clearly a big step up from Andrew Scheer?  To be sure, many of mine would be high profile retreads, but some new candidates as well.

From west to east
1.James Moore
2.Mike Bernier (assuming the B.C Liberals lose)
3.Rona Ambrose
4.Gary Mar
5.Brad Wall
6.Brian Bowman
7.Jim Baird
8.Lisa Raitt
9.Michel Fortier
10.Bernard Lord
11.Peter MacKay

1. James Moore: I could see him running, as he is still relatively prominent in the CPC. His biggest challenge would be getting a seat, as metro Vancouver has trended away from the CPC since he left.

2. Mike Bernier: If a seat opens up, yes. His part of BC is held by the Conservative backbencher Bob Zimmer, who has been there since 2011. It's not inconceivable that this seat opens up, though maybe not in a snap election.

3. Rona Ambrose: Says she won't run, and has a well-paying corporate job. If she wants back into politics at all, her best bet is to wait for O'Toole's leadership to end at some point and jump into a leadership race.

4. Gary Mar: Don't know much about him, but there's not much free real estate for Conservative politicians in Alberta right now. He'd likely have to wait for a Calgary-area retirement/resignation.

5. Brad Wall: O'Toole would probably love to have someone like him in caucus, he could almost function as a "prairie lieutenant" to shore up the base while O'Toole focuses on Ontario. Again, no real estate in Sask. But should a CPC MP in SK retire anytime soon, he would get the nomination with ease.

6. Brian Bowman: Is he popular in Winnipeg? Winnipeg South and Elmwood-Transcona are marginal enough for a popular tory to win, but it's an uphill battle. And with the current state of Covid in Winnipeg, he might not win.

7. Assuming you mean John Baird: No. Ottawa has been very NOVA-ized since 2015, and his old riding of Ottawa West-Nepean is now a solid Liberal riding. He would have to run in Kanata-Carleton to have a shot. And even then, Baird might not want to. I don't know the details but the word in Ottawa is that Baird has a few skeletons in his closet.

8. Lisa Raitt: Milton is gone. Even if Van Koeverden's Olympian stardom wears off, there's clearly greater trends in Milton and it's hard to see the CPC making up a 9000-vote gap and 21% swing. She could try one of the Oakville ridings, but even those are unlikely to go blue. Her best shot is to hope Chong retires in Wellington-Halton Hills.

9. Michael Fortier: He would have to be parachuted into one of the Beauport ridings, or wait for a QC CPC MP to resign. He's been out of the public eye for quite some time though, I don't think he would be that much of a star candidate.

10. Bernard Lord: Again, out of the public eye for quite some time. He's the CEO of Medavie-Blue Cross now, which probably pays better than an MP's salary. And I don't know how well a red tory like him could fit with the party of Erin "Take Canada Back" O'Toole

11. Peter MacKay: Already announced he's not running. If he changes his mind, he has an uphill battle in Central Nova.

Thanks for this well thought out reply.  I did refer to it as a 'dream slate' so, not that it should be taken as people actually likely to run, just people I thought would make an excellent front bench with Prime Minister Erin O'Toole (much better than say Pierre Polievre or Michelle Rempel.)

I was wondering if there were any names I didn't think of.

I disagree with the characterization here of Erin O'Toole.  He has signaled not so much being a 'take back Canada' Conservative or of being a Red Tory as much as being a 'working class Tory' (sorry to anybody who is offended by the word 'Tory')  similar to Boris Johnson in the U.K and Scott Morrison in Australia.  O'Toole has repeatedly (especially since winning the leadership) made comments critical of big business and in favor of private sector unions.  

I'm interested in any specific policies they come up with to back this up.  I think especially if they show an interest in 'trust busting' or in being much more serious about addressing corporate crime or wealthy tax cheats than the Liberal Party has demonstrated, that they could appeal to a large number of Canadians.    


Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,069


« Reply #9 on: February 08, 2021, 03:36:42 AM »

The media are all fixated on the slow vaccine rollout, and the Conservatives are gleefully making hay over this.

This will bite them in the ass, for the 63452nd time. Within a few months, production capacity will have ramped up, and the (rich) world will be awash with vaccines. Supply will no longer be an issue.

As usual, the Conservatives ridicule Trudeau and lower public expectations towards him, so that when Trudeau greatly exceeds these expectations but still doesn't perform as well as he could, these attacks backfire on them again and again.

And yet the Conservatives are still stuck in the low 30s.  The Liberals have dropped according to this poll, but the Conservatives haven't budged.
Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,069


« Reply #10 on: February 11, 2021, 11:06:13 PM »

Pierre Polievre has been replaced as shadow finance minister in favor of Ed Fast.

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/pierre-poilievre-erin-otoole-shadow-cabinet_ca_60241c00c5b6f38d06e8f017

Interesting move from Erin O'Toole dropping the noxious show horse Polievre for a genuine work horse in Ed Fast.

Along with the reaching out to the private sector unions and kicking Derek Sloan out of the party, this seems to be another move by O'Toole to shift the party to the center right.

From what I've seen of people with different ideologies, they aren't all the same except for having different ideologies.  Some people on the left seem far more concerned than most other people with 'civility' while some of those on the right (especially the hard right) seem to genuinely admire underhanded people unlike other people.

So, while I wouldn't expect Erin O'Toole to say outright "Yes, I lied to you when I ran in the leadership on the hard right, and I expect you to admire me for being underhanded" I would not be surprised if he says words to those effect.

The only issue here I think is will hard right Canadians admire this underhanded behavior when it was used on them?

As for me, I don't care for duplicity, but I'm not part of the 'civility' crowd either.  As the song goes, 'it's okay, I understand, this ain't no never-never land.'  If Erin O'Toole can demonstrate a reasonableness on a wide range of issues while the Trudeau Liberals fail to demonstrate a need for at least some fiscal discipline, I would certainly give the Conservatives a hard look in the next election.
Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,069


« Reply #11 on: April 05, 2021, 02:09:16 AM »

I'd argue a lot of Trudeau's power comes more from incumbency than Canada's leftward lean. Just look at the BC or Ontario Liberals; they won repeated elections while being widely despised for corruption and ineptitude and survived even when the Federal Liberals were getting pummeled in their provinces. Higgs hasn't had much issue with reelection despite running a province that Trudeau literally swept in 2015 and Ford is (at least currently) looking likely to cruise to a fairly safe reelection.

It seems like Canadians will typically reelect incumbents regardless of partisan affiliation or ideology unless they really screw up, at which point even an oaf like Doug Ford can win a nominally Liberal province like Ontario. Trudeau's survived on the basis that his scandals haven't really impacted regular people that much and so far he's managed to successfully pass off blame for the ones that have. If the housing bubble bursts or severe inflation sets in then even a literal tool like O'Toole would have no problem Wynne-ing against Trudeau, though if the NDP nominated a decent leader they could conceivably fill the void.

The Ontario Progressive Conservatives in the McGuinty years repeatedly 'pulled defeat from the jaws of victory.'

The British Columbia Liberals made a lot of unpopular decisions from 2001-2005 but after a single term out of office, the NDP were still in no position to return to power, and the Liberal policies had a good deal of popularity during this hangover of the 'neoliberal' economic period.  It would be a mistake to underestimate how many people agreed with the policies of the B.C Liberals or the Harris Conservatives from 1995-1999, for instance.  

Still, those policies did allow the NDP to return to 42% of the vote and 33 seats in 2005 after largely been given up for dead in 2001.  Most  pundits and the Liberal Party expected the NDP to win, I believe, only around 15-20 seats.  That better than expected showing by the NDP surprised the Liberals, and the good economic times allowed them to govern more like liberals, and they seemed to be actually a pretty popular government from 2005-2009.  
Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,069


« Reply #12 on: May 05, 2021, 05:41:06 AM »

NDP: May not do well in polls, but if public wants Ford defeated and they don't warm up to Del Duca, I think they have an opening.  Lets remember in 2018, almost every poll pre-election showed similarly bad numbers. 

Polls were all over the place before the 2018 election for the NDP.  Some of their numbers were quite good, and those polls stuck with voters, and gave them credibility to get a surge in their favour.

I remember hearing that the memory of Bob Rae's premiership discouraged voters, particularly 905 residents and obviously older voters from voting NDP. To me it hardly could have been decisive given the scale of Ford's victory but I would ask you what do you think of that suggestion?

Very likely since his unpopularity in Ontario was also supposedly a major reason why he didn't win the Liberal leadership.
Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,069


« Reply #13 on: May 09, 2021, 06:12:42 PM »

You don't need to bridge the divide. Just let the PC-equivalent run a center right UK Tory style campaign that runs on a carbon tax and beating down SoCons for those key upper middle class urban/suburban votes while the Reform-equivalent runs with all the policies that let it dominate the Prairies and that (especially recently) provided inroads in postindustrial ex-NDP regions like Essex and Oshawa.

As it stands a single Tory leader is forced to choose between their base and growth, whereas two Tory leaders could get both. If anything being divided is a good thing, since that makes it harder for Trudeau to do his usual trick of painting the Tories as Republicans to alienate centrist suburbanites.

Also, of course Trudeau is at his peak when he's paying a huge portion of the population to stay home. The same trick worked quite a while for Bolsonaro. But the real question is what happens to his popularity when the bill comes due, either in the form of austerity and service cuts when the BoC raises rates or inflation if it doesn't. I've seen zero explanations for how we're going to handle the debt (let alone provincial debt) when real rates aren't negative.

I'm sure Trudeau will capitalize by holding an election sooner rather than later though, ideally by baiting the other parties into forcing it somehow.

The PCs and Reform/Alliance merged *because* the alternative was another decade of Liberal majorities with ~35% of the popular vote. More specifically, the PCs never recovered from the shocks of Mulroney's last years, and were a spent force. It's possible that, given another decade, the Alliance Party could have itself evolved into a big-tent centre-right party, but we'll never know.

There would certainly be room for a moderate, centre-right party. Unfortunately, the First Past The Post system makes it unviable.

Virtually every democratically elected government gave generous cash handouts over the past year. But, if buying voters with their own money was the magic elixir to keep power, then Trump would have won. People want real leadership, or at least the perception of it (admittedly, Trudeau did much better on the latter than the former). The debt will have to be addressed through big tax hikes, which most peer countries are going to introduce in some form in the coming years.

I agree, that Trudeau will find a way to call an election by this Fall, when life has returned to normal and we've enjoyed a Summer of economic exuberance. He'll get away with it, because Erin O'Toole has been suspiciously eager about one for months.

The Progressive Conservatives might have been coming back. They had just won a by-election in Ontario and they had a credible and relatively popular leader in former Prime Minister Joe Clark. 

There was also reason to expect the Liberal government would be hurt by scandals with rumors of the 'Sponsorship scandal' starting to bubble up.  Historically the Progressive Conservatives had benefited from Liberal government scandals.  However, Joe Clark seemed to have the worst political judgement of any major politician in Canada, and just when this situation for a major return of the P.Cs seemed possible, he stepped down as P.C leader.
Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,069


« Reply #14 on: May 09, 2021, 07:36:33 PM »

Looking back two decades, the Lower Mainland of BC and Vancouver Island embracing Preston Manning and Stockwell Day sure looks weird today.  But so was the election of Rob Ford as mayor of Toronto.  

1.Preston Manning was not the far right wing person his opponents tried to caricature him as.  To be sure, his signature issue was the deficit and he was suspicious of government, but he was mostly a 'process politician' primarily interested with how laws were implemented much more so than what those laws were. 

Manning might be the only successful populist 'process politician' to ever exist.

He used to speak of the Reform Party with the analogy of an airplane, arguing that it needed both a right and a left wing to stay in the air.

2.Vancouver Island is not as standard left wing as outsiders think it is.  It has historically been far more populist than left wing.  So, the unpopularity of the provincial Harcourt government in 1993 combined with Manning's populism made Vancouver Island (outside of Victoria which went Liberal) a fertile ground for the Reform Party.  The same was true in the North West of B.C, the Federal Skeena riding as well as the Kootenays, other areas that have historically been left leaning populist areas.  Interestingly in 1993, The Chretien Liberals almost won the West Kootenay riding with the NDP falling to third.

3.In the Lower Mainland, I think the unpopularity of the Pierre Trudeau years hurt the Chretien Liberals as a fair number of 'red Tories' likely stuck with the Progressive Conservatives in 1993.  To be sure, the outer parts of the Lower Mainland like Surrey, Langley and the Maple Ridge area were more right leaning then than now, but a number of the inner ridings around Vancouver were very close races.  The most competitive was the New Westminster riding which Reform Paul Forseth won with just 29% of the vote.
Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,069


« Reply #15 on: May 16, 2021, 10:16:48 AM »

British Columbia has been called Canada's Australia by one scholar of Canadian political culture.  Like Britain and Australia, class-based voting has been strong and held out longer.  The stunning defeat of Premier in Van-Point Grey in 2013 symbolized that the "stigma" against the NDP among many of the "liberally minded" professional class had come to an end.  Education and metropolitan/non-metropolitan have become bigger fault lines in politics.   Today the NDP looks quite safe in Point Grey.

Maybe, but the NDP also won Vancouver-Point Grey (then a dual member riding) in 1988 with Dr Tom Perry who was also reelected in 1991 in the then single member riding.
Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,069


« Reply #16 on: May 16, 2021, 10:26:23 AM »
« Edited: May 16, 2021, 10:45:48 AM by Frank »

In the long run the Tories would have been better off had the PCs and Reform never merged. The differences between the Anglicized, urbane Atlantic PCs and the Americanized, populist Reformers (not to mention the Quebec separatists) are too great to be bridged by any but the most skilled politicians (and even Harper's coalition was falling apart by the end). It would make far more sense for two separate right of center parties to focus on the regions they're best at while strategically not running candidates in key swing ridings (presumably after negotiations and/or local primaries).

This post is from a little back, but it reminds me quite a lot of the predicament the Labour Party is in here. How sensible are the Canadian Tories right now?

Not very, they are in same trouble Labour party is.  In fact two parties have a lot in common in terms of losing even if different in ideology.

I saw on A Fiscal Conservative Point of View that you don't like them anymore. I'm having a similar problem with the Tories here.
What is Trudeau like - I know little about the details of Canadian politics, but from abroad he comes across as exceedingly irritating.

I find him irritating as well, a combination of a public image of banal and sanctimonious, with a now suspected not so private image of ruthlessness.  

That said, as I also previously wrote, this general plodding image suggests an incompetence that overshadows a government that has actually had a had a number of monumental accomplishments, I argue The Justin Trudeau administration has been far more consequential than the Pierre Trudeau government from 1968-1979.  Were Justin Trudeau to step down today, I think his government would be compared to the Lester Pearson government that had a similar air of incompetence and minor scandals but left a major legacy.

The Justin Trudeau Administration's significant accomplishments include
1.Marijuana legalization
2.Senate reform
3.The Children's benefit that has significantly cut child poverty
4.The Carbon tax and the purchasing of the pipeline

Of course, all of these are still works in progress but that's true of every government.

Compare that to the previous Harper government which in nearly 10 years had the signature achievement of cutting the GST by 2 points and passing criminal justice legislation that they knew was unconstitutional with the intent of fundraising off of and running against the Supreme Court.
Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,069


« Reply #17 on: May 16, 2021, 02:40:05 PM »
« Edited: May 16, 2021, 02:43:51 PM by Frank »

In regards to the Canadian Senate, there certainly are regional inequities and I don't doubt they can be a problem, but the Senators being appointed seem to be taking more of a 'pan Canadian' approach.

At its best, the purpose of this Senate can be as a useful tonic to the 'fake news' problem of today.  The goal of the reformed Senate seems to be to create a body of general experts who can cut through the 'fake news' and act as a counterbalance to the craven elected House of Commons.  

Obviously it's too soon to say if it's having much of a positive effect.  I think once the transition period is over with and all the partisan Conservative Senators are gone, we'll have a much better idea (I know a few of the less partisan Conservative Senators quit the Conservative caucus to sit as Independents) if this experiment works or not, assuming the Conservatives don't get back into power and start appointing partisans again.

However, the Senate does already seem to be working as intended: amending generally agreed flawed legislation from the House.  It would be a mistake however to believe that the partisan Senate did not do this work from time to time previously.  Even prior to these changes, a number of Senate committees were highly regarded for the quality of their hearings.

The idea of a popularly elected lower House matched by an inferior but still powerful unelected upper House of experts is not new.  At a minimum, the United States considered this before coming up with the idea of its Senate to be elected by state legislatures and it was a proposal that was going to be discussed at the Russian Constituent Assembly in 1918 as well.  I'm sure other nations have considered the idea as well.  

Obviously I strongly disagree that this isn't real reform or that this isn't an idea with its own history and body of research behind it.  I don't really see the purpose or the reform that comes with a second body of craven elected politicians.
Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,069


« Reply #18 on: May 16, 2021, 02:54:30 PM »

My understanding is that the Reform Party took the western base?


That's basically it.

So what were the PCs like?

Mostly the opposition.  They governed from 1957-1963.  1979-1980 and 1984-1993.

I'm not all that familiar with the Diefenbaker government, but he certainly was no right winger.  His government passed a Bill of Rights (that was the basis of Trudeau's Charter of Rights and Freedoms) and opposed nuclear weapons.

The Joe Clark government from 1979-1980 did not pass a single piece of legislation.  I'm not even sure if they appointed a single person to any agency, board or commission.  The budget, which they were defeated over, was their first piece of legislation.  They actually had a number of pieces of legislation ready to go that likely would have been popular and likely would have bolstered their popularity before the budget with its $0.18 a gallon increase in gasoline prices.  Joe Clark was never a political genius.  He basically got extremely lucky in winning the 1976 Convention, but felt it was due to his political genius.

The Mulroney Government is hated by most Canadians for those who old enough to remember it, but I think it's the second best Canadian Administration of the last 60 years (second only to the Pearson government.)  Mulroney was a person easy to dislike due to his bluster and ego, but he presided over a very consequential government.  In addition to negotiating the original Free Trade Agreement and the subsequent NAFTA (left to both the brief Kim Campbell government and the Chretien Government to complete) he also replaced the inefficient Manufacturer's Sales Tax with the GST.  In doing this, he resisted the impulse of the other right wing governments in English speaking countries in the 1980s to significantly reduce taxes and significantly increase their budget deficits.

The Mulroney government generally was the equivalent to the 'wets' in the U.K Conservative Party.  In addition to those two significant achievements were a whole host of smaller accomplishments the proudest of which was openly supporting Nelson Mandela in South Africa.
Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,069


« Reply #19 on: May 16, 2021, 02:58:39 PM »
« Edited: May 16, 2021, 03:03:23 PM by Frank »

In regards to the Canadian Senate, there certainly are regional inequities and I don't doubt they can be a problem, but the Senators being appointed seem to be taking more of a 'pan Canadian' approach.

At its best, the purpose of this Senate can be as a useful tonic to the 'fake news' problem of today.  The goal of the reformed Senate seems to be to create a body of general experts who can cut through the 'fake news' and act as a counterbalance to the craven elected House of Commons.  

Obviously it's too soon to say if it's having much of a positive effect.  I think once the transition period is over with and all the partisan Conservative Senators are gone, we'll have a much better idea (I know a few of the less partisan Conservative Senators quit the Conservative caucus to sit as Independents) if this experiment works or not, assuming the Conservatives don't get back into power and start appointing partisans again.

However, the Senate does already seem to be working as intended: amending generally agreed flawed legislation from the House.  It would be a mistake however to believe that the partisan Senate did not do this work from time to time previously.  Even prior to these changes, a number of Senate committees were highly regarded for the quality of their hearings.

The idea of a popularly elected lower House matched by an inferior but still powerful unelected upper House of experts is not new.  At a minimum, the United States considered this before coming up with the idea of its Senate to be elected by state legislatures and it was a proposal that was going to be discussed at the Russian Constituent Assembly in 1918 as well.  I'm sure other nations have considered the idea as well.  

Obviously I strongly disagree that this isn't real reform or that this isn't an idea with its own history and body of research behind it.  I don't really see the purpose or the reform that comes with a second body of craven elected politicians.

Welcome to the House of Lords Preservation Society!

Other than removing most of the hereditary Lords, I'm not sure what changes were brought in by Tony Blair or what has happened subsequently.  There are a lot of potential benefits to an unelected House of experts that has the ability to amend legislation but that ultimately realizes it has to defer to the elected House.

It can:
1.amend unconstitutional legislation rather than going through the time consuming process of court challenges (of course the Senators are assuming the legislation is unconstitutional, but if a group of non partisan experts think legislation is unconstitutional that's generally good enough for me, even if they aren't all lawyers.)
2.sit on craven populist legislation until the populist sentiment cools
3.propose unpopular changes to legislation or propose unpopular legislation that the House of Commons is trying to avoid (not dissimilar than the Supreme Court)
4.hold non partisan hearings that influence public opinion
Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,069


« Reply #20 on: May 17, 2021, 01:37:20 PM »


Interesting. I don't know enough about Edmonton politics to say whether he's a frontrunner but he'll certainly add to this race.

The current mayor, Don Iveson, announced several months ago he's not running for a third term.  I assume Beesley knew that, but I didn't know that and I assume some other people here didn't know that either.

If elected mayor, maybe Sohi can continue his tradition of announcing infrastructure projects and then not get them built. Smiley
Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,069


« Reply #21 on: May 17, 2021, 01:58:34 PM »
« Edited: May 17, 2021, 03:06:25 PM by Frank »

Filmmaker, Leap Manifesto spokesperson and NDP dynasty Avi Lewis is running in West Vancouver-Sunshine Coast-Sea to Sky:

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/filmmaker-activist-avi-lewis-to-run-for-federal-ndp-seat-in-b-c-riding-1.5431132

Quite the uphill battle, to say the least.  The NDP came in fourth there last time.

Well, he's running for the NDP nomination anyway. I know the NDP can be parochial, and the Lewis name is associated with Ontario New Democrats, but I also know that, especially the more urban New Democrats, can be supportive of other urbanites, at least for candidates running for leader.  For instance, Jack Layton likely won more support in British Columbia than the Manitoba M.P Bill Blaikie who was running as something of a 'western Candidate', and British Columbia New Democrats also likely supported Jagmeet Singh over the aborted campaign of Burnaby-New Westminster M.P Peter Julian.

In regards to this riding for a general election, the West Vancouver ridings were two of only four ridings in suburban Lower Mainland (or Greater Vancouver, I mean not including the city of Vancouver, Surrey or the Fraser Valley, just the suburbs around Vancouver but including Delta which is actually south of the Fraser River) that the NDP did not win in the recent provincial election (the Green Party narrowly lost one of the two.)  The provincial NDP has held the provincial riding of Powell River-Sunshine Coast since 2005, but I don't think the Sunshine Coast part of that riding is a very solidly NDP area. Federally, the Powell River part of the riding is included as part of a Coastal Vancouver Island riding.



Historically Powell River-Sunshine Coast is something of an interesting oddity in that it's something of a historical stronghold for the provincial NDP even though the NDP didn't hold it from 1986-2005. In 1986, the NDP lost the riding in an upset by something like 30 votes.  The winner in that election was Social Credit candidate Harold Long.  In 1991, Gordon Wilson, then leader of the Liberal Party won and was reelected in 1996 as the leader of the People's Democratic Alliance (PDA.)  In the 1991 election, Harold Long received the lowest percent of vote of any Social Credit incumbent.

In 2001 during the Liberal landslide, the B.C Liberals took the riding.  The winner was former Social Credit MLA Harold Long.

Apropos of nothing here, but for fans of Canadian books, the defeated NDP candidate in the 1991 election was Howard White, the then President of Harbour Publishing.
Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,069


« Reply #22 on: May 22, 2021, 03:41:10 PM »

Fun fact about that referendum: Gilles Duceppe spoiled his ballot. Instead of voting yes or no he wrote about the need for Quebecers to focus on the real enemy: Capitalism.

Yep, he was a Maoist into his 30s. A Maoist.

Well, that's really no worse than being a Randian, and that's mainstream in some circles.
Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,069


« Reply #23 on: May 23, 2021, 12:07:21 AM »
« Edited: May 23, 2021, 12:18:05 AM by Frank »

Fun fact about that referendum: Gilles Duceppe spoiled his ballot. Instead of voting yes or no he wrote about the need for Quebecers to focus on the real enemy: Capitalism.

Yep, he was a Maoist into his 30s. A Maoist.

Well, that's really no worse than being a Randian, and that's mainstream in some circles.

Sure, but Maoism was never a popular form of communism in developed western countries. I wouldn't be surprised if he was a Trot or a Marxist-Leninist, but Maoism always struck me as a more postcolonial, third-world thing.

Then again many 60s era Quebec nationalists would consider themselves victims of colonialism and reasonably comparable to enslaved African-Americans, so what do I know

This may be because Maoism, especially at that time, had as much to do with Mao and China as 'socialism' did to the Nazis.  

This is from a book published in 1973 called 'A Dictionary of Modern Revolution' by Edward Hyams.  

"The purest of the New Leftists are to be found among the Maoists.  First, as to its name, Maoism is not simply an imitation of the communism of the People's Republic of China: inspired by certain of the thoughts of Mao Tse-tung, European Maoism is, in its purest manifestation, very much more radical, more guacheiste, than Chinese communism, despite the fact that Chinese communist practice since the Cultural Revolution is apparently less bureaucratic than Russian communism.  The Maoists are Marxist-Lenninist, and claim that there is continuity from Marx and Lenin to Mao; but they utterly repudiate the Communist Party practices of going to the people with a readymade program, arrogating to the Party militant leadership of the proletariat.  The dictatorship of the proletariat must really come from the Proletarians themselves.  The Maoist intellectual becomes one of the people - here there are echoes of the populist movement in the late 19th Century Russia, and of the intellectual communism of Britain in the 1930s.  The Maoist does not teach and lead the people, he is taught and led by them, though he should act as a spark to fire the mass.  He should give weight to pushing the spontaneous revolutionary movement in his factory or office or university towards the Left, away from moderation and negotiation towards revolutionary action.

Reproached by the institutionalized Old Left with having no clear political line, no programme based on theory, the Maoist does not deny it: he answers to the masses, the people, are constantly pushing in a direction and sense favorable to their class; that the fundamental immorality from which stems all social evil is the exploitation of man by man and of this basic sin the masses alone are not guilty; and that it follows that the revolutionary movement of the people themselves cannot be but moral. Out of this it will emerge, helped to birth by the Maoists, a revolutionary socialist and wholly democratic programme of the people, not of a small elitist and avant-gardist group such as those formed by the Trotskyites, or of a bureaucracy such as that of the Communist Party or the trade unions."

Page 11, Introduction.

Of course, this is just what the author claims the Maoists thought of themselves, I have no idea if others on the 'New Left' of the early 1970s agree with that assessment, but the only thing of significance here is that this is likely what Gilles Duceppe was thinking of when he referred to himself as a Maoist.
Logged
Benjamin Frank
Frank
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,069


« Reply #24 on: May 23, 2021, 12:15:18 AM »
« Edited: May 23, 2021, 12:48:54 AM by Frank »

Surprised nobody's brought up Quebec's unilateral amendment of the constitution.

I'm not surprised Trudeau supported this decision, he needs Legault voters in the next election. But he may just have opened up a can of worms.


I could see a right wing party, especially Jason Kenney in Alberta, seeking to declare their province with English as the only official language and getting a unilateral amendment to the constitution to get it declared as such.  

We'll see if there is a large desire to still remove French from cereal boxes, but even more, we'll see if the federal Liberals and the other national parties show a double standard in the treatment of Quebec and the English speaking provinces.

One other possibility is a new English rights federal party starting up in Quebec.  That could threaten at least 5 to maybe 10 Liberal seats in Montreal.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 12  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.072 seconds with 12 queries.