Goodbye Greens - Hello Pirates?

[CAMP]

Who gets to decide what's polled? My MP sends out bulletins every few months that inevitably contain at least one polling question. Of course, they tend to be hot button issues, and that's what strikes me about polling. You don't get polls about whether the nearest international airport should have a runway added, or any of the other countless thousands of decisions made very year. I mean, what are we talking about, if it gets into Question Period or the scrum and Lloyd Robertson ends up talking about it on the 10pm broadcast, then it's a poll? Is it every money bill? And are these polls binding? What percentage of the riding has to respond, or is it a statistical sample? Is this supposed to be Ross Perot's box with buttons on it? What are the limits of the polling questions? If I want to stop status Indians in my riding from getting special fishing rights, despite Supreme Court rulings, can I get enough people to override the constitution and previous precedents? Most importantly, could a poll be created to force Stockwell Day to change his name to Doris Day?

Obviously the day to day operations of the government isn't going to be polled. It was suggested to poll the public as to what would be the 5 main issues they want tackled by their government. These would be the items polled or if they are large items then use a referendum.

Polls (whatever they may be) would only be to offer guidance to the MP from his riding, so they know how to vote in the house. Make all the poll results public domain and also how the MP voted in the house, this way their constituents have feedback which will provide accountability. Polls would be non binding. For the larger issues use a referendum which they would be binding. For example I would have like to have a referendum on bailing out GM.

I doubt it would have been bailed out. I would also have liked a referendum on entering the Afghanistan war. I'm not sure which way that one would have gone. I just want more control over these large impact decisions as well as driving our government to act on issues they would rather push under the carpet. Issues such as Caledonia, etc.

[benny]

Obviously the day to day operations of the government isn't going to be polled.

I would also have liked a referendum on entering the Afghanistan war.

Personally and much like libertarians on this respect, I think that a government should have no day to day operations to deal with. The whole idea for a population to have political representatives is to deal with matters that require secrecy (i.e. top secret classification).

[CAMP]

Personally and much like libertarians on this respect, I think that a government should have no day to day operations to deal with. The whole idea for a population to have political representatives is to deal with matters that require secrecy (i.e. top secret classification).

Well I wouldn't say that Libertarians would just keep the day to day operations going on, they would want to dismantle it and reduce government. I don't think that would be the will of the majority. Democracy is all about the pursuit of the majority rule.

[benny]

Well I wouldn't say that Libertarians would just keep the day to day operations going on, they would want to dismantle it and reduce government. I don't think that would be the will of the majority. Democracy is all about the pursuit of the majority rule.

- A government with NO day to day operations that's what I wrote.

- The definition of democracy is the will of the people (as a people).