Could Canada be more democratic?

[TimG]

The fisheries may be managed at a state level, but the US government is still ultimately responsible for negotiations with Canada.

BC fisheries also have to deal with unsettled aboriginal claims which are also a federal issue.

[eyeball]

The fisheries may be managed at a state level, but the US government is still ultimately responsible for negotiations with Canada.

It obviously took it's responsibility more seriously, because it had to deal with stakeholders with a stronger chain of accountability to yank on. Stakeholders on our side just didn't have that and as such Ottawa had less inducement to negotiate as hard.

It's pathetic that so many Canadians are so adverse to anything that might empower Canada's regions.

[ToadBrother]

It obviously took it's responsibility more seriously, because it had to deal with stakeholders with a stronger chain of accountability to yank on. Stakeholders on our side just didn't have that and as such Ottawa had less inducement to negotiate as hard.

It's pathetic that so many Canadians are so adverse to anything that might empower Canada's regions.

The problem isn't with Canadians in general, who usually don't give a damn until the problem kicks them directly in the arse. To some extent it's the nature of any system that different levels and jurisdictions compete, and that centralization, while it can potentially lead to a certain kind of efficiency, can often leave regions the poorer for it.

[eyeball]

The problem isn't with Canadians in general, who usually don't give a damn until the problem kicks them directly in the arse. To some extent it's the nature of any system that different levels and jurisdictions compete, and that centralization, while it can potentially lead to a certain kind of efficiency, can often leave regions the poorer for it.

Are you hoping this will somehow compel me to feel obliged to try and see whatever greater good it is you're looking at?

[eyeball]

So, could Canada be more democratic?

It's possible I suppose but as for probable, I wouldn't bet on it.

[ToadBrother]

Are you hoping this will somehow compel me to feel obliged to try and see whatever greater good it is you're looking at?

I can't compel you to see anything. I can tell you right now that we're a damned sight better off than some places, even some places that are ostensibly democracies.

And I'm not saying that there isn't room for improvement. Of course there is. No institution or system can remain static. But when we talk about altering institutions it should not be purely reactionary. You can see that in British Columbia's health care system, where it was suddenly decided that a new level of government between hospitals and the Ministry of Health was needed to respond to things on a regional level, and we ended up with the Health Authorities, which managed, so far as I can tell, to simply employ a bunch of upper and middle managers, accountants and lawyers.

Beyond that, at the political level, the problems are not with the underlying system. The UK has largely the same system, but individual MPs and caucuses as a whole have considerably more influence over party and leadership matters. The problem in Ottawa as much as anything is a cultural one, and you won't shift that by changing voting systems.

Edited April 14, 2011 by ToadBrother

[eyeball]

I can't compel you to see anything. I can tell you right now that we're a damned sight better off than some places, even some places that are ostensibly democracies.

And I'm not saying that there isn't room for improvement. Of course there is. No institution or system can remain static. But when we talk about altering institutions it should not be purely reactionary. You can see that in British Columbia's health care system, where it was suddenly decided that a new level of government between hospitals and the Ministry of Health was needed to respond to things on a regional level, and we ended up with the Health Authorities, which managed, so far as I can tell, to simply employ a bunch of upper and middle managers, accountants and lawyers.

I'm quite certain there's more fisheries managers than there are fishermen to manage too.

I know there's always room for improvement but one would hope to see some in one's lifetime - a blistering pace for Canada apparently.

[ToadBrother]

I'm quite certain there's more fisheries managers than there are fishermen to manage too.

The only things certain in life are death, taxes and bureaucrats.

I know there's always room for improvement but one would hope to see some in one's lifetime - a blistering pace for Canada apparently.

I guess it depends on where you look. To my mind a minority government bent on survival and jockeying with cranky Opposition parties has produced the perfect formula for coming out of a recession in good shape. If this is the evolution of Canadian democracy, then I'm all for it.

[eyeball]

I suppose, if nothing moves nothing gets hurt.

[ToadBrother]

I suppose, if nothing moves nothing gets hurt.

So far as governments go, I think sometimes it's true. Imagine if we had a well-meaning majority government that didn't have to ask pretty please with cream on top for favors from the rest of Parliament. Such a government could do all sorts of damage.

[eyeball]

Given that, I fail to see why you think reforms that tie up Ottawa's hands are such a bad thing.

Our ability to do so is just too hit and miss.

Edited April 14, 2011 by eyeball

[[email protected]]

"The problem with Parliament is that it has ceased to be a legislative body. It provides a public forum for venting reaction or venting ideas, but doesn't have much to do with governing the country." - Stephen Harper, Prime Minister

"The Prime Minister used to be described as 'the first among equals' in the cabinet, or as 'a moon among minor stars'. This is no longer so. He (she) is now incomparably more powerful than any colleague. The Prime Minister chooses the ministers in the first place, and can also ask any of them to resign; if the minister refuses, the Prime Minister can advise the Governor General to remove that minister and the advice would invariably be followed. Cabinet decisions do not necessarily go by majority vote. A strong prime minister, having listened to everyone's opinion, may simply announce that his (her) view is the policy of the government, even if most, or all, the other ministers are opposed. Unless the dissenting ministers are prepared to resign, they must bow to the decision." - Jean Chretien, former Prime Minister

"A Canadian Prime Minister can appoint judges, ratify treaties, send Canadian men and women into war, negotiate trade agreements, make patronage appointments, set the date of elections to suit his or her political advantage, determine when Parliament will be prorogued, when it will be recalled, and appoint the most senior public servants, all without reference to the MPs Canadians have elected to represent them. This is a parliamentary dictatorship and it must be brought to an end." - Bill Blakie, MP

"Parliament is not working and has not been working for a long time" - Joe Clark, former Prime Minister