Keepitsimple Posted February 7, 2014 Report Share Posted February 7, 2014 In watching Power & Politics today, it was mentioned that the former head of Elections Canada - Jean Pierre Kingsley - gave the entire bill an A-. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted February 7, 2014 Report Share Posted February 7, 2014 This legislation is a long time coming. Elections Canada has been acting as a partisan agency for too long, and this level of oversight is sorely needed. Partisan? because they tried to blow the whistle on CPC robocalls to thwart non CPC voters! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted February 7, 2014 Report Share Posted February 7, 2014 Partisan? because they tried to blow the whistle on CPC robocalls to thwart non CPC voters! No because they have directly targeted the Conservatives for things ALL parties were doing, turned disagreements over what the regulations require into media circuses, changed rules and retroactively went after people who were following the rules as they were written at the time, and because they ordered people to lie on their expense claims (threatening to have them expelled from Parliament if they didn't). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted February 7, 2014 Report Share Posted February 7, 2014 No because they have directly targeted the Conservatives for things ALL parties were doing, turned disagreements over what the regulations require into media circuses, changed rules and retroactively went after people who were following the rules as they were written at the time, and because they ordered people to lie on their expense claims (threatening to have them expelled from Parliament if they didn't). Apparently all parties weren't calling people and directing them to phony polling booths. Under the new act the CEO wouldn't even be able to report voters had made complaints as they did last time. Perhaps you don't mind being muzzled, I do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted February 7, 2014 Report Share Posted February 7, 2014 Bryan's being very foolish. No one in their right mind wants it to be harder for Elections Canada to make public voter fraud and other problems. This isn't a partisan issue. And the fact that he's making it one just goes to show how little accountability the CPC has. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted February 7, 2014 Report Share Posted February 7, 2014 (edited) It goes to show that the dysfunction in our system of governance starts with Canadian voters, who after all are responsible for the governance they get. In addition to their ignorance about how their system of government works, many lack the moral or ethical background required to use it appropriately, effectively or even safely. Edited February 7, 2014 by eyeball Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted February 8, 2014 Report Share Posted February 8, 2014 Bryan's being very foolish. No one in their right mind wants it to be harder for Elections Canada to make public voter fraud and other problems. This isn't a partisan issue. And the fact that he's making it one just goes to show how little accountability the CPC has. You may have noticed how they limited debate and forced the vote. When will they take delivery of their brown tunics I wonder? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted February 8, 2014 Report Share Posted February 8, 2014 It goes to show that the dysfunction in our system of governance starts with Canadian voters, who after all are responsible for the governance they get. In addition to their ignorance about how their system of government works, many lack the moral or ethical background required to use it appropriately, effectively or even safely. There is that old adage which goes "people get the government they deserve" OK, let's hope we have learned our lesson. And I truly hope, strange as it may sound, that I get a robocall in 2015 election day steering me to a phony poll. I'd have so much fun with that, but I don't think even the curent cons. are that stupid. But who knows? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted February 10, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 I'm listening to the debates on this and as usual, the Tories don't seem to be truthful of the reasons for it and it seems the one that is important to the Tories is to take more power away from EC CEO. My question is who is/going to be the commissioner with the power?? Also, minister Pierre says the reason people don't vote is they don't know how, where and why...the reason for people not voting is , they don't think it matters who gets in because ALL MP's are corrupt, well not ALL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted February 11, 2014 Report Share Posted February 11, 2014 (edited) I'm listening to the debates on this and as usual, the Tories don't seem to be truthful of the reasons for it and it seems the one that is important to the Tories is to take more power away from EC CEO. My question is who is/going to be the commissioner with the power??A Harperite for sure! This is all about retaining power, by fair means or foul. /feds-ram-through-elections-act-overhaul-bill PARLIAMENT HILL- As the government prepared to cut short debate Monday on government legislation that would severely curtail the independence and authority of Canadas chief electoral officer, opposition MPs accused the minister in charge of the bill of distorting an independent study of polling booth incidents in the 2011 election. ... As the opposition parties have ramped up criticism of the measure that came as a surprise when the government unveiled its election legislation last week, MPs and other critics have pointed out elimination of the vouching system, which allowed an estimated 120,000 eligible voters to cast ballots in 2011, would suppress vote support for parties that oppose the Conservatives. Edited February 12, 2014 by jacee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted February 12, 2014 Report Share Posted February 12, 2014 (edited) As the opposition parties have ramped up criticism of the measure that came as a surprise when the government unveiled its election legislation last week, MPs and other critics have pointed out elimination of the vouching system, which allowed an estimated 120,000 eligible voters to cast ballots in 2011, would suppress vote support for parties that oppose the Conservatives.[/i] Who says these people would oppose the Conservatives? It's said that a sizable portion of that 120,000 are Aboriginal. The recent First Nations Education Act, coupled with the Residential Schools apology demonstrate a commitment to real progress. Don't confuse the shrill cry of the few eco-activist-backed First Nations mouthpieces with the everyday on-reservation people who comprise the "vouched-for". As for New Canadians - there's a good argument that they traditionally favour the government that was in power when they got here - and many new Canadians come from relatively Conservative backgrounds. The Left has a definite edge with low income and student voters - but other than the homeless, it's difficult to see why these people would have a problem with ID. It's all unsubstantiated hot air. We should all pay a lot of attention to Jen Pierre Kingsley, the previous Chief Electoral Officer who rates the Fair Elections Act an A-. “Mr. Speaker, 100,000 people had their vote vouched for in the last campaign,” the NDP critic explained. “This includes aboriginal citizens, low-income people, new Canadians, students and people with disabilities. The question is why is the government making it harder for these Canadians to exercise their right to vote?” Edited February 12, 2014 by Keepitsimple Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted February 12, 2014 Report Share Posted February 12, 2014 (edited) Unsubstantiated? Read the legislation. If it's substantiated it will have been too late. Do you really want people to sit back and let it happen? The whole point is to resist this legislation because it makes it easier to get away with electoral fraud. That is a completely non-partisan issue and you want people to wait until it happens to complain. How ridiculous. Edited February 12, 2014 by cybercoma Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted February 12, 2014 Report Share Posted February 12, 2014 Does anybody really have to wonder why the new law would stop the CEO from reporting election irregularities/supperssion? I just hope the RCMP start bringing the instigators of the previous election suppressors into court before they get away with it again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted February 12, 2014 Report Share Posted February 12, 2014 Unsubstantiated? Read the legislation. If it's substantiated it will have been too late. Do you really want people to sit back and let it happen? The whole point is to resist this legislation because it makes it easier to get away with electoral fraud. That is a completely non-partisan issue and you want people to wait until it happens to complain. How ridiculous. I said the opposition's claim that the 120,000 voters would not vote Conservative is unsubstantiated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted February 12, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 12, 2014 I think the NDP may have been talking to the homeless and any other group/person who does have a address, which you have to have to prove you are a Canadians citizen. The only thing that most MP complained about was long the process takes for EC to come to a decision and the less time was about 14 months. Instead of re-educating the voters , why not re-educate the MP of the "do's, "don't"s and don't even think trying that????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted February 13, 2014 Report Share Posted February 13, 2014 If they really just wanted to make sure voters knew, where, when, and how to vote, they could have just made sure the "act" emphasized that in the agenda of EC. That they have essentially gutted EC and moved the responsibility into a ministry, pretty much tells the tale of the CPC agenda. I bet it backfires big time. The awareness of the voter suppression that occured last time I'm sure has now permeated the electorate and they want revenge. I swear if I hear Polievere say " a longer reach, sharper teeth, and a stronger hand" one more time, I will surely puke.Incessant talking points make me feel ill. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted February 13, 2014 Report Share Posted February 13, 2014 Who says these people would oppose the Conservatives?.The Hill Times, I believe. The Left has a definite edge with low income and student voters - but other than the homeless, it's difficult to see why these people would have a problem with ID.If you don't drive, you have a problem with photo ID.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted February 13, 2014 Report Share Posted February 13, 2014 Probably a fair number of vets who are old enough they don't drive anymore. And after the way the conservatives have ticked them off, disenfranchising them could be beneficial come next election. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted February 13, 2014 Report Share Posted February 13, 2014 Probably a fair number of vets who are old enough they don't drive anymore. And after the way the conservatives have ticked them off, disenfranchising them could be beneficial come next election.Low income people don't have cars. Inner city people don't much either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted February 16, 2014 Report Share Posted February 16, 2014 (edited) Does anybody really have to wonder why the new law would stop the CEO from reporting election irregularities/supperssion? I just hope the RCMP start bringing the instigators of the previous election suppressors into court before they get away with it again. In an interview on CBC Radio on Saturday, Mayrand said I can no longer speak about democracy in this country. Im not aware of any electoral bodies around the world who cannot talk about democracy. Until Monday afternoon, Poilievre had declined to clarify whether the act was designed to prevent the head of Elections Canada from giving media interviews, for instance. The act, as presented by Poilievre, says the chief electoral officer may provide the public with information on the following topics only, listing only details about voting. http://ww2.nationalpost.com/m/wp/blog.html?b=news.nationalpost.com/2014/02/11/pierre-poilievre-backs-down-on-provision-that-critics-said-muzzled-chief-electoral-officer It's out of control ridiculous the obsessive silencing of democracy by Harper! And what the heck is this?! For example, clause 376, subsection 3 on page 59 suggests that raising money from donors who have contributed to the party in the past should not be considered an election expense. http://ww2.nationalpost.com/m/wp/blog.html?b=fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2014/02/04/john-ivison-conservatives-fair-elections-act-offers-common-sense-changes-with-a-dose-of-mistrust Hunh? Fundraising from your base doesn't have to be claimed as an election expense? That's ridiculous! Edited February 16, 2014 by jacee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted February 16, 2014 Report Share Posted February 16, 2014 (edited) In an interview on CBC Radio on Saturday, Mayrand said I can no longer speak about democracy in this country. Im not aware of any electoral bodies around the world who cannot talk about democracy. When the former commissioner, Jean Pierre Kingsley, rates the Act an A-......and Mayrand can find nothing good to say, you have to seriously wonder if his judgement has been clouded by partisanship - or at lleast by his obvious dislike for the Conservative government......because clearly, there's plenty to like in the new legislation. Edited February 16, 2014 by Keepitsimple Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted February 16, 2014 Report Share Posted February 16, 2014 When the former commissioner, Jean Pierre Kingsley, rates the Act an A-......and Mayrand can find nothing good to say, you have to seriously wonder if his judgement has been clouded by partisanship - or at lleast by his obvious dislike for the Conservative government......because clearly, there's plenty to like in the new legislation. There are clearly, (Oh God do I sound like Harper in QP?) clearly things to like in the new legislation, but they are so obvious a child could have figured them out. All they really needed to do was enhance the exosting rules, not gut them which makes a lot of us suspicious as we head to a new election after what we saw during the last one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironstone Posted February 17, 2014 Report Share Posted February 17, 2014 The Conservatives are going to bring in "the fair elections act", which will remove the Commissioner of Canada Elections and setup a separate office, probably man by Tory friendly person, like Pierre Poutine??? This is such a farce when the Tories , themselves are broken so many EC rules. http://o.canada.com/news/conservatives-to-table-bill-that-will-reorganize-elections-canada/ I guess the Conservatives are greatly irritated by the fact that Marc Mayrand and Elections Canada never seem to go after the Liberals and NDP with the same gusto as they do against the Conservatives. http://blogs.canoe.ca/lilleyspad/contributor-columns/column-lilley-elections-canada-is-far-from-fair/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bleeding heart Posted February 19, 2014 Report Share Posted February 19, 2014 (edited) The profound difficulty of being a sensible Conservative in our loopy-lefty world of partisan Marxist lunacy is that they are always being victimized. I mean, yes, good conservatives despise "victim culture," except when it is real: ie the victimization of conservatives. That is a serious problem, because, first of all, Opposition parties remain oppositional, which is truly unfair to the political Right. The victimization comes not only from the pinkos who comprise all non-conservative political parties; they are also victimized by the left-wing media, the left-wing professors who have destroyed the Academy, scientists, teachers, immigrants, women, and the working poor...that is, the majority of the population, who are morons by inclination, and fifth-columnists by effect. The true mystery is the way that, the more powerful and influential a conservative becomes...the more he is being victimized. Edited February 19, 2014 by bleeding heart Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted February 19, 2014 Report Share Posted February 19, 2014 Shouldnt that be in pink font or something? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.