INTEGRITY in GOVERNMENTS

[peoples advocate]

I have often heard government at all levels say out loud to the press ' How do we get the voters out to vote ' ? Even this week in Calgary the turn out was terrible .

I think they should look at a few factors the largest being social media..It is a lot harder to cover something up because in the wink of an eye everyone knows what has happened. Yes government offices can say no comment , and sweep scandals under the rug but guess what ? The younger generation is a lot smarter than we were and they are tired of all the lies that come from politicians.

How about we hook all party leaders up to polygraph machines and every time they lie they get a jolt of electricity Well I know that won't happen but one very strange thing they might try is INTEGRITY and ACCOUNTABILITY .

Young people need some heroes to look up to and others have to stop voting a certain way just because daddy voted that way.and the rest please just vote lets make your voice heard.

This mostly three party system in a great country like ours is antiquated time to figure out a new system one that stops the wealthy lobbyists from buying votes that belong to us.

The most important pillar in a civilized society is Integrity and sadly it has gone missing in action.

Lets figure out a way to make these officials see that they are there to serve our best interest and not their own .

Lets end the golden hand shakes and behind door deals where we come out as the losers .

Maybe they should take the oath of office and at the same time sign a contract that states they will loose the position if they are caught in a lie or anything unlawful .

Hard to believe we as a people can not stop the scandals or make them accountable for their actions , one of the first things we teach out children.

http://www.pipsc.ca/portal/page/portal/website/news/magazine/summer2011/7

Edited November 3, 2014 by peoples advocate

[Topaz]

It's kind of hard for them to pay for their crimes when they are the ones in charge and have the power of cover ups except when it the opposition parties that slip. Just look at the way the Harper government has treated the rules of Parliament , found guilty of contempt of Parliament and he just ignores it. That's why someone said Harper is Putin-like, he rules from top down and does what he pleases. He said in the election that gave him a majority, he would work with the opposition parties...until he got the majority, then does what he pleases. He has the largest most expensive government ever, cuts the most, has hurt the Canadian public the most, turned off the vets, the First Nations, so who in there sane mind, would vote for this party. Since the former Reformer, alliance, Conservatives have come to power, Canada has gone down hill!

[TimG]

This mostly three party system in a great country like ours is antiquated time to figure out a new system one that stops the wealthy lobbyists from buying votes that belong to us.

Yawn.

Translation: Politicians don't do what I want and therefore must be corrupt.

Sorry there are many reasons why your pet policies don't get adopted including:

1) They are not that popular outside of the narrow circle of people you choose to associate with.

2) The unintended consequences of the policies would be extremely unpopular.

3) The policies make no sense and cannot be implemented.

Also, when it comes to people using money to buy influence unions and various NGOs are just as bad - if not worse than corporations or the wealthy. Look at the last Ontario election with the OPP ads. Any policies designed to stop money from influencing politics would have to include prohibitions on unions and NGOs. Are you sure that is such a good idea?

Edited November 3, 2014 by TimG

[On Guard for Thee]

Nice job, three succinct points that fully describe income splitting.

[Moonlight Graham]

Nice job, three succinct points that fully describe income splitting.

On Guard For Thee for the thread win!

Edited November 3, 2014 by Moonlight Graham

[Moonlight Graham]

Also, when it comes to people using money to buy influence unions and various NGOs are just as bad - if not worse than corporations or the wealthy. Look at the last Ontario election with the OPP ads. Any policies designed to stop money from influencing politics would have to include prohibitions on unions and NGOs. Are you sure that is such a good idea?

Many NGO's by their nature lobby government, but I don't think they have money into politics like corporations do, maybe not even unions. The overwhelming majority of NGO's struggle for money so they don't have the same resources. I'd love to see some numbers from somebody.

The thing with corporations, NGO's, and lobbyists in general is that there is a cycle, both in Canada and especially in the US (where elections for the legislature are more frequent), where some lobbyist or CEO or member of a board of directors of a corporation or even an NGO or union or etc. will go into politics and win a seat, get into cabinet/executive branch or the bureaucracy in general and support policy that benefits their particular industry or even former employer, and while in such a political position will of course establish all sorts of influential contacts. Then once out of politics they will find a job making big money in the same or similar industry or even their former company and lobby the government on their employer's behalf using all their new powerful friends they made while elected etc.

[TimG]

Many NGO's by their nature lobby government, but I don't think they have money into politics like corporations do, maybe not even unions.

Groups like Greenpeace, WWF. Tides Foundation have 100 of millions which are used exclusively for advocacy. If one is going to complain about money in politics the influence of these types of organizations cannot be ignored.

Then once out of politics they will find a job making big money in the same or similar industry or even their former company and lobby the government on their employer's behalf using all their new powerful friends they made while elected etc.

Yep. The best way to reduce this is to reduce what the government does. i.e. these people go where the money is. If the government has money to spend then that is where they go. If the government stops handing out money these people will have to go elsewhere.

[overthere]

I have often heard government at all levels say out loud to the press ' How do we get the voters out to vote '

I don't think I have ever heard a government say that, what would be their point since they don't need votes? They have already won an election. They are the government after all.

No, you hear that piteous whine all the time from poltical parties, and always the party that lost. Chronic loser say it more often.

They all, every one, have an assumption that if only more people came out to vote their party would obviously get all those missing votes and win hands down. It is , very simply, loser talk.

[On Guard for Thee]

Groups like Greenpeace, WWF. Tides Foundation have 100 of millions which are used exclusively for advocacy. If one is going to complain about money in politics the influence of these types of organizations cannot be ignored.

Yep. The best way to reduce this is to reduce what the government does. i.e. these people go where the money is. If the government has money to spend then that is where they go. If the government stops handing out money these people will have to go elsewhere.

Yeah, those damn foreign funded radicals caring about the environment...Oh yeah, Joe Oliver already beat you to that one.

[TimG]

Yeah, those damn foreign funded radicals caring about the environment.

Money is money. Why are NGOs spending money "acceptable" but companies spending money "not acceptable"? Sounds like you don't really care about money in politics - you only care about money promoting ideas you disagree with (trait shared many on the left who prefer to outlaw people who disagree with them). Edited November 3, 2014 by TimG

[On Guard for Thee]

Money is money. Why are NGOs spending money "acceptable" but companies spending money "not acceptable"? Sounds like you don't really care about money in politics - you only care about money promoting ideas you disagree with (trait shared many on the left who prefer to outlaw people who disagree with them).

I think it was Oliver who was outlawing people who disagree with him.

[Moonlight Graham]

Integrity in our political system is more difficult because Canada has responsible government, where governments can be dissolved and elections called (and MP's jobs threatened) on votes of no confidence, meaning parties must vote as united blocks more often than their US counterparts. Canada's system also creates a far more powerful head of government and executive (our prime minister & his/her cabinet) than in a US-style system, where the executive and cabinet are outside of the legislature (unlike Canada's PM and cabinet) and in a US-style system are much less able to control & whip its members into voting how they or their constituents wish.

This all creates an environment in Canadian politics where MP's often have to tow the party in voting behaviour and in what they say to the media and in Parliament, essentially lying to constituents and not representing their interests much of the time as opposed to that of party leadership. The greatest opportunity for individual MP's to voice the true concerns against the party line is in caucus meetings, which are held in secret away from the press and the public, and that's pretty sad. We have a political environment where MP's are forced to publicly lie and kiss ass to party leadership if they expect to have any sort of career. This whole party hierarchy BS isn't very democratic.

Edited November 3, 2014 by Moonlight Graham

[TimG]

We have a political environment where MP's are forced to publicly lie and kiss ass to party leadership if they expect to have any sort of career. This whole party hierarchy BS isn't very democratic.

And the alternative is what? The US system where individual congressmen can be bought by vested interests who then push for provisions in bills that benefit the benefactor or where they trade their votes for wasteful pork spent in their ridings? The party control in Canada makes the system much more responsive to what average people want as opposed to vested interests. The only thing I would change is make it possible for MPs to depose a leader like they have in the UK or Australia. Edited November 3, 2014 by TimG

[Moonlight Graham]

And the alternative is what? The US system where individual congressmen can be bought by vested interests who then push for provisions in bills that benefit the benefactor or where they trade their votes for wasteful pork spent in their ridings? The party control in Canada makes the system much more responsive to what average people want as opposed to vested interests. The only thing I would change is make it possible for MPs to depose a leader like they have in the UK or Australia.

You can ban pork, that would be easy. In the US they need more finance reform. Both systems have their flaws, but ours certainly isn't perfect and can be improved upon. We need a lot more free votes in Parliament. Why not make all non-confidence votes free votes? I also like many of the proposals in Michael Chong's reform bill: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/tory-mp-to-table-reform-bill-increasing-power-of-caucuses/article15734316/

[TimG]

I also like many of the proposals in Michael Chong's reform bill:

I support Chongs bill too. It is a good compromise.

[peoples advocate]

I don't think I have ever heard a government say that, what would be their point since they don't need votes? They have already won an election. They are the government after all.

No, you hear that piteous whine all the time from poltical parties, and always the party that lost. Chronic loser say it more often.

They all, every one, have an assumption that if only more people came out to vote their party would obviously get all those missing votes and win hands down. It is , very simply, loser talk.

apparently you are not listening , they say it all the time but I am not surprised by your answer because some people listen as well as government officials.

[peoples advocate]

And the alternative is what? The US system where individual congressmen can be bought by vested interests who then push for provisions in bills that benefit the benefactor or where they trade their votes for wasteful pork spent in their ridings? The party control in Canada makes the system much more responsive to what average people want as opposed to vested interests. The only thing I would change is make it possible for MPs to depose a leader like they have in the UK or Australia.

A man is never forced to lie . It is a choice and once done it just becomes easier and easier . To give up and say it is just the way things get done is a cop out I agree it is a hard climb but one that must be undertaken.

Let me ask you this question . When did Canadian voters decide that being lied to was o. k. ?

One of the first things we teach our children is don't lie

Bible Thou Shalt not lie.

The longer we wait to put an end to it the harder it will be and I fear the worst is yet to come and will not be seen by us but rather our children and their children

[PIK]

Who cares, the only people that should vote are the ones that care and pay attention.