Trudeau and Singh's teams quietly planning electoral reform legislation

[CdnFox]

31 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I don't see any problem at all with it under a minority government where a majority of the people's representatives say go for it.

Because screw transparancy right

So if PP gets in and decides that all voting booths be pulled from universities and put in legion halls on meat night, people have to show 4 peices of id to vote, there is no advanced polls except for (name group he does the best with), you're ok right? I mean if he's got a majority then the majority of the people's reps said it was fine

[eyeball]

26 minutes ago, suds said:

I can think of a better way, have a referendum or whatever, but let the people have the final say on something so vitally important to our country as our  elections. These politicians, they don't own this country, we do. WE THE PEOPLE!

I say whatever starting with process guardians - public volunteers who observe, record and report on the public's business that's presently being conducted out of sight. Not to have a say in the process but simply to be a witness to it.

As for referendums...

National referendums are seldom used in Canada. The first two referendums in 1898 and 1942 saw voters in Quebec and the remainder of Canada take dramatically-opposing stands, and the third in 1992 saw most of the voters take a stand dramatically opposed to that of the politicians in power.

https://www.google.com/search?q=number+of+federal+referendums+in+Canada&rlz=1CAUBRP_enCA1091&oq=number+of+federal+referendums+in+Canada&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOdIBCTE5NzQzajBqN6gCALACAA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

I'm pretty sure the politicians in power will be even more dramatically opposed to process guardians. I can't for the life of me understand why any and every ordinary Canadian that isn't a hard-boiled partisan would be too. Especially these days in this Black Age of Public Mistrust.  

Edited January 30, 2024 by eyeball

[CdnFox]

4 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I say whatever starting with process guardians - public volunteers who observe, record and report on the public's business that's presently being conducted out of sight. Not to have a say in the process but simply to be a witness to it.

As for referendums...

National referendums are seldom used in Canada. The first two referendums in 1898 and 1942 saw voters in Quebec and the remainder of Canada take dramatically-opposing stands, and the third in 1992 saw most of the voters take a stand dramatically opposed to that of the politicians in power.

https://www.google.com/search?q=number+of+federal+referendums+in+Canada&rlz=1CAUBRP_enCA1091&oq=number+of+federal+referendums+in+Canada&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOdIBCTE5NzQzajBqN6gCALACAA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

I'm pretty sure the politicians in power will be even more dramatically opposed to process guardians. I can't for the life of me understand why any and every ordinary Canadian that isn't a hard-boiled partisan would be too. Especially these days in this Black Age of Public Mistrust.  

so no problem with the libs doing secret deals.  Gotcha.

[eyeball]

11 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Because screw transparancy right?

So if PP gets in and decides that all voting booths be pulled from universities and put in legion halls on meat night, people have to show 4 peices of id to vote, there is no advanced polls except for (name group he does the best with), you're ok right? I mean if he's got a majority then the majority of the people's reps said it was fine 

No, I agree with Suds. It's not really a good idea giving majority governments too much say with how our elections are conducted.

I say screw opacity and you celebrate it.

[suds]

11 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I say whatever starting with process guardians - public volunteers who observe, record and report on the public's business that's presently being conducted out of sight. Not to have a say in the process but simply to be a witness to it.

As for referendums...

National referendums are seldom used in Canada. The first two referendums in 1898 and 1942 saw voters in Quebec and the remainder of Canada take dramatically-opposing stands, and the third in 1992 saw most of the voters take a stand dramatically opposed to that of the politicians in power.

https://www.google.com/search?q=number+of+federal+referendums+in+Canada&rlz=1CAUBRP_enCA1091&oq=number+of+federal+referendums+in+Canada&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOdIBCTE5NzQzajBqN6gCALACAA&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

I'm pretty sure the politicians in power will be even more dramatically opposed to process guardians. I can't for the life of me understand why any and every ordinary Canadian that isn't a hard-boiled partisan would be too. Especially these days in this Black Age of Public Mistrust.  

Yeah, process guardians. That'll be the answer all right. And who gets to pick these process guardians??  I get your point though, average Canadians are just too stupid to be making these decisions on their own.

Edited January 30, 2024 by suds

[eyeball]

6 minutes ago, suds said:

Yeah, process guardians. That'll be the answer all right. And who gets to pick these process guardians??

Other volunteers. But maybe the suggestion of a camera up every politicians ass would be easier.

Quote

I get your point though, average Canadians are just too stupid to be making these decisions on their own.

That's not the point I'm making but your's is spoken like a true Laurentian Elite. 

[suds]

Are there problems as to why they're doing this now? Are there some Canadians or parts of Canada that are disenfranchised for whatever reason? Skeptical minds would like to know.

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

No, I agree with Suds. It's not really a good idea giving majority governments too much say with how our elections are conducted.

I say screw opacity and you celebrate it.

You literally celebrated it and accepted it.  You go back and forth so much the chinese national ping pong league is trying to recruit you as their top ball.

[Michael Hardner]

7 hours ago, eyeball said:

Cite please. Thousands of them I suppose given you just appealed to the authority of a forum with 1000's of members.

I think that you are scrupulously honest.  My vote..

 

[Michael Hardner]

I thought they were bringing back proportional representation based on the OP.  But looks like a big nothing..

 

Edited January 30, 2024 by Michael Hardner

[blackbird]

4 hours ago, Boges said:

Where-as Conservatives want voter apathy and a low turn-out. Because they know they're in the minority. 

Do you want good, responsible government or just more social services, taxes, and a welfare state?   A large portion of the population think of government as the nanny that should provide everything.  That is why we have NDP and Liberals.

[CdnFox]

37 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I think that you are scrupulously honest.  My vote..

 

LOL - well there  you go   The man who insits hes conservative thinks you're not a liar   Well done

[Boges]

10 hours ago, blackbird said:

Do you want good, responsible government or just more social services, taxes, and a welfare state?   A large portion of the population think of government as the nanny that should provide everything.  That is why we have NDP and Liberals.

Nice False Choice you present.

[Aristides]

16 hours ago, eyeball said:

Even if a majority of Canada's Parliamentarians agree to it? Why does it  matter that it be a partisan majority?

Even then, major changes like going to a PR system should be decided by referendum. Parliament should only be involved in drafting the proposed changes.

[blackbird]

38 minutes ago, Boges said:

Nice False Choice you present.

The people demand everything and politicians try to appease them;  spend, spend, spend.  It is also why we now have massive government debt.

"Adjusted for current inflation, Canada’s total provincial and federal debt increased from $1.1 trillion to $2.1 trillion between 2007-2008 and 2022-2023, according to a study by the right-wing think tank Fraser Institute."

 

What's Canada debt and where's the government spending money? | CTV News

Canada is indeed broken.  That is because Canada is a heathen nation.  It can only go downward.

Most of the population are heathen or pagan.  Sad but true.

Edited January 30, 2024 by blackbird

[Boges]

2 minutes ago, blackbird said:

The people demand everything and politicians try to appease them;  spend, spend, spend.  It is also why we now have massive government debt.

"Adjusted for current inflation, Canada’s total provincial and federal debt increased from $1.1 trillion to $2.1 trillion between 2007-2008 and 2022-2023, according to a study by the right-wing think tank Fraser Institute."

What's Canada debt and where's the government spending money? | CTV News

So what programs should we cut? At a Federal Level. 

[blackbird]

Just now, Boges said:

So what programs should we cut? At a Federal Level. 

The country's whole system is so dysfunctional now I don't know if it can ever be fixed.  Certainly not with the kind of liberal and left politicians we have now.  It would take a miracle.

[Boges]

1 minute ago, blackbird said:

The country's whole system is so dysfunctional now I don't know if it can ever be fixed.  Certainly not with the kind of liberal and left politicians we have now.  It would take a miracle.

Note this thread is about expanding access to voting. So you're just being an old man shaking at a Cloud. 

I'm curious, what country should we look to, to find such financial restraint as an example? The US dwarfs Canada in debt:GDP Ratio. 

[blackbird]

Just now, Boges said:

Note this thread is about expanding access to voting. So you're just being an old man shaking at a Cloud. 

I'm curious, what country should we look to, to find such financial restraint as an example? The US dwarfs Canada in debt:GDP Ratio. 

Changing the electoral system won't help.  That is a smokescreen.   We are 2.2 trillion dollars in debt.  The system is broken.  Looking to other countries won't help either.

We are in a crisis.  Homeless encampments, massive housing shortage, high food costs, failing medical system.  What more do you need to know to see we are a broken country.

What's Canada debt and where's the government spending money? | CTV News

[Boges]

5 minutes ago, blackbird said:

Changing the electoral system won't help.  That is a smokescreen.   We are 2.2 trillion dollars in debt.  The system is broken.  Looking to other countries won't help either.

We are in a crisis.  Homeless encampments, massive housing shortage, high food costs, failing medical system.  What more do you need to know to see we are a broken country.

What's Canada debt and where's the government spending money? | CTV News

And PP will come in and fix it all. 🤣

BTW, if he proposes taking away the Daycare subsidy, I'll go back to voting for the Liberals. We pay enough taxes, might as well get the benefits from it. 

[suds]

1 hour ago, blackbird said:

Changing the electoral system won't help.  That is a smokescreen.   We are 2.2 trillion dollars in debt.  The system is broken. 

That could be it...  a smokescreen.  Canadians are pissed off, they're way down in the polls, and can't run on their record. So they regurgitate 'electoral reform' and make it a central issue in the next election. But you're right... it won't fix a broken system.

 

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, Boges said:

So what programs should we cut? At a Federal Level. 

CBC for a start  There's 1,5 billion. 

And with them out of the advertising game ad money will go to the other papers so we can cut subsidies for them.

we can cut foreign aid - we just gave a whack more money to a terrorist org - trudeau announced he'd cut funding and then sent them their last cheque.  We don't need to be doing that.

We can reduce the federal workforce - it has been growing out of control at a huge expense and that often makes services WORSE.  Cut them back via attrition and early retirement and put money into automating gov't services so we need fewer people. Over time there's many many billions in savings there.

Reduce immigration and focus on high value immigrants who are able to hit the ground and start earning decent money right away. Doctors and nurses are obvious but there are lots of other trades we could use.

Look at cutting funding to special interest groups and such. There's a lot of money that goes out the door to 'anti racism' groups who turn out to be full on jew haters.

And that's  just a start.

You are not going to balance the budget overnight. That is not possible without causing major damage to the economy.  But you can cut a lot of waste without affecting core services and then grow into the remainder fairly easily