[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Grey Fox]

Véronique Hivon or bust.

[Drakken]

I think the PQ should just pick the number 2 from the last convention to avoid losing time and money but I understand the party members could not like it. By the way, from the potential candidates, my favorite is probably Alexandre Cloutier.

Things has changed since last year. That proposition is ludicrous.

He was a flavour-of-the-month last time, because he is young and not soiled by anything close to wielding power, and the Peladeau factor that lent some PQ members to go to Cloutier as a counterweight is now gone. His time has not yet come - and his biggest caucus support that brought him a semblance of credibility, Véronique Hivon, risks being a contender herself.

Let's be real here, like brutal-politics real. Cloutier didn't stand a chance last time, and doesn't this time either. There ain't a ideologically-polarizing candidate anymore for the left to rally against and artificially boost his support to second place. There are enough proven, capable, and still relatively young powerhorses currently there that would crush Cloutier in a quick election this time with no Peladeau to alienate supporters from the leftist faction of the party. Their coffers are nigh-empty, they cannot afford another psychodrama of a leadership campaign that lasts months on end. They'll want a pragmatic leader, quickly elected to prepare themselves for the next election in two years. Who do you give the mantle to, the idealist n00b or the proven veteran?

Véronique Hivon has piloted a very difficult bill (right-to-die legislation in Quebec for those outside the province) across partisan sides, with a class and over-the-melee professionalism that has brought a lot of good will and political clout in the population in very recent memory. It makes her an ideal candidate to rally the caucus for a quick leadership race. Besides, the PQ has never gotten rid of that Messiah complex that make them want to crown a Savior, than elect a leader. What would Cloutier bring that would make the Francophones unite with the PQ under his leadership, to win the next election?

[Drakken]

PKP quits politics a little less than one year after becoming the PQ leader.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/parti-quebecois-pierre-karl-peladeau-announcement-1.3562533

Any thoughts Quebecers?

The only case in recent memory of a politician really leaving politics because he chose his family first. It had nothing to do with politics, I genuinely believe he would have left even with 45-50% in the polls.

Peladeau is very family-oriented. He had a distant relationship with his father (the newspaper mogul Pierre Peladeau) that made his childhood and teenage years quite lonely and traumatic. He always said to people around him that he would never be the father to his children that his father was to him. I believe that it took a publicly-humiliating pending divorce and his ex-wife openly discussing on TV how deeply his choices had cut her to the core and affected both his children and herself to make him see the light, that politics wasn't worth the personal sacrifices, even if he truly believed in the separatist cause.

In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if he made that choice as a gesture to show he was willing to repair his marriage and rebuild his family. The show was taped on Thursday but showed on Sunday, and Peladeau was uncharistically absent from social media since Thursday evening. My personal take is that she had him shown the tape of the interview and they had the talk during the weekend.

Whether we like the person, the businessman, or the politician or not, as men and fathers we got to respect such a choice. It takes brass balls. Not everything has to been an act, and seeing a proud man like Peladeau, the man who was at the head of Québécor Media and future Premier of Quebec, tremble and barely hold himself to not weep in front of the cameras as he announced his resignation makes it obvious it was an emotional, impulsive decision of a vulnerable man who was in emotional pain. It could not be politically-motivated, even the PQ caucus itself got informed of his resignation a mere ten minutes before the announcement itself, and no one was showing him the door. In fact, just last week he had made changes to his senior staff and fired his Chief of Cabinet because the latter's relationship with the rest of the caucus was dysfunctional at best.

[Drakken]

Did he ever have a realistic shot at power though?

Leaders of the PQ always have a realistic shot at power, as soon as Francophones get so tired of the Liberals that they flock enough to the PQ to get them a majority.

[Jacob]

Whether we like the person, the businessman, or the politician or not, as men and fathers we got to respect such a choice. It takes brass balls.

This is not a story I've followed, but if what you're saying is true then yeah - I can definitely respect that.

Secondly, does the sentence I quoted imply that you have a child (or more)?

[crazy canuck]

Whether we like the person, the businessman, or the politician or not, as men and fathers we got to respect such a choice. It takes brass balls.

This is not a story I've followed, but if what you're saying is true then yeah - I can definitely respect that.

Secondly, does the sentence I quoted imply that you have a child (or more)?

Yeah, unfortunately resigning for family reasons has become a cover for the real reason all too often.  The example Drakken brings up sounds like it really was the reason.

[Barrister]

Liberals introduce the Parliamentary committee that will look at electoral change.  And it's surprising that for a government that complains about first part the post which "distorts the will of the electorate", they chose to give themselves 6 out of 10 committee sports despite winning only 39% of the popular vote.

And no, they still refuse to put any change up to a referendum.



http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/liberals-electoral-reform-1.3576472

[Jacob]

Liberals introduce the Parliamentary committee that will look at electoral change.  And it's surprising that for a government that complains about first part the post which "distorts the will of the electorate", they chose to give themselves 6 out of 10 committee sports despite winning only 39% of the popular vote.

And no, they still refuse to put any change up to a referendum.



http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/liberals-electoral-reform-1.3576472

In what version of reality would you expect any party holding a majority in parliament - Conservative, Liberal, NDP, BQ, Reform or what have you - to not give themselves the majority on a committee potentially changing the electoral rules?

[Barrister]

In what version of reality would you expect any party holding a majority in parliament - Conservative, Liberal, NDP, BQ, Reform or what have you - to not give themselves the majority on a committee potentially changing the electoral rules?

In this version of reality?

Look, electoral reform has always been held to be a non-partisan issue.  Look at how it was done in BC and Ontario - they took the politicians right out of it.  They created a "Citizens assembly" where citizens were chosen at random and then debated different models.  Their conclusions were then voted on in a referendum.

New Zealand has changed from a first past the post system to another system.  Before doing so however they had both a Royal Commission, and of course any change had to be approved by a referendum.

So look - if they want to do this in a parliamentary committee I guess that's okay (though it risks looking partisan) as long as they let voters make the final decision.  But it's shocking that they're going to change the entire voting system without consulting canadians or without trying to ensure there is a broad cross-party consensus.


The model most often touted by Trudeau is a preferential ballot - where you list your choices 1, 2 and 3.  And guess what - just about everyone agrees that would vastly increase Liberal party support.

[Jacob]

In this version of reality?

Can you point me at any parliamentary committee in the history of our parliament where a majority government did not have the majority of seats on the committee?

Look, electoral reform has always been held to be a non-partisan issue.  Look at how it was done in BC and Ontario - they took the politicians right out of it.  They created a "Citizens assembly" where citizens were chosen at random and then debated different models.  Their conclusions were then voted on in a referendum.

New Zealand has changed from a first past the post system to another system.  Before doing so however they had both a Royal Commission, and of course any change had to be approved by a referendum.

So look - if they want to do this in a parliamentary committee I guess that's okay (though it risks looking partisan) as long as they let voters make the final decision.  But it's shocking that they're going to change the entire voting system without consulting canadians or without trying to ensure there is a broad cross-party consensus.

So your assumption is that this committee will make a recommendation and parliament will just pass a law with no further consultation with the public or other political parties?

As opposed to, say, doing some studies and then recommend a path forward potentially including wider consultation and voting?

The model most often touted by Trudeau is a preferential ballot - where you list your choices 1, 2 and 3.  And guess what - just about everyone agrees that would vastly increase Liberal party support.

How about we wait and see what comes out of the committee before we get all ?

[Barrister]

So your assumption is that this committee will make a recommendation and parliament will just pass a law with no further consultation with the public or other political parties?

As opposed to, say, doing some studies and then recommend a path forward potentially including wider consultation and voting?

The committee's work is supposed to be done in 5 months.  That's not a lot of time.  They are going to try and have a series of "town halls" in each constituency, but that's generally a terrible way to determine public sentiment on anything - only the tiny minority who cares passionately about voting reform will bother to show up when they could be doing any of a million other things.

Yes, I am assuming there will a recommendation for preferential ballot and the voting in committee will be along party lines.

The model most often touted by Trudeau is a preferential ballot - where you list your choices 1, 2 and 3.  And guess what - just about everyone agrees that would vastly increase Liberal party support.

How about we wait and see what comes out of the committee before we get all ?

How about I try and get people motivated to increase public pressure on the Liberals to promise a referendum rather than waiting until it is too late?

[Camerus]

Considering the extremely high quality of Canadian governance (by global standards) and the relative lack of public interest in overhauling the electoral system, it's hard to conclude that this is anything other than irresponsible idealism or a cynical power play. 

[viper37]

a cynical power play. 

That's the Liberal Party, so, it kinda goes hand in hand.

[Neil]

Liberals introduce the Parliamentary committee that will look at electoral change.  And it's surprising that for a government that complains about first part the post which "distorts the will of the electorate", they chose to give themselves 6 out of 10 committee sports despite winning only 39% of the popular vote.

And no, they still refuse to put any change up to a referendum.



http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/liberals-electoral-reform-1.3576472

Is violence our only recourse?

[crazy canuck]

Considering the extremely high quality of Canadian governance (by global standards) and the relative lack of public interest in overhauling the electoral system, it's hard to conclude that this is anything other than irresponsible idealism or a cynical power play.

It was an election promise.  So its not really hard to conclude why they are doing this.

My take on it is that BB doesnt have much to worry about.  This is all probably just window dressing so they can say they did something to try to keep the promise.   It is very unlikely anything could get done before the next election.