[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[viper37]

How much is this anti-lockdown anti-vax posturing damaging the UCP in the eyes of supporters who are not anti-lockdown and anti-vax?

I mean, it's damaging the party in my eyes but I'm not a core voter (by several metrics ) - but to what degree is it affecting those who are?

It's damaging enough:Alberta NDP to from majority government
Just a poll, a long way from the elections, but I think there's frustrations from those who think the govt didn't do enough and those who think the govt is doing too much and they are supporting the NDP in polls as a way to show their frustrations with the govt.
But maybe BB will have Rachel Notley as Premier once again.

[Oexmelin]

There is the argument about protecting the interests of diverse groups and making sure they're represented. If you go purely population number based it means that the interests of people in the lower populated hinterlands will be completely suborned to the high population ares.

Not only that, but at some point you encounter the logistical problem of having a gigantic riding that you need to tour by plane - or that harbors small, but significantly different populations, with different needs.

[viper37]

I mean shouldn't they try to draw the Ridings to be of roughly equal population?

there's no provincial senate to compensate.  And on the Federal level, they ain't elected and don't have that much power anyway.
If you look at a Quebec map, to divide ridings by equal pop, it would mean one riding from Lévis up to Gaspé and the Magdelen Islands.  That's an awful lot of territory to cover for one person.  Meanwhile, in Montreal, all MPs will gang up together to get their free bridge, or their highways maintained.
At some point, if you want pure rep by pop, just give the keys of the kingdom to Montreal (and Toronto and Vancouver for the Fed gov), it will effectively be the same, and we wouldn't waste any money paying for usuless MPs unable to counterbalance the weight of the cities.  And having elections only in large cities would save money too.  Win-win situation for every city dweller, they no longer have to pretend like they care about countryside and remote areas.

[Barrister]

Also curious to see how Kenney responds.  He's put up with a lot of very public disagreements from his caucus, but calling for his resignation is step even further.  Witll this MLA be booted from caucus?

Loewen (and another highly critical MLA Drew Barnes) ejected from caucus.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/edmonton/mlas-drew-barnes-todd-loewen-booted-from-ucp-caucus-1.6025897

[Grey Fox]

Cancel culture!!

[crazy canuck]

I mean shouldn't they try to draw the Ridings to be of roughly equal population?

So, you guys have a bicameral system, with the Congress represented by population, and the Senate represented by states.

Canada has a unicameral system (well we have a Senate with some minor powers, but can't meaningfully block legislation).  So we give smaller population areas more seats.  Two biggest examples are PEI is guaranteed 4 MPS even though purely by pop they should probably only get 1.  Each territory gets one MP as well, even if you combined them all together and they still might be a little under-sized.

And more to the point we are talking about the Provincial Legislature here, ie no Senate.

There is the argument about protecting the interests of diverse groups and making sure they're represented. If you go purely population number based it means that the interests of people in the lower populated hinterlands will be completely suborned to the high population ares.

Not only that, but at some point you encounter the logistical problem of having a gigantic riding that you need to tour by plane - or that harbors small, but significantly different populations, with different needs.

Yes, and the best example of that is the Stikine riding.  That one Riding is 8 times the size of Vancouver Island.  To put that into context, Vancouver Island is the size of Belgium.  To put it in practical terms: from a 2017 article illustrating the point: 

"It takes Vancouver-West End MLA Spencer Chandra Herbert 20 minutes to walk from one end of his riding to the other. It takes Stikine MLA Doug Donaldson 21 hours.  By car."

[crazy canuck]

Interesting move by the Quebec government - the current federal political environment gives the constitutional amendment a chance.  Or absent that, a very interesting decision for the SCC in due course.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-quebec-seeks-to-amend-constitution-with-new-language-law/


I have not heard any more reporting about this in the English press.  A bit surprising.  But looks even more like the political timing is just about perfect for this to get done.

[Valmy]

And more to the point we are talking about the Provincial Legislature here, ie no Senate.

Me and BB were talking about the Federal Ridings.

[crazy canuck]

And more to the point we are talking about the Provincial Legislature here, ie no Senate.

Me and BB were talking about the Federal Ridings.

In the context of an issue regarding redrawing Provincial ridings in BC, but ok.

[Valmy]

And more to the point we are talking about the Provincial Legislature here, ie no Senate.

Me and BB were talking about the Federal Ridings.

In the context of an issue regarding redrawing Provincial ridings in BC, but ok.

Well he changed the subject

Anyway I appreciated all the explanations.

[saskganesh]

Fun fact. Provincial and Federal ridings in Ontario are identical. Further: city wards in Toronto were reduced in order to make a triple level match, because reasons

[Barrister]

Any of you here been following this Bill C-10 issue?

The law is supposed to require big streaming / internet services so they're subject to same kind of regulation as traditional broadcasters.  The big motivation there is to require CanCon rules online.  I'm not a big fan of CanCon rules, but whatever.

The Conservatives though have been pushing hard that the law needs to specifically exempt user-generated content.  The Liberals are opposed to doing this, although they say going after individual users is not their intent.

Anyone know of a smart take on this issue that's available?

[Grey Fox]

I follow it. It's a weird issue. In English, the broadcasting act could in theory regulate individual speech. In French, it is seen has impossible since the act refers explicitly to enterprises.

It is very convulated since Guilbeaut is so bad at explaining it. I think it is needed. Too much of our money goes the GAFAND. I am a big fan of CanCon but against simsub, which I think is responsible for so much of our issues with CanCon. Especially in English Canada.

For an against C-10 view look at Michael Geist

I am aware of no for view in English, but Quebec's political class, artists and journalist are usually for it.

For a more belligerent against view you can look at @jfmezei in twitter. He finds good fault in the propose rules mainly in all the ways it will involve the CRTC in almost all internet interaction that Canadians do. Especially those that do not involve social media.

[crazy canuck]

Any of you here been following this Bill C-10 issue?

The law is supposed to require big streaming / internet services so they're subject to same kind of regulation as traditional broadcasters.  The big motivation there is to require CanCon rules online.  I'm not a big fan of CanCon rules, but whatever.

The Conservatives though have been pushing hard that the law needs to specifically exempt user-generated content.  The Liberals are opposed to doing this, although they say going after individual users is not their intent.

Anyone know of a smart take on this issue that's available?

The House had a good segment on it, I think two weeks ago.  Also there was a good Globe article doubting the minister had actually read his own proposed leglislation.

Here it is

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-is-it-possible-that-maybe-steven-guilbeault-hasnt-actually-read-bill-c/?symbol=print-msg

edit:

And here is a editorial piece referencing Geist, who as GF mentioned, has strong opinions on the subject

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/editorials/article-the-trudeau-government-says-it-wont-regulate-user-content-on-social/?symbol=print-msg


My own take, I am worried this is political posturing over good public policy and I do worry the political leadership on this does not have a good understanding of the bill or the communications it is attempting to regulate.

[Grey Fox]

I think it's trying to fit the new car of the internet in the old garage of the Broadcasting world.

It wants to put everything under the broadcasting act without amending the definitions in the act. Mezei(he's a CRTC expert) says that the CRTC will find itself regulating...books.