[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Barrister]

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.

But that's the thing - they didn't promise to "look into electoral reform".  Trudeau's explicit promise was that "this is the last election under the current voting rules".



In a shocker, here's a Toronto Star editorial on the process that I agree with.

Let the people vote on electoral reform: Editorial
Only a referendum will lend democratic legitimacy to the Liberals' promised overhaul of Canada's electoral system

Wed., May 11, 2016
It's so obvious as to be banal: democratic reform should be pursued by democratic means. Yet the idea bears expressing as the Liberal government embarks on its promised push to overhaul Canada's electoral system.

On Tuesday, the Liberals finally moved to create a long-awaited committee to study alternatives to our first-past-the-post system of voting. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has promised that last year's federal election would be the last under the current model, which routinely allows governments to form majorities with barely 40-per-cent support (as did his Liberals).

We are not convinced that an alternative system could better capture the will of the electorate. What is clear, however, is that the reform process proposed by the government is insufficiently democratic, given its vast implications for our democracy.

As we have argued before, the best route to legitimate reform is a referendum.

This is especially true given the seeming impossibility of parliamentary agreement. As Liberal House Leader Dominic Leblanc rightly pointed out last year, it is vital that this sort of reform "be done by consensus." Yet, given the tenor of the current conversation, consensus seems a quixotic goal.

"The Liberals have chosen to maintain their false majority on the committee, stacked the decks," said New Democrat MP Nathan Cullen after the government tabled its motion. Green Party Leader Elizabeth May, who was appointed as a non-voting member, said she is "perplexed" by her status. Conservatives complained they were not consulted on the committee's design. This doesn't sound like the germ of all-party agreement.

As it is, the Liberals lack the mandate to unilaterally adopt either of the main alternatives to first-past-the-post. One, a ranked ballot, is seen to benefit the centrist governing party above all. The other, proportional representation, has been rejected in four provincial referendums over the last 11 years. The government should get the explicit, unambiguous consent of Canadians before it pursues either.

Trudeau has vowed that his government's decision will be shaped by a broad national consultation. This process should prove invaluable as the Liberal-dominated committee determines which model it prefers. It should drive a needed conversation about our democratic deficits and how to address them. And it should inform how Trudeau goes about selling his chosen model, particularly to the many, us included, who are skeptical that a change would benefit the country.

This committee should not, however, be the final determinant of whether or how our system evolves. Those most fundamental democratic questions should, of course, be left to the people.

https://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorials/2016/05/11/let-the-people-vote-on-electoral-reform-editorial.html

[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.

But that's the thing - they didn't promise to "look into electoral reform".  Trudeau's explicit promise was that "this is the last election under the current voting rules".

I don't know what your comment has to do with mine.   Camerus said he thought there was a lack of public interest in electoral reform.  That seems an odd comment given the fact the Liberals had it in their election platform.   I also don't know how one implements electoral reform without first considering how best to do it. 

[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.

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.

But that's the thing - they didn't promise to "look into electoral reform".  Trudeau's explicit promise was that "this is the last election under the current voting rules".

I don't know what your comment has to do with mine.   Camerus said he thought there was a lack of public interest in electoral reform.  That seems an odd comment given the fact the Liberals had it in their election platform.   I also don't know how one implements electoral reform without first considering how best to do it.

They made it one of their election promises, yes. But I don't see how the explanation "they're doing it because they said they're going to do it" addresses my criticism that it's uncalled for and thus either irresponsible idealism or a cynical power play.

As for lack of public support, it's difficult to gauge, because the Liberals have not till now opened it up too much to public discussion, however I definitely thought during the election that the Liberals promise of electoral platform was decidedly not one of the significant issues in the discussion and more of a very minor plank of their platform.

[crazy canuck]

Electoral reform is a pretty big issue here.  I suppose it depends where you are in the country.

In other news...

All of the job growth in Canada is occurring in Vancouver and Toronto.  And of that it seems most of it is occurring in Vancouver.

Blistering hot housing markets aren't the only things setting Toronto and Vancouver apart from the rest of Canada — the two cities also accounted for all of the country's job growth, economists say.

"Yes, that means the rest of the country has created precisely no new jobs in the past year," BMO chief economist Douglas Porter said in a recent commentary.

Kavcic added that B.C. created 110,000 of Canada's 144,000 net new jobs in the past year through April, and the labour force is surging on the back of population inflows and rising participation rates.

Overall employment in B.C. jumped 4.9 per cent in the past year, while Ontario was second in the country, but "way back" at 1.4 per cent, Kavcic said.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/housing-jobs-toronto-vancouver-1.3577061

[Monoriu]

Electoral reform is a pretty big issue here.  I suppose it depends where you are in the country.

In other news...

All of the job growth in Canada is occurring in Vancouver and Toronto.  And of that it seems most of it is occurring in Vancouver.

Blistering hot housing markets aren't the only things setting Toronto and Vancouver apart from the rest of Canada — the two cities also accounted for all of the country's job growth, economists say.

"Yes, that means the rest of the country has created precisely no new jobs in the past year," BMO chief economist Douglas Porter said in a recent commentary.

Kavcic added that B.C. created 110,000 of Canada's 144,000 net new jobs in the past year through April, and the labour force is surging on the back of population inflows and rising participation rates.

Overall employment in B.C. jumped 4.9 per cent in the past year, while Ontario was second in the country, but "way back" at 1.4 per cent, Kavcic said.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/housing-jobs-toronto-vancouver-1.3577061

What kind of jobs though?  I only know how to push paper, not how to build a house

[Barrister]

Electoral reform is a pretty big issue here.  I suppose it depends where you are in the country.

In other news...

All of the job growth in Canada is occurring in Vancouver and Toronto.  And of that it seems most of it is occurring in Vancouver.

Blistering hot housing markets aren't the only things setting Toronto and Vancouver apart from the rest of Canada — the two cities also accounted for all of the country's job growth, economists say.

"Yes, that means the rest of the country has created precisely no new jobs in the past year," BMO chief economist Douglas Porter said in a recent commentary.

Kavcic added that B.C. created 110,000 of Canada's 144,000 net new jobs in the past year through April, and the labour force is surging on the back of population inflows and rising participation rates.

Overall employment in B.C. jumped 4.9 per cent in the past year, while Ontario was second in the country, but "way back" at 1.4 per cent, Kavcic said.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/housing-jobs-toronto-vancouver-1.3577061

Yay an economy built on the housing bubble!

[Grey Fox]

You have no one but yourself to blame BB.

[Barrister]

You have no one but yourself to blame BB.

[Grey Fox]

I hold you responsible, on this forum, of all the choices made by the PC governments in Canada, on both level.

[Barrister]

I hold you responsible, on this forum, of all the choices made by the PC governments in Canada, on both level.

That's funny.  I'm an anti-PC guy myself (other than a brief flirtation with the Manitoba PC Party).  I'm a federal Conservative, provincial Wildrose guy.

[Jacob]

I hold you responsible, on this forum, of all the choices made by the PC governments in Canada, on both level.

That's funny.  I'm an anti-PC guy myself (other than a brief flirtation with the Manitoba PC Party).  I'm a federal Conservative, provincial Wildrose guy.

You know full well that Grey fox meant the federal Conservative Party (CP in French acronyms, I'm pretty sure).

[Grey Fox]

Yes. 

[Jacob]

Yay an economy built on the housing bubble!

You figure the entirety of the 4.9% job growth is in construction? And that construction is purely driven by a housing bubble rather than the significant population growth?

[Barrister]

Yay an economy built on the housing bubble!

You figure the entirety of the 4.9% job growth is in construction? And that construction is purely driven by a housing bubble rather than the significant population growth?

Yes.  Although not just construction - realtors and the like would be included.

[Barrister]

Further to my point, housing is now a bigger part of BC's economy than oil and gas is to Alberta's economy.

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2016/05/12/bc-real-estate-alberta-oil-economy_n_9938922.html?utm_hp_ref=canada-alberta&ir=Canada+Alberta

Obviously that has a lot to do with the collapse in the price of oil, but also because housing forms a greater % of BC's economy every year, now at 18% of GDP.