Newbie
Posts: 3 
November 21st, 2007, 10:35 PM
Hello to Everyone!
I am running in CBC's competition Canada's Next Great Prime Minister. Basically, the contest is centered around having a “great idea” for Canada. My idea for Canada is to strengthen Canadian federalism through increased representation and participation for the municipalities and the Aboriginal peoples of Canada.
By posting here, I thought I would try to get my video out into the larger Canadian political community. I would love it if people would watch my video, and leave me comments and questions that I will respond to. I'm hoping that in this way we can foster a debate about the issues of federalism that I raise in my video.
You can watch the video at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UdJyZfU_HQ
You can also check out the competition at: http://www.cbc.ca/nextprimeminister/
Cheers,
Julienne
Hello to Everyone!
I am running in CBC's competition Canada's Next Great Prime Minister. Basically, the contest is centered around having a “great idea” for Canada. My idea for Canada is to strengthen Canadian federalism through increased representation and participation for the municipalities and the Aboriginal peoples of Canada.
By posting here, I thought I would try to get my video out into the larger Canadian political community. I would love it if people would watch my video, and leave me comments and questions that I will respond to. I'm hoping that in this way we can foster a debate about the issues of federalism that I raise in my video.
You can watch the video at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UdJyZfU_HQ
You can also check out the competition at: http://www.cbc.ca/nextprimeminister/
Cheers,
Julienne
Hawkings former plumber
Posts: 8,698 
Videos: 1
Location: RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia Drive Apt 911
Videos: 1
Location: RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia Drive Apt 911
November 21st, 2007, 10:45 PM
Hello, are you actually running or are you participating? Our next great PM will be Al Gore or possibly Stemcell Harpercon.
Hello, are you actually running or are you participating? Our next great PM will be Al Gore or possibly Stemcell Harpercon.
November 21st, 2007, 11:26 PM
Well first I'd like to say congratulations.
I think federalism is a good platform. You mentioned electoral reform as part of a better federalism, but was that only for seat allocation amongst the native groups? I have to say I like that idea. Do you have any thoughts about a mixed member proportional. While cities and municipalities are underrepresented, I think there is also a problem with under-representation even amongst the federal parties. Ontario tried the referendum, but was unsuccessful. I think that may have been due to the sudden nature by which the option was presented.
If you break the voter statistics down, we see that some parties need fewer votes to guarantee a seat than others. A better dichotomy would be hard to find than the gulf between parties like the Liberals/Conservatives and the Green party.
Further complicating things is the elections themselves. What are we electing? An MP, a party, or a Prime Minister? The platforms are largely outside of the MP's power, and they really represent a central message in the voting campaign. Add in that parties will fund advertising in ridings with the national message, which has caused some controversy in Parliament.
On the fiscal reforms, I was wondering where you would draw the extra funds for municipalities from. Would they receive municipal transfers at the expense of the provincial transfers? Or would you evaluate other federal spending for some wiggle room?
Well first I'd like to say congratulations.
I think federalism is a good platform. You mentioned electoral reform as part of a better federalism, but was that only for seat allocation amongst the native groups? I have to say I like that idea. Do you have any thoughts about a mixed member proportional. While cities and municipalities are underrepresented, I think there is also a problem with under-representation even amongst the federal parties. Ontario tried the referendum, but was unsuccessful. I think that may have been due to the sudden nature by which the option was presented.
If you break the voter statistics down, we see that some parties need fewer votes to guarantee a seat than others. A better dichotomy would be hard to find than the gulf between parties like the Liberals/Conservatives and the Green party.
Further complicating things is the elections themselves. What are we electing? An MP, a party, or a Prime Minister? The platforms are largely outside of the MP's power, and they really represent a central message in the voting campaign. Add in that parties will fund advertising in ridings with the national message, which has caused some controversy in Parliament.
On the fiscal reforms, I was wondering where you would draw the extra funds for municipalities from. Would they receive municipal transfers at the expense of the provincial transfers? Or would you evaluate other federal spending for some wiggle room?
Newbie
Posts: 3
November 22nd, 2007, 10:54 AM
Toro:
The very reason we have both the provincial and the federal levels of government is to grant greater and more direct representation to the Canadian people. Think about it, if Canada was a centralized state with the government only operating out of Ottawa, how well represented would Newfoundland be? Or BC? The idea of creating these different levels of government is to grant regional representation so that regional interests can be met.
However, municipalities get consistently organized out of this system. They are not represented directly within the House of Commons, and they usually receive their money as a transfer payment from the provinces rather than from the federal government. As the provinces are themselves often strapped for cash this means the cities have to limit very important city services such as transportation (look at Toronto's TTC) or shelters, or waste management programs. So what I proposed in my video was that the federal government should take a more active role contributing to monetary transfers to the municipalities, the municipalities should be granted greater autonomy over municipal taxation, and the cities should be represented in the House of Commons through a Department of cities.
Hope this helps.
If you have more questions and/or comments regarding my video, I would love it if you could direct them to my youtube page: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UdJyZfU_HQ
Cheers,
Julienne
Toro:
The very reason we have both the provincial and the federal levels of government is to grant greater and more direct representation to the Canadian people. Think about it, if Canada was a centralized state with the government only operating out of Ottawa, how well represented would Newfoundland be? Or BC? The idea of creating these different levels of government is to grant regional representation so that regional interests can be met.
However, municipalities get consistently organized out of this system. They are not represented directly within the House of Commons, and they usually receive their money as a transfer payment from the provinces rather than from the federal government. As the provinces are themselves often strapped for cash this means the cities have to limit very important city services such as transportation (look at Toronto's TTC) or shelters, or waste management programs. So what I proposed in my video was that the federal government should take a more active role contributing to monetary transfers to the municipalities, the municipalities should be granted greater autonomy over municipal taxation, and the cities should be represented in the House of Commons through a Department of cities.
Hope this helps.
If you have more questions and/or comments regarding my video, I would love it if you could direct them to my youtube page: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UdJyZfU_HQ
Cheers,
Julienne
Newbie
Posts: 3
November 22nd, 2007, 08:41 PM
Thanks for the congratulations.
I’m glad you liked my idea of creating reserved political seats for the Aboriginal peoples of Canada. As to my thoughts on MMP, I did vote for it in the Ontario referendum. However, while MMP would be an improvement for granting greater representation for traditionally underrepresented parties such as the Green party, MMP is also systematically flawed. The main problem that I see with this system is that it creates a closed-list ballot. By voting for a party rather than for a person, the party has complete control over who they make MP. This closed-list system is seen around the world as being less democratic. For instance, in Kosovo the closed-list ballot system was recently abolished, as it was deemed to be undemocratic. The second problem with MMP is that unlike in the current electoral system where MPs represent constituents within a riding, the reserved seats would not be based on a riding. This begs the question of who the MPs holding these seats are to be held responsible to. At least with granting the Aboriginal peoples of Canada reserved political positions, it is clear that they are to be held responsible to the narrowly defined communities that they are to represent (for example the Cree, the Metis, etc) So while MMP is an improvement in terms of granting greater representation to traditionally underrepresented parties, I think it brings with it new problems. MMP was also not successful in Ontario because it was not properly promoted to the public. To guarantee this kind of democratic reform, MMP would have to be taken back to the drawing board (or at least another citizens committee) to address these problems, it would then have to be properly conveyed to the public longer before the election.
In terms of fiscal reform, I would redirect some of the federal funds from the provinces to the municipalities. The reason for this is that the provinces are already allotted funds which are to go to the municipalities, but often get put into other provincial programs. Thus, to redirect some of the funds to go directly to the municipalities would not financially hinder the provinces, it would just reduce the middleman, so to speak, giving greater direct representation to the municipalities. However, I would also, as you suggest, re-evaluate the entire federal budget so as to grant the municipalities greater funding.
Hope this answers your questions, and I’m glad to have this discussion and to debate these issues.
For the contest however, it would be very helpful to me if we could have this debate opened up on my YouTube page: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UdJyZfU_HQ. The judges of the contest are looking at how I can respond to exactly these kinds of questions. So, if you have any more comments and/or questions, I would love it if we could continue this debate on YouTube.
Thanks for your support,
Julienne
Quoting Tonington
Well first I'd like to say congratulations.
I think federalism is a good platform. You mentioned electoral reform as part of a better federalism, but was that only for seat allocation amongst the native groups? I have to say I like that idea. Do you have any thoughts about a mixed member proportional. While cities and municipalities are underrepresented, I think there is also a problem with under-representation even amongst the federal parties. Ontario tried the referendum, but was unsuccessful. I think that may have been due to the sudden nature by which the option was presented.
If you break the voter statistics down, we see that some parties need fewer votes to guarantee a seat than others. A better dichotomy would be hard to find than the gulf between parties like the Liberals/Conservatives and the Green party.
Further complicating things is the elections themselves. What are we electing? An MP, a party, or a Prime Minister? The platforms are largely outside of the MP's power, and they really represent a central message in the voting campaign. Add in that parties will fund advertising in ridings with the national message, which has caused some controversy in Parliament.
On the fiscal reforms, I was wondering where you would draw the extra funds for municipalities from. Would they receive municipal transfers at the expense of the provincial transfers? Or would you evaluate other federal spending for some wiggle room?
I think federalism is a good platform. You mentioned electoral reform as part of a better federalism, but was that only for seat allocation amongst the native groups? I have to say I like that idea. Do you have any thoughts about a mixed member proportional. While cities and municipalities are underrepresented, I think there is also a problem with under-representation even amongst the federal parties. Ontario tried the referendum, but was unsuccessful. I think that may have been due to the sudden nature by which the option was presented.
If you break the voter statistics down, we see that some parties need fewer votes to guarantee a seat than others. A better dichotomy would be hard to find than the gulf between parties like the Liberals/Conservatives and the Green party.
Further complicating things is the elections themselves. What are we electing? An MP, a party, or a Prime Minister? The platforms are largely outside of the MP's power, and they really represent a central message in the voting campaign. Add in that parties will fund advertising in ridings with the national message, which has caused some controversy in Parliament.
On the fiscal reforms, I was wondering where you would draw the extra funds for municipalities from. Would they receive municipal transfers at the expense of the provincial transfers? Or would you evaluate other federal spending for some wiggle room?
Thanks for the congratulations.
I’m glad you liked my idea of creating reserved political seats for the Aboriginal peoples of Canada. As to my thoughts on MMP, I did vote for it in the Ontario referendum. However, while MMP would be an improvement for granting greater representation for traditionally underrepresented parties such as the Green party, MMP is also systematically flawed. The main problem that I see with this system is that it creates a closed-list ballot. By voting for a party rather than for a person, the party has complete control over who they make MP. This closed-list system is seen around the world as being less democratic. For instance, in Kosovo the closed-list ballot system was recently abolished, as it was deemed to be undemocratic. The second problem with MMP is that unlike in the current electoral system where MPs represent constituents within a riding, the reserved seats would not be based on a riding. This begs the question of who the MPs holding these seats are to be held responsible to. At least with granting the Aboriginal peoples of Canada reserved political positions, it is clear that they are to be held responsible to the narrowly defined communities that they are to represent (for example the Cree, the Metis, etc) So while MMP is an improvement in terms of granting greater representation to traditionally underrepresented parties, I think it brings with it new problems. MMP was also not successful in Ontario because it was not properly promoted to the public. To guarantee this kind of democratic reform, MMP would have to be taken back to the drawing board (or at least another citizens committee) to address these problems, it would then have to be properly conveyed to the public longer before the election.
In terms of fiscal reform, I would redirect some of the federal funds from the provinces to the municipalities. The reason for this is that the provinces are already allotted funds which are to go to the municipalities, but often get put into other provincial programs. Thus, to redirect some of the funds to go directly to the municipalities would not financially hinder the provinces, it would just reduce the middleman, so to speak, giving greater direct representation to the municipalities. However, I would also, as you suggest, re-evaluate the entire federal budget so as to grant the municipalities greater funding.
Hope this answers your questions, and I’m glad to have this discussion and to debate these issues.
For the contest however, it would be very helpful to me if we could have this debate opened up on my YouTube page: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UdJyZfU_HQ. The judges of the contest are looking at how I can respond to exactly these kinds of questions. So, if you have any more comments and/or questions, I would love it if we could continue this debate on YouTube.
Thanks for your support,
Julienne
Bright Spark
Posts: 454
Location: Vanderhoof, BC
Location: Vanderhoof, BC
November 28th, 2007, 08:36 AM
Quoting JulienneVipond
Firstly, congradulations on your presentation, I hope you win...I personally wouldn't support your premise while I understand the basic issues that you raise all too well...The concern with any form of centralization of authority of this sort is that it would tend to concentrate political power into self serving lobbies and slip streaming the provincial authority would lead to the emergence of city states....Even more than we have now.Looking at the country objectively and its current state of development as a nation, the present need is to establish a yeomanry which is particularly Canadian...This hasn't been done yet....Yeoman traditions are built through the population being tied to the land.This is something I believe the next Great Canadian Prime Minister will be trying to achieve....
Hello to Everyone!
I am running in CBC's competition Canada's Next Great Prime Minister. Basically, the contest is centered around having a “great idea” for Canada. My idea for Canada is to strengthen Canadian federalism through increased representation and participation for the municipalities and the Aboriginal peoples of Canada.
By posting here, I thought I would try to get my video out into the larger Canadian political community. I would love it if people would watch my video, and leave me comments and questions that I will respond to. I'm hoping that in this way we can foster a debate about the issues of federalism that I raise in my video.
You can watch the video at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UdJyZfU_HQ
You can also check out the competition at: http://www.cbc.ca/nextprimeminister/
Cheers,
Julienne
I am running in CBC's competition Canada's Next Great Prime Minister. Basically, the contest is centered around having a “great idea” for Canada. My idea for Canada is to strengthen Canadian federalism through increased representation and participation for the municipalities and the Aboriginal peoples of Canada.
By posting here, I thought I would try to get my video out into the larger Canadian political community. I would love it if people would watch my video, and leave me comments and questions that I will respond to. I'm hoping that in this way we can foster a debate about the issues of federalism that I raise in my video.
You can watch the video at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4UdJyZfU_HQ
You can also check out the competition at: http://www.cbc.ca/nextprimeminister/
Cheers,
Julienne
