Voter turnout drops to record low

Praxius

Mass'Debater
Dec 18, 2007
10,609
99
48
Halifax, NS & Melbourne, VIC
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canadavotes/story/2008/10/15/voter-turnout.html

An estimated 59.1 per cent of Canadians cast votes in Tuesday's general election — a figure that appears to be a record low in the history of Confederation.

A total of 13,832,972 votes were cast nationally of the 23,401,064 registered electors, Elections Canada figures showed as of 9 a.m. ET Wednesday.

The highest voter turnout appeared to be in P.E.I., where 69.5 per cent of registered voters cast ballots.

The lowest turnout appeared to be in Newfoundland and Labrador, where just 48.1 of registered voters took part.

All the figures were based on reports from 69,601 of 69,630 polls across the country. The total number of registered electors did not, however, include anyone who only registered on election day itself.

After the ballots were counted, Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his Conservatives won a second consecutive minority government.

The turnout figure of 59.1 per cent was slightly below the previous lowest turnout figure of 60.9 per cent. That happened when Paul Martin's Liberals won a minority government in 2004.

The highest voter turnout in Canadian electoral history occurred in 1958, when 79.4 per cent of registered voters took part in the election that saw John Diefenbaker return to power with a majority government.

Lowest turnout in our history..... that's pretty pathetic.

I guess there's no real need to be a democracy anymore since nobody seems to use it.

So what shall we turn to? Communism? Fascism? Socialism? A Repblic style government like in the US where the decisions are made for us while fooling most into thinking they have a choice in the matter?

Wait a minute, why am I even asking? Nobody uses their democratic rights anyways..... maybe I'll just tell you what the answer shall be.
 

scratch

Senate Member
May 20, 2008
5,658
22
38
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canadavotes/story/2008/10/15/voter-turnout.html



Lowest turnout in our history..... that's pretty pathetic.

I guess there's no real need to be a democracy anymore since nobody seems to use it.

So what shall we turn to? Communism? Fascism? Socialism? A Repblic style government like in the US where the decisions are made for us while fooling most into thinking they have a choice in the matter?

Wait a minute, why am I even asking? Nobody uses their democratic rights anyways..... maybe I'll just tell you what the answer shall be.

Hey Prax (you've the schnulls) ..... Go for it!
 

Praxius

Mass'Debater
Dec 18, 2007
10,609
99
48
Halifax, NS & Melbourne, VIC
Hey Prax (you've the schnulls) ..... Go for it!

Seriously, what's the point? We could have 5 more or 50 more parties thrown into the mix and everybody will just stick to voting Conservative or Liberal.... and even less and less people will turn out to vote simply because this is all that happens..... the Liberals or Conservatives make up the top two spots.... everytime..... no change..... so what's the point?

Clearly Canadians are stuck in their no-change mentality and simply happy to stick with their ways of life they currently lead.

I've suggested in possibly popping into politics if there was some level of interest in me doing so or if there was interest in some type of change in our country and government..... clearly there isn't and it's getting worse, so why bother?

Nobody cares, so why should I?
 

scratch

Senate Member
May 20, 2008
5,658
22
38
Seriously, what's the point? We could have 5 more or 50 more parties thrown into the mix and everybody will just stick to voting Conservative or Liberal.... and even less and less people will turn out to vote simply because this is all that happens..... the Liberals or Conservatives make up the top two spots.... everytime..... no change..... so what's the point?

Clearly Canadians are stuck in their no-change mentality and simply happy to stick with their ways of life they currently lead.

I've suggested in possibly popping into politics if there was some level of interest in me doing so or if there was interest in some type of change in our country and government..... clearly there isn't and it's getting worse, so why bother?

Nobody cares, so why should I?

As much as I am choking on this.....let's go for `representation by population`?
 

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
It was nearly 70% in PEI.

It would be nice to have some more demographic information on which segments of the population voted more/less. That would be one step towards addressing the issue.

Maybe online voting, though I don't know how people feel about the security of information using that method...
 
  • Like
Reactions: dancing-loon

lone wolf

Grossly Underrated
Nov 25, 2006
32,493
210
63
In the bush near Sudbury
Voter turnout across Canada

Newfoundland and Labrador.......48.1%
New Brunswick.......................62.8%
Nova Scotia............................60.7%
P.E.I. ...................................69.5%
Quebec.................................61.1%
Ontario.................................59.1%
Manitoba...............................56.8%
Saskatchewan.........................59.4%
Alberta..................................52.9%
British Columbia.......................61.0%
Northwest Territories...............48.6%
Yukon...................................63.7%
Nunavut................................49.4%

All in all ... quite pitiful. 42% of a population just doesn't give a damn....
 
  • Like
Reactions: dancing-loon

Praxius

Mass'Debater
Dec 18, 2007
10,609
99
48
Halifax, NS & Melbourne, VIC
As much as I am choking on this.....let's go for `representation by population`?

I don't agree with that process as it's no more different then how it currently is in our government. I say this because that form of government would mean that the locations of the country which hold more population would have even more say in what occurs not just in their area, but elsewhere in the nation.

Case in point would be how the Maritimes already have very little influence or say in the government at is currently stands and most of the issues presented in our government is always revolved around central and western Canada.... if this form of government was put in place, it'd make very little difference here in the Maritimes, if not, worse then it currently is. Now that Alberta has more workers from the Maritimes working there, that province would have even more say, while now the maritimes would have even less...... and I can only see things getting even more worse here then it currently is if that sort of government was in place.

I say it's no more different then the current system based on not changing a damn thing in regards to the government keeping main interest in central/western Canada while not giving a damn about the rest of the nation.... neither system helps where I live or those around me.

Representation by Population
http://faculty.marianopolis.edu/c.belanger/quebechistory/federal/repbypop.htm

Representation by Population (Rep. by Pop.) is a method by which seats are allocated in the House of Assembly in such a way as to vary with population. The higher the population of a unit (province), the larger the number of seats allocated to that province should be. Essentially, it relates to the basic democratic principle of "one person, one vote" and that all votes should count equally......

...... French Canadians recognized that constitutional reforms were necessary but would not concede Rep. by Pop. unless guarantees were given. The result of these pressures was the creation of the federal system in 1867: representation by population was conceded to Upper Canada (ss. 51-52 of the Constitution Act) but French Canada obtained a province where it would be full "master" in its house. Thus, Upper Canadians could not use their numerical strength to dominate them as those powers that were directly relevant to the culture and way of life of Lower Canadians would be put beyond the reach of Upper Canadians. Maritimers were also fearful of the large role that Central Canada would inevitably play in the central government. Their fear that they would be powerless in a House dominated by Central Canada became one of the most important stumbling blocks to the union of the colonies. Several guarantees were sought and obtained by the provinces that feared Ontario's voting strength:

1) Quebec received a fixed number of seats (65) and would serve as the basis for the calculations of the seats for the other provinces. It was thus guaranteed that its deputation would never fall below this number s. 51(1-2) . Cartier’s view was that as long as French Canadians voted as a block, and for his party, he "could make and unmake governments". To exercise influence in the federal government, he deemed it important that he not lead a shrinking group of parliamentarians from Quebec.

2) "The proportion which the population of a province bore to that of the Dominion was ascertained for both the census ten years earlier and the current one, and if the latter proportion was not more than one-twentieth less than the former, no reduction in the representation of that province would be made under the general rule." (R.M. Dawson, The Government of Canada, 1957, p.36); see s.51(4).

3) Rep. by Pop. in the House of Commons was counterbalanced by equality of representation of regions in the Senate (s.22). This was especially important for the Maritime provinces.

4) The British North America Act, 1915, introduced a further restriction to the principle of Representation by Population as it stipulated that a province would always be entitled "to a number of members in the House of Commons not less than the number of Senators representing such province." This has become article 51A of the Constitution Act.


Throw in this concept and you can say goodbye to Canada, as the above explains that the current system is in place in order to keep the country in union..... a very shaky one at that.

This was one of the main reasons why it took so long for some of the Maritime provinces to join Canada, because there was the question on exactly how much influence we'd have in the government...... and clearly today, it's still very little.

Then again, maybe the breaking up of Canada is what's needed to wake people up.
 

scratch

Senate Member
May 20, 2008
5,658
22
38
Voter turnout across Canada

Newfoundland and Labrador.......48.1%
New Brunswick.......................62.8%
Nova Scotia............................60.7%
P.E.I. ...................................69.5%
Quebec.................................61.1%
Ontario.................................59.1%
Manitoba...............................56.8%
Saskatchewan.........................59.4%
Alberta..................................52.9%
British Columbia.......................61.0%
Northwest Territories...............48.6%
Yukon...................................63.7%
Nunavut................................49.4%

All in all ... quite pitiful. 42% of a population just doesn't give a damn....

.....and for that we will all pay!

 

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
I was thinking more along the lines of age groupings. The 18-20 year old voters are notoriously slack when it comes to voting. Muchmusic's election coverage doesn't seem to help, though it's a start...
 

lone wolf

Grossly Underrated
Nov 25, 2006
32,493
210
63
In the bush near Sudbury
I wonder if Stats Can and Elections Canada swap that kind of stuff. It might be an eye-opener to target the non-voting public ... just to find out why (then subject 'em to the bureaucratic bungle)
 

scratch

Senate Member
May 20, 2008
5,658
22
38
I wonder if Stats Can and Elections Canada swap that kind of stuff. It might be an eye-opener to target the non-voting public ... just to find out why (then subject 'em to the bureaucratic bungle)


You've got it l.w.

Put the Feds on them.

Next time they will vote.

Betcha!
 

Tonington

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 27, 2006
15,441
150
63
I wasn't thinking the Feds courting voters, so much as campaigns using demographic data to better market themselves. The federal government doesn't really care how many people vote. Elections Canada was operating under new guidelines that actually make it harder for some people to vote...Elections Canada does actually have some data on past elections...