Should the Green party be allowed in national leaders debates?
- Thread starter CBC News
- Start date
I was going to bring up the point that Dion wanted May in the debate but Colpy already made that point. Some twit on the news last night tried to make a point that May couldn't be in the debate because the Green Party doesn't run candidates in every riding. I guess that privilege is reserved for a certain seditious little pri-k that runs the Bloc heads.
Keep in mind there are many green cons who find the Grean party attractive since they really aren't that liberal.
An extremely right wing business friend of mine is the biggest the tree hugger I know, he buys land the Beatrix Potter way, just to preserve it....he is voting Green.
NDP probably has the right idea. If they're going to have a lot of fringe parties, why not have a free vote and eliminate the party system altogether? Fringe makes it too easy to split the vote - the way Mulroney did for Free Trade and GST. By popular vote, both times he was clobbered.
Well lets go over this, Other parties in the past have done this and still participated.
Why the special case for Green and Liberals but not other parties?
The BQ was allowed into the debates when it had only a single unelected MP.
Another thing I would like to add, is that if the Bloc are allowed in the debate.... a party that only represents one Province, then all parties should be allowed to be in the debates.
Restricting who can go into the debates, etc. is a control on freedom and the public's ability to be informed and make a sound decision.
People can call them fringes, but they're only fringes because nobody gives them a chance to speak.
I feel that so long as a political party can represent and have members that can be elected in most of the provinces, then they should be allowed..... for a party that only focuses on one province is a joke.... like the Bloc.... and besides, all they want to do is seperate from Canada anyways, so wtf should they be allowed in the debate if they don't represent all of Canada's best interests?
Restricting who can go into the debates, etc. is a control on freedom and the public's ability to be informed and make a sound decision.
People can call them fringes, but they're only fringes because nobody gives them a chance to speak.
I feel that so long as a political party can represent and have members that can be elected in most of the provinces, then they should be allowed..... for a party that only focuses on one province is a joke.... like the Bloc.... and besides, all they want to do is seperate from Canada anyways, so wtf should they be allowed in the debate if they don't represent all of Canada's best interests?
That's not true. The 1993 election had all five leaders at the debate, including the Bloc Quebecois, which had to that point not elected a single member to Parliament.
ETA: I see Zzarchov beat me to the punch.
You're taking credit for what the Cons as you call them said? The name seems to fit...
Conclusion doesn't follow from the premise. But I'm not surprised you would follow blindly along...
Well shucks Walt, lets just let all the Independents in on it too! :roll:
FYI:
As far as I'm concerned this one issue is justification enough to vote Green. But I also happen to agree with most of their policies:
http://www.greenparty.ca/en/policy
As far as I'm concerned this one issue is justification enough to vote Green. But I also happen to agree with most of their policies:
http://www.greenparty.ca/en/policy
YES they should be in the debate. I am no Green supporter by any means, but if it gets the other parties to reconsider any of their policies and utilise any good ideas that the Greens have (665,940 people voting for them in 2006 is still a LOT of people) we as Canadain's can only benefit....can't we????
Personally, I think they should replace the Bloc. I do not believe that they have ANY right to be in the debates, as has been previously mentioned, they don't field any candidates outside of Quebec and they DONT WANT TO BE A PART OF CANADA...so lets exclude them from any part of the Canadian Political system if they feel that way......
Personally, I think they should replace the Bloc. I do not believe that they have ANY right to be in the debates, as has been previously mentioned, they don't field any candidates outside of Quebec and they DONT WANT TO BE A PART OF CANADA...so lets exclude them from any part of the Canadian Political system if they feel that way......
Let's look at the 'rules'. Apparently, the idea is that a party must have a sitting member to be represented in the debate.
The Green Party has a member, who joined the party while Parliament was not in session; Parliament was subsequently dissolved. Therefore, they have never had a sitting member.
So, we'll change the rules because we like the Green Party. This means we have to change the rules for every other party as well.
The Green Party has a member, who joined the party while Parliament was not in session; Parliament was subsequently dissolved. Therefore, they have never had a sitting member.
So, we'll change the rules because we like the Green Party. This means we have to change the rules for every other party as well.
Sitting member? When was that added?
Your mistaking changing the rules with making new rules that previous parties had retroactively upheld.
If it turns out that no previous leaders had been left handed, that doesn't make it a rule that new leaders can't be left handed and participate, even if that makes it a convenient way to remove a current leader from the debate.
They run as a national party, they could in theory form a majority government, they have an MP and they have enough popular support to qualify for official party funding (unlike the rhino, marxist-lenninist etc)
They have far more right to be there and have their voices heard than either the defunct reform or BQ have ever had.
Your mistaking changing the rules with making new rules that previous parties had retroactively upheld.
If it turns out that no previous leaders had been left handed, that doesn't make it a rule that new leaders can't be left handed and participate, even if that makes it a convenient way to remove a current leader from the debate.
They run as a national party, they could in theory form a majority government, they have an MP and they have enough popular support to qualify for official party funding (unlike the rhino, marxist-lenninist etc)
They have far more right to be there and have their voices heard than either the defunct reform or BQ have ever had.
I heard that from some CBC wonk the other day. Could be wrong, which is why I said 'Apparently'.
From cbc.ca:
"In the December 2005 debates that preceded the 2006 election, Jim Harris — then leader of the Green party — was excluded because his party had no seats in the House of Commons."
Since the 'Green' MP joined the party when Parliament wasn't in session, then technically, the Green Party has never had a seat in the House.
"In the December 2005 debates that preceded the 2006 election, Jim Harris — then leader of the Green party — was excluded because his party had no seats in the House of Commons."
Since the 'Green' MP joined the party when Parliament wasn't in session, then technically, the Green Party has never had a seat in the House.