So who will lead Canada's new minority govt.??

So who will lead Canada's new minority govt.??


  • Total voters
    11

AnnaG

Hall of Fame Member
Jul 5, 2009
17,507
117
63
Who said it was perfect?

Don't like it, change it, but don't bitch !!
Why not? Citizenship and having the ability to vote gives us the right to bitch.

Changes are also part of our democratic system.
Only if the people that "represent" (supposedly) pass legislation on changes.

Know of a better system?
One or two.

At any rate, it is not the system that is the problem. It's the "humans" (politicians and bureaucrats) inhabiting the system that is the problem.
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
Democratic? hahaha
Canada is only democratic during elections and other rare occasions (like referendums, for instance). Mostly we live in a dictatorship.
Anyways, I like living where I am.
No place is perfect and so far the political idiocy that exists within Canada is only a small part of the whole. For the most part, the politics of Canada does not affect me.

Now if we had the British Parliamentary model used there, well it would be more open for real debates, real votes, and where backbench MP's from all parties, can and have voted as a group and voted down a govt bill.
 

AnnaG

Hall of Fame Member
Jul 5, 2009
17,507
117
63
Now if we had the British Parliamentary model used there, well it would be more open for real debates, real votes, and where backbench MP's from all parties, can and have voted as a group and voted down a govt bill.
I'd prefer a more direct democratic system. One where people keep themselves informed and have lots of referendums. Our politicians are supposed to be representatives of the people, but they rarely are.
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,340
113
Vancouver Island
Referendums get to be expensive. Politicians generally do represent someone's viewpoint, trouble is those that are offended always claim they are not being listened to.
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
I'd prefer a more direct democratic system. One where people keep themselves informed and have lots of referendums. Our politicians are supposed to be representatives of the people, but they rarely are.

Look to California for the failure of many referendums and the impacts caused.
 

AnnaG

Hall of Fame Member
Jul 5, 2009
17,507
117
63
And look to Switzerland to the successes. Politicians can't do dick unless the Swiss public says so.

Erm, Californians are weirder than the Swiss. And they are weirder than us, too, for that matter.

Referendums get to be expensive. Politicians generally do represent someone's viewpoint, trouble is those that are offended always claim they are not being listened to.
Perhaps they do represent someone's opinion, but do they represent the majority? Rarely.
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
Last edited:

AnnaG

Hall of Fame Member
Jul 5, 2009
17,507
117
63
I used California due to a variety of needs and differences from North to South. Also an ethnically diverse society. Swiss have none of that.

MapFight - Switzerland vs Canada size comparison

Switzerland Demographics Profile 2014
Good point.
I do not see the sense in treating everyone in every region of Canada the same. To me it would make much more sense for the provinces to have more power than the federal gov't. After all why should a person in AB or Nunavut have just as much say over BC waters as a BCer? Why should I have as much say over grain issues as Petros?
 

Goober

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 23, 2009
24,691
116
63
Moving
Good point.
I do not see the sense in treating everyone in every region of Canada the same. To me it would make much more sense for the provinces to have more power than the federal gov't. After all why should a person in AB or Nunavut have just as much say over BC waters as a BCer? Why should I have as much say over grain issues as Petros?

Again i have to disagree. the US while a republic, before the Civil War the states had significant power. This changed after for well known reasons.
We need a strong Federal govt to lead.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
The Fourteenth Amendment (Amendment XIV) to the United States Constitution was adopted on July 9, 1868, as one of the Reconstruction Amendments. The amendment addresses citizenship rights and equal protection of the laws, and was proposed in response to issues related to former slaves following the American Civil War. The amendment was bitterly contested, particularly by Southern states, which were forced to ratify it in order for them to regain representation in Congress. The Fourteenth Amendment, particularly its first section, is one of the most litigated parts of the Constitution, forming the basis for landmark decisions such as Roe v. Wade (1973) regarding abortion, Bush v. Gore (2000) regarding the 2000 presidential election, and Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) regarding same-sex marriage. The amendment limits the actions of all state and local officials, including those acting on behalf of such an official.

The amendment's first section includes several clauses: the Citizenship Clause, Privileges or Immunities Clause, Due Process Clause, and Equal Protection Clause. The Citizenship Clause provides a broad definition of citizenship, overruling the Supreme Court's decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), which had held that Americans descended from African slaves could not be citizens of the United States. The Privileges or Immunities Clause has been interpreted in such a way that it does very little.

The Due Process Clause prohibits state and local government officials from depriving persons of life, liberty, or property without legislative authorization. This clause has also been used by the federal judiciary to make most of the Bill of Rights applicable to the states, as well as to recognize substantive and procedural requirements that state laws must satisfy.
 

Cliffy

Standing Member
Nov 19, 2008
44,850
193
63
Nakusp, BC
GG would invite NDP, Libs to form government if Tories defeated on SFT


If the Conservatives win a minority government on Oct. 19 and the opposition parties decide to defeat the government on the Throne Speech, Governor General David Johnston would not agree to call another election immediately and would instead invite other parties to form government if they can, experts say.
Mr. Johnston “would not call an election because the Throne Speech is so early in the session that somebody else has the right to try to prove they enjoy the confidence of the House,” said Prof. Ned Franks, a professor emeritus of political science at Queen’s University, in an interview with The Hill Times.
Prof. Franks said that regardless of the election outcome, Prime Minister Stephen Harper (Calgary Heritage, Alta.) would have the first right to form government. But if he fails to win the confidence of the House, Mr. Johnston, a former professor of securities regulation, information technology and corporate law would invite the other parties to seek the confidence of the House before agreeing to call another election.

GG would invite NDP, Libs to form government if Tories defeated on SFT: Ned Franks | hilltimes.com
 

JamesBondo

House Member
Mar 3, 2012
4,158
37
48
If the CPC were to win a minority. It would be difficult for the governor general to not give them the chance to form govt. The CPC has one of the most successful minority government records in the history of Canada.
 

Cliffy

Standing Member
Nov 19, 2008
44,850
193
63
Nakusp, BC
If the CPC were to win a minority. It would be difficult for the governor general to not give them the chance to form govt. The CPC has one of the most successful minority government records in the history of Canada.
Do you ever come up for air, or do you really like the smell of your own excrement?
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,817
471
83
We would be best if the NDP and Liberals do the democratic thing and co-operate against Harper.