12.06.2016 08:28 AM

Survey says: someone was paid a quarter of a million dollars to do this 

Look, this “democratic reform” file has been a fiasco from the start.  From four vague lines in the Liberal Party platform (promising bold change but not saying what the bold change would be), to now, when the whole thing has spiralled downward into Twitter hashtag farce (there some really good ones, too): it’s been a disaster, full stop.

I’m against all of the parties on this thing.  I oppose the “referendum solves everything” approach – favoured by Conservatives and separatists – because I still don’t know what the question would be.  (And, irony of ironies, what kind of referendum would it be? Fifty per cent plus one? Two-thirds? Ranked ballot style? And so on.)

I’m against the New Democrat approach, which is proportional representation by stealth.  They want that system because it guarantees them seats, even when they run a shitty election campaign, which is something they do with great regularity.  For Dippers, proportional representation is like an electoral pension plan without end.

And I’m against the Liberal approach, which is to tinker with democracy for no apparent reason whatsoever.  It may be imperfect, per Churchill, but our system of electing and governing is a Hell of a lot better than all of the alternatives, isn’t it?  Besides, if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.  To wit: before now, was anyone standing around the water coolers of the nation, saying: “God almighty, I didn’t sleep again last night because our elected representatives are insufficiently informed about the Gallagher Index!”

Enough time has been wasted on this horseshit, politicians.  Donald Trump is bringing the world towards the brink of some sort of a war with China, and this is all you have to worry about?

Get a life.  It’s our democracy, not yours, you solipsistic, self-interested bastards.

 

42 Comments

  1. smelter rat says:

    Bingo. And whoever designed that survey should be fired. Total joke.

  2. Kev says:

    That survey is appalling.

  3. My sentiments exactly. The whole exercise is ridiculous.

  4. doconnor says:

    Unlike the other parties the NDP has been totally open about what they want and how they want to achieve it.

    For a lot of voters, how parties run thier election campaign isn’t as important as the principles that their party represents. Wild swings in seat count generated by the relatively small swings in support are undemocratic. It’s not about politicians have a secure job. It’s about segments of the population having a secure voice is government.

  5. Peter says:

    A lot of the pro-change PR crowd are like zealots. They remind me a bit of old-style Esperanto advocates who were convinced the world would blow itself up if we all didn’t speak the same language. They tend to be adamant that we don’t live in a democracy, that there are no up-sides to the present system and that their favourite alternative can be imposed with no losers—-win/win all around. When they lose referenda, which they often do, they can be splenetic about “misinformation” or inflaming the irrational fears of the plebs, etc., as if the issue was capital punishment or mass refugees. They seem to have little sense that this is essentially a wonk issue that is not a priority for most.

    • doconnor says:

      People who don’t want reform tend to complain about our passion because the lack rational arguments to support thier cause.

      One of the reasons the PR is unpopular in Canada because FPP is mostly used in the English speaking world, so we don’t have expirence with anything else. PR is more popular in Quebec.

      So will a lack of PR blow up the world? We’ll see how the Trump Presidency goes.

      • Matt says:

        PR is used in Italy, no?

        60 governments in the last 70 years.

        Now, Canada wouldn’t be that bad, but we’d probably still be at the polls every 18 to 30 months.

      • Peter says:

        <i<because the lack rational arguments to support their cause.

        If I had a dollar for every time a progressive told me how rational he or she was, I’d retire to Bali. It doesn’t seem to matter what the issue is (or how many elections or referenda they lose), their response is always how smart and rational they are and what unthinking ninnies their opponents are. Funny how your cool, intellectual rationalism so often leads to a completely irrational, splenetic contempt for those who don’t share your views. You do like to compliment yourselves, don’t you?

        Of course there are rational arguments for fptp related to government stability and efficiency and particularly the balancing of political voices in a widespread country with many regional, cultural and linguistic divisions. Your beloved rationalism is really little more than your belief you can treat Canada like a blank canvass and craft a masterpiece without considering history, demographic variations or the different priorities various groups and interests have when they vote.

  6. dave constable says:

    About 65% votes, 40% votes for Liberals, Liberals get 54% of the seats and 100% of the power…works for Liberals, so it must be the best kind of democracy.
    With 100% of the decision making power in the hands of Liberals, therefore we get the best decisions.
    I think I get it.

    • dave constable says:

      So, what we do now, if a Liberal, is repeat, ‘Okay we made a bit of a mistake, nothing to see here, move on to what we say are important things.’

  7. billg says:

    The Liberals badly needed to steal votes from the NDP, so, anything and everything was promised.
    Electoral reform, marijuana and a Greener Environment, all with smiles.
    This is blowing up right in front of their eyes as well as the wink wink nudge nudge marijuana laws and pipelines and oil production.
    When Trump and Trudeau meet for the first time I wonder if in a backroom somewhere they high five each other and laugh and laugh and laugh.

    • bluegreenblogger says:

      It is kind of funny, how every single election, Conservatives, Greens, and Liberals ‘steal’ NDP supporters. 90% of the electorate are dippers who are serially ‘stolen’ in the dead of night. ‘Cause you know. well, I cannot continue, because I do not know why or how. I only know that for all my life, the NDP has apparently been the victim of some mammoth human trafficking ring.

      • Peter says:

        FTW, bluegreen. I’d probably listen more carefully to what they have to say if I didn’t keep running into their pathetic whining about how clever they are and how unfair to them everybody is.

      • billg says:

        They are all kept in a warehouse near Lebreton Flats just west of the Parliament buildings, very hush hush.
        Maude Barlowe and Martha Hall Findlay feed them, and, the LPC fly’s in Joni Mitchell on weekends to entertain them, a carbon offset donation to Uganda makes everyone feel better about having to fly her in on a jet, they will of course be released 6 months before the next election.

  8. Aongasha says:

    This commentary is why I keep coming back, no partisanship and valid. So much better and more relevant to us, than the Trump one-trick pony ever-lasting boring diatribes. There I said it! May get me banned but them’s the breaks. This kind of analysis and commentary is where you shine though and I hope to see more of it, for all our benefits. Thanks.

  9. Kelly says:

    We have a phony electoral system. How many times does it have to be said? We never get what we vote for. That’s why people hate it and a third of voters don’t even bother.

    Campaigns matter? Yes…and that is a problem. People are lied to bullied and threatened . . . at risk of splitting the vote, etc. We have an electoral system designed for a 2-party system, of the type Churchill was describing. A system that is a sham democracy only twice as good as a communist 1-party system… which isn’t saying much.

    • bluegreenblogger says:

      well our phony system has certainly delivered the goods. At this moment, I am pretty over the top happy that we still have it, the alternatives seem to be delivering a lot of no good. I do not want to be ruled by a Knesset for example. Some political opinions are not worth reflecting in Government, or even in Parliament

  10. P. Brenn says:

    waste of time , money – leave things be – no system perfect but I would not want to live anywhere else than Canada – focus on jobs , jobs ,jobs – military, social programs, environmental planning – all run off this juice called money

  11. Bill Templeman says:

    All too complex for my small brain. All I know is that Trudeau said this would be the last FPTP election. Now he is fudging. Ergo he was bluffing during the campaign. And I believed him. Not again. Agree 100% that this issue has consumed far too much time. Trump. Climate change. New mission for our military. Massive migration, much of it climate driven. We have other stuff to deal with.

  12. Charlie says:

    Wow, Warren, You and I are so on the same page here.

    I don’t buy the Conservative bullshit about referendums because they just want to kill electoral reform; it has nothing to do with democratic participation and them pretending to is so transparent. They know full-well what happens with referendums in Canada, and they stand to lose the most by changing systems. I will say though, Scott Reid is turning into an effect MP for the CPC; more intelligent than the bulk of the Opposition benches.

    I can’t stand the NDP and their damn pining for PR. If they didn’t suck at elections, then maybe they wouldn’t need a system that guarantees them seats. PR is perfect way to reward a party like the NDP for failing all the time.

    I’m beyond done with the Liberals and their waffling on the whole matter itself. They botched it should thank god the holidays are near. I’ll make my prediction right here and now: Maryam Monsef to the backbenches for the start of 2017. No doubt she’s been dealt a shitty hand by the PMO on this, but she’s completely fumbled the communications as Minister. If strategists in the Liberal party want to turn a new page for next year, Monsef has to be shuffled out.

    • Matt says:

      Both Scott Reid of the CPC and Nathan Cullen of the NDP were quite entertaining in Question Period today.

      Both asked pretty clever questions to Monsef. She had nothing to retort but the same tired talking points provided by the PMO.

      • Charlie says:

        I didn’t catch Nathan Cullen in the House but I did see Reid; he was indeed very clever and entertaining.

        I also saw Scott Reid on a panel and was pleasantly surprised by the more informed questions he posed for his Liberal co-panelist.

        I don’t think Monsef is doing anyone any good by being the main communicator on the file. While I do agree that this seems to be a PMO orchestrated mess, I still think Monsef’s patronizingly “collaborative” attitude on the matter is failing. Which is why I think she’ll be dumped over the holidays.

  13. Matt says:

    After that shit show of a survey, I’m convinced they have been intentionally throwing Monsef under the bus since day one on this file.

    She’s taking all the hits and Trudeau will be unscathed when this promise they had no intention of fulfilling ends up in the trash bin.

    Fortunately for the Liberals, Monsef is actually an incredibly incompetent Minister.

  14. Ronald O'Dowd says:

    Warren,

    That’s what you get when you let 40ish people in long pants make policy. Sorry, just couldn’t resist.

  15. gyor says:

    You still don’t get it Warren it IS broke. In very election I’ve voted in not once has there in practice been any point to it, I voted NDP in a riding that doesn’t support the NDP and honestly I never ended up with a representive who pushed for the things I wanted.

    There are millions of Canadians who are fed up having their votes count for absolutely nothing in the current system.

    Over 80% of those who went before the committee support led proportional representation, most of the world democracies have proportional representation.

    • armand says:

      I’ve had parties and MP’s I’ve voted for win, form government and still not end up with a representative who pushed for the things I wanted. Democracy is not about getting what you want.

    • dave constable says:

      Same here! I lived and worked for 40 + years in a constituency where everyone knew who would win the federal election locally. At that time, of 308 ridings across Canada, I’ll bet close to 250 were ridings in which our fellow voters knew who was going to win. If they supported that candidate, their vote didn’t matter; if they were for another candidate, their vote didn’t matter.

      Our present FPTP system, from the 18th Century, when maybe 2% of the male population could vote, was for choosing, at most, between two candidates. It favours two major parties. It keeps good new ideas out. The Libs and Conservatives want a system where they simply each await their turn at the public purse. They will fight to the last job seeker to keep the present system.

      NDP, as someone mentioned above, would gain from proportional because their % of the vote would be reflected in the % of seats – if people voted as they do now. But a change to include proportional would likely enable slightly different voting choices by us voters.

    • Kev says:

      Just because your candidate loses, doesn’t mean your vote is wasted.

  16. Matt says:

    Warren, do you know anything about Mario Canseco? He’s a pollster with Insights West.

    He said today that he’s seen better designed questionnaires in Cosmopolitan Magazine and any data collected from this Liberal crap fest is unusable.

    Man.

    When Pollsters, with their sketchy record of political polling over the last 10 years take shots at your survey, you know it’s a clusterf–k of epic proportions.

  17. Stephen Gallagher says:

    As a Gallagher I am more often moved to extend the middle rather than the index.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.