Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
the goat
climber
north central WA
|
|
|
Mar 30, 2011 - 02:05am PT
|
I nominate Trevor Gillies for PM and Matt Cooke for Vice PM. Isn't that how it works up there?
|
|
Todd Eastman
climber
Bellingham, WA
|
|
|
Mar 30, 2011 - 02:16am PT
|
MH for Minister of Rock and Snow!
|
|
Studly
Trad climber
WA
|
|
|
Mar 30, 2011 - 08:06am PT
|
Pretty funny how Canada has been annexed by the US and they don't even know it yet and keep holding these elections. Those crazy Cheesers!
|
|
MH2
climber
|
|
|
Mar 30, 2011 - 12:47pm PT
|
The Canadian for that is, "slightly more than pink."
Like Max Ferguson was accused of. But according to his teacher, he was a good boy who studied hard and always had good marks, and he liked to look at questions from all angles. In fact, she could describe him in two words: marks and angles.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 30, 2011 - 08:40pm PT
|
Today's big election controversies are whether Harper should personally participate in discussions about Libya, and whether he should attend the "royal" wedding in a month. There is a strong tradition that during elections, the prime minister not attend such events, as they can be too easily mispresented as partisan. However, a Canadian general is commander of the allied forces operating in Libya (bet you didn't know that), and about 40 countries are meeting to discuss what's next. Canada is represented by a senior bureaucrat, but some say it's important enough that a politician should be there.
The fuss about the wedding is trivial, in that we separate our head of government (prime minister) and head of state (governor general). The latter is sort of like the US vice-president, and gets to go to a lot of funerals, weddings, and similar events, as representative of Canada.
Bored yet?
|
|
MH2
climber
|
|
|
Mar 30, 2011 - 08:47pm PT
|
"Bored yet?"
Please explain the coalition issue. Again.
And then again.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Mar 30, 2011 - 10:50pm PT
|
The other thing, of course, is that the election will interfere with the start of the playoffs. For some, that's a real tragedy.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 1, 2011 - 02:26am PT
|
Today's election fuss was about the leaders' television debate. We have five parties - Liberals, Conservatives, New Democrats, Bloc Quebecois, and the Greens. The first four currently hold seats in Parliament, but the Greens don't. However, the Greens got almost 10% of the vote in the last election. Their leader participated in the last election debate, in 2008 - an attempt by the other party leaders to exclude her kicked up a big fuss. It didn't help that they were older men, and her a younger, feisty, woman.
This time she's being excluded, and the leaders are blaming it on the television networks that organize the debate. (No independent body looking after it like in the US, unfortunately.) So that's generating lots of publicity for the Greens, who are putting a lot of effort into trying to get their leader elected - they've never had an elected MP before.
Otherwise, prime minister Harper challenged Michael Ignatieff, leader of the Liberals, to a one on one debate, which he accepted. One or the other is likely to be the next prime minister, either with a majority or a working minority, so it makes sense. We'll see if Harper stays with his commitment, as he probably has more to lose and less to gain.
|
|
MoonGoon
climber
canadistan
|
|
Here's the question...
Would you select high contrast colour film, or would you go with the classic simplicity of black and white?
What loser still uses film. It's 2011 MAN!
In other news, Stephen Harper is a totally normal guy: http://www.stephenharperisatotallynormalguy.com/
|
|
Ottawa Doug
Social climber
Ottawa, Canada
|
|
Classic simplicity of black and white, for sure!
: )
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 1, 2011 - 09:35pm PT
|
I have a Rhino button around, from the 1984 (?) election. A relative back east got it for me.
Today Harper backed away from a possible one on one debate with Ignatieff. No surprise there.
Dramatically, an NDP candidate stepped down, and encouraged voters in his riding to vote for the Liberal candidate, saying that the centre and left need to unite, to prevent the Conservatives from being re-elected. We currently have multi-polar politics; reducing it to bipolar, apart from the Bloc Quebecois, might be interesting. The right wing was fractured from 1993 - 2006, and never able to gain power until it cobbled together a coalition - as are all political parties. Right now, Harper might win a majority with only 40% of the vote.
(Canada's politics have in effect been tri-polar since the formation of the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation in the 1930s, by amongst others the grandfather of someone who sometimes posts here. The CCF was renamed the NDP in about 1960, when it became something of an agricultural/working class/union coalition. Despite this, we've mostly had majority federal governments.)
Someone asked about how Canada forms governments. Our head of state is called the Governor General. He or she is appointed by the government, but the other parties are consulted, and there's something of a review process. Essentially, it has to be someone who is perceived as being not particularly partisan, and able to act as our mostly ceremonial head of state. The Governor General's job is mostly representing Canada in the ceremonial sense, plus administering things like the Order of Canada.
However, the Governor General also has a significant constitutional role, particularly in times of crisis. By constitutional convention, the leader of the party with a majority of seats in Parliament after an election is entitled to first crack at forming a government. So that's simple - unless a party revolts against its leader, which has happened. The GG then has to figure out who truly has the support of a majority.
But if there's a minority, the leader of the party with the most seats has to satisfy the Governor General that in fact there's a workable arrangement for a majority, even if no formal coalition. (We've had a minority government since 2004, but never a formal coalition.) If other parties make up a majority, they in theory could go to the GG, present their plan, and if the GG was convinced, be allowed to form a government - even if the party with the most seats wasn't included.
However, the party with the most seats almost always forms the government. A coalition of the parties with fewer seats might be allowed to try, if they could convince the GG that there was an arrangement likely to last two or three years, right after an election. In the present case, the government was defeated on a vote of confidence after 2.5 years. In theory, the opposition could have put together a majority coalition, but unless they were ready to go, the GG was right to agree to dissolve Parliament and call an election.
It is not good that the proportion of adult Canadians who vote is declining steadily.
Aren't you glad you asked about this stuff? Those who think the US electoral college is odd may not now be so sure.
|
|
the goat
climber
north central WA
|
|
Don Cherry. Any questions?
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 3, 2011 - 09:33pm PT
|
The other neat thing is that we don't actually get to vote for our prime minister, let alone the governor general. We vote for a member of parliament in each riding - there are about 315 ridings across the country. The candidates represent parties, and the party with the most MPs gets to be the government.
The riding boundaries are determined by electoral commissions, usually headed by retired judges and such, and all done in public. So the gerrymandering that is popular in the US isn't really an issue. Also, our elections, including enumeration of voters, are conducted by an independent, neutral official appointed by parliament, with at least acquiescence by all parties. Again, minimizes shenanigans.
The most exciting case we had in relation to elections was after the Charter of Rights and Freedoms was brought in 30 years ago. Until then, rural areas got more seats in Parliament than urban areas - a long-standing historical/political compromise, going back to the days of slow communications. The Charter says all citizens are equal, and so it was necessary to adjust ridings, within some other constitutional limits, so that they were roughly equal in population. (There are some exceptions.)
The eastern and maritime provinces, especially Quebec, are steadily losing seats in parliament, as western populations grow. Not something they're very happy about.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 4, 2011 - 12:26am PT
|
Well, if new world order is here, can corniss chopper, shut up and wank, and all the rest of the poli-tards be far behind?
We also finance our elections differently. Essentially, each of the registered parties that receives over a threshhold percentage of votes in a federal election, gets some annual funding from the federal government. (The taxpayers, that is.) The amount is based on the number of votes they received, not the number of MPs elected. Direct corporate and union financial support for the parties is banned, and they have limited scope to do it indirectly - the purchasers of all political ads in the news media during elections must be identified. Our Supreme Court decided that in Canada, corporations aren't humans for purposes of elections, and should not have related rights. They have enough already, anyway.
Donations by individuals to political parties receive favourable tax treatment, almost the same as donations to charities. But they're capped at about $1,000/person.
Harper wants to discontinue the federal subsidy of political parties, for partisan motives. It's chump change in terms of the budget, and goes back decades in one form or another. And his Conservatives get lots of indirect corporate support.
A third rail of Canadian federal politics is that of being seen as too cozy with our southern neighbours. A polite, professional distance is preferred - we all remember what Lyndon Johnson did to Mike Pearson, and of course Mulroney's notorious duet with Reagan. This election, neither major party can play the "American" card. Michael Ignatieff for years was a professor at Harvard, while it's no secret that Harper hangs around with wannabe neo-cons, mostly from Alberta (aka Texas north), and worse still is an evangelical christianist. The latter are less than 10% of our population, and rather suspect due to their social views, and tainted by association with US fundamentalists.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 4, 2011 - 01:25am PT
|
Richard "The Troll" Schaller (RIP - died 2006). His campaign included wanting to repeal the law of gravity - long before the yogic flyers showed up. His party also promised to keep none of its promises, a classic philosophical conundum that will make your brain hurt, if you think about it for too long.
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/westcoastnews/story.html?id=92596c7d-467a-4ce2-b092-3cc60cb62042
Then there's that Horseshoe Bay establishment, Troll's. Operated by a family named Troll. Really. Not only that, owner Gary Troll once won a $14 million lottery.
Who said Canadian politics are boring?
|
|
murcy
Gym climber
sanfrancisco
|
|
MH, thanks very much for this. I married one of your wimmen, lived up there for a short time, and so knew some of the basic stuff, but I am glad to pick up more about that and about current circumstances from your admirably succinct missives. I'm dismayed that what most impressed me about the place---that the civil discourse is so much more serious than here---seems to be changing.
|
|
Chief
climber
The NW edge of The Hudson Bay
|
|
Given that the reigns of power aren't held by elected leaders it doesn't matter whether it's Harper, Ignatieff, Republicans or Democrats.
North America is governed by a corporate oligarchy founded on the privatization of profit and socialization of loss.
The masses are manacled by debt slavery, distracted by reality TV and gladiator sports and convinced they live in a democracy and fight for freedom while being "protected" from terrorists.
It's Fortress America with Canada providing the resources, Mexico the labor and the US the multinational's police force.
We can look forward to a North American "Security Perimeter", the "Amero", biometric ID and a cashless society.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 4, 2011 - 11:26am PT
|
I'm not qualified for public office. If nothing else, I ain't pretty, and tend to plain speaking. But thanks anyway.
Perry has it more or less right - most of the important decisions that affect us are economic, and they aren't made by politicians. Many are made by individuals, in our choices of what to be and consume and do. And political decisions in Canada are increasingly dominated by US policy.
|
|
MH2
climber
|
|
I'm not sure these guys were qualified for public office either, Anders.
Richard The Troll Schaller on the left and Barry Headoffice Heidt.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 9, 2011 - 04:54pm PT
|
OK, so the politicians are being boring, and I thought it would be nice to have a little quiz. Who is the man in the photo below, and what role did he have in Canadian history?
Hint: Not Pierre Trudeau.
Canadians, and those who've lived in Canada, not eligible to participate.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!