Former CFC Governor Seeks Federal Nomination - Not Chess Related

[Paul Bonham]

Re: Federal Canadian Election - NDP/Liberal One-Time "Working Agreement"

I am open to looking at electoral reform, to methods of representation that are better representative of the public’s interests.

From Liberal.ca

“The Liberal Party of Canada believes that Parliament should belong to the people instead of the Prime Minister. Liberals are committed to exploring Parliamentary and Electoral reform in order to realign our institutions with democratic principles and to ensure more meaningful and effective representation.”

It has to be asked: How do you personally define "methods of representation that are better representative of the public’s interests" ?

IMO, true democracy would have the adult population actually voting on each individual issue as it arises, in real time, with the majority vote deciding. That doesn't mean decisions made might necessarily be BETTER, it just means they would be more representative of the public's wishes. The logistics of doing this, even in today's internet age, are prohibitive. But what we get instead, a system where each adult citizen votes for one from among three or four professional politicians, and regional winners then hold office for up to 5 years, is light years away from my idea of REAL democracy.

And it should be noted that electoral reform itself means different things to different people. Here in the U.S., Republicans are trying, in the name of electoral reform, to get all 50 states to force voters to produce certain forms of photo ID before being able to cast a vote. Coincidentally (!), the forms of photo ID being required are not held by the poorer segment of the American populace, and in many cases out of reach from them due to cost. And even more coincidentally (!), these poorer segments overwhelmingly vote Democrat.

Electoral reform, at whatever time it is enacted, will become just another means by which the party in power at that time strengthens its hold. The only REAL job of politicians is to devise means to convince "the people" that their interests are being served by the government and the system as a whole, and this is true of any governing system be it capitalist, socialist, fascist, communist, what have you.

So Mr. Gladstone, man of integrity though you may be: unless you are actively PROPOSING some reform that will lead to something closer to the real representation as I've outlined above, don't bother proclaiming that you or your party are "open" to electoral reform. That is basically a non-policy. Smoke and mirrors. "More meaningful and effective representation" is undefinable because it is totally subjective.

You actually might get more respect if you told "the people" that the kind of real democracy I've outlined above might actually lead to worse decisions being made. The majority doesn't always want what's actually and objectively best for them.

[Erik Malmsten]

Re: Federal Canadian Election - NDP/Liberal One-Time "Working Agreement"

I don't think people want to vote on every issue, they want to delegate and then complain. Paul mustn't follow Canadian national politics: The Liberals/NDP want Electoral reform as the Progressive Conservatives (Red Tories) and Reform united the right under one party, while the left is split between Liberals, NDP and Green (and Bloc?). This gives the Conservatives a major advantage in winning the most seats, yet having less than 50% of the vote. The Liberals/NDP want Parliamentary reform as Harper has been ruling as a dictator: All things go through his office. Massive bills containing dozens of different issues are bounded together as one bill and rammed through Parliament, Conservative committee members not accepting any amendments. So the traditional checks and balances by ordinary MPs are gone. And there's been the closing down of funding of any opposition from women groups, charities, and scientists. All done in the name of reducing taxes to the richest, increasing the military, removing gun controls, removing environmental controls, etc.

[Bob Armstrong]

Some Canadian Political Deficits

I don't think people want to vote on every issue, they want to delegate and then complain. Paul mustn't follow Canadian national politics: The Liberals/NDP want Electoral reform as the Progressive Conservatives (Red Tories) and Reform united the right under one party, while the left is split between Liberals, NDP and Green (and Bloc?). This gives the Conservatives a major advantage in winning the most seats, yet having less than 50% of the vote. The Liberals/NDP want Parliamentary reform as Harper has been ruling as a dictator: All things go through his office. Massive bills containing dozens of different issues are bounded together as one bill and rammed through Parliament, Conservative committee members not accepting any amendments. So the traditional checks and balances by ordinary MPs are gone. And there's been the closing down of funding of any opposition from women groups, charities, and scientists. All done in the name of reducing taxes to the richest, increasing the military, removing gun controls, removing environmental controls, etc.

Hi Erik:

Unhappy with Harper, maybe? A bit with the multi-opposition to Harper? and with a parliamentary system in which the role of the MP has been able to be emasculated?

Bob

[Peter McKillop]

Re: Federal Canadian Election - NDP/Liberal One-Time "Working Agreement"

Well, Peter, I'm not all that happy with the thought of Trudeau winning and giving Ontario the money Premier Wynne wants. I still recall Pierre Tudeau and his heavy handed governments which is enough to make me prefer the NDP over the Liberals. I still recall interest rates of over 20% during his years in office around 1981 or 1982. That's bank prime to which I refer.

My only problem with the Harper government is over door to door mail delivery. If they drop their policy on doing away with it that's where my vote goes.

The Ontario liberal government, after years of financial fiascos is in a position where they either have to nickel and dime voters with sneaky tax grabs or raise the personal Ontario income taxes by roughly 5 percentage points. Not unreasonable when you consider people tend to vote for the government they can afford.

A federal Liberal govt. doesn't necessarily mean fiscal irresponsibility. After all, it was the Liberals under Chretien and Martin who finally got the deficit situation headed in the right direction after the so-called efforts of Mulroney/Wilson. And the interest rate situation of the early '80s was an international phenomenon, not a Pierre Trudeau inspiration.

I agree wholeheartedly with your comments about the Ontario Liberals.

[Peter McKillop]

Re: Federal Canadian Election - NDP/Liberal One-Time "Working Agreement"

If elected Gary, do you promise to challenge Tony Clement to a game?

Tony Clement? You mean Captain Science?

[Nigel Hanrahan]

Proportional Representation in Canada

Proportional representation has certain problems, too, such as no party hardly ever gaining a majority, and fringe parties gaining undue influence (and seats) as a result.

A recent comment on this issue from my local [NDP] MP, Jean Crowder, follows.

"Mr. Speaker, the Law Commission of Canada identified problems with the first-past-the-post system. It said:

"For many Canadians, this system is inherently unfair—more likely to frustrate or distort the wishes of the voters than to translate them fairly into representation and influence in the legislature. It has been criticized as: being overly generous to the party that wins a plurality of the vote, rewarding it with a legislative majority disproportionate to its share of the vote; allowing the governing party, with its artificially swollen legislative majority, to dominate the political agenda; promoting parties formed along regional lines, thus exacerbating Canada’s regional divisions; leaving large areas of the country without adequate representatives in the governing party caucus; disregarding a large number of votes in that voters who do not vote for the winning candidate have no connection to the elected representative, nor to the eventual make-up of the House of Commons; contributing to the under-representation of women, minority groups, and Aboriginal peoples; preventing a diversity of ideas from entering the House of Commons; and favouring an adversarial style of politics."

Ninety percent of the world's democracies, including Australia, New Zealand, Scotland, Ireland and Wales have abandoned or significantly modified the pre-democratic British system that still prevails in Ottawa.

British Columbia unfortunately had a failed referendum with regard to a single transferrable vote. Part of the reason it lost was that people wanted change, but many people did not understand the proposed system.

What we need is a very clear proposal for Canadians, outlining how it would affect them in their riding, in their district, and how their access to a parliamentary procedure would improve under a system of proportional representation.

We should all be very concerned in this House about the lack of participation in the electoral process. We should all take a hard look at how we operate in this House. Our objective here should be to increase voter participation. Our objective should be to ensure that the values of Canadians are adequately represented in this House."

Crowder was addressing the issue of the precipitous drop in voting in elections in Canada. It's pretty clear that some parties are banking on this decline in voter participation for their success. The failure of democracy is then viewed as a shining victory. The former Mayor of Toronto was a case in point (I can provide data if interested).

Her column is here.

[Gary Ruben]

Re: Federal Canadian Election - NDP/Liberal One-Time "Working Agreement"

After all, it was the Liberals under Chretien and Martin who finally got the deficit situation headed in the right direction after the so-called efforts of Mulroney/Wilson. And the interest rate situation of the early '80s was an international phenomenon, not a Pierre Trudeau inspiration.

I was pretty happy with the Chretien years. I've been pretty happy with the Harper years as well, so far. The Harper government steered us though the financial crisis in much better shape than the the U.S. enjoyed.

The Trudeau years were marked with promises like No wage and price controls and the election he won from Joe Clark regarding gas prices which were based on inaccuracies. There was also some other things like the War Measures Act and NEP which didn't go over well in the west.

Federally, I voted for Stanfield federally.

Some did well in those days like the money lenders and those who bought long term Canada bonds at a deep discount to face value.

[Kevin Pacey]

Re: Proportional Representation in Canada

A recent comment on this issue from my local [NDP] MP, Jean Crowder, follows.



Crowder was addressing the issue of the precipitous drop in voting in elections in Canada. It's pretty clear that some parties are banking on this decline in voter participation for their success. The failure of democracy is then viewed as a shining victory. The former Mayor of Toronto was a case in point (I can provide data if interested).

Her column is here.

My feelings on low voter turnout are as follows:

Civics classes being taught in school might have a fair chance of improving the youth vote, at least. Of course, try to ensure that there is no school teacher's union or provincial government bias in what is taught. In any case, a voter taught to stay reasonably informed is more to be hoped for than significant numbers of completely uninformed voters at the ballot box, IMO. Thus, only with voter education should mandatory voting be considered, like in Australia (don't know if there's civics classes there though).

Speaking of Australia, they sort of have a 'none of the above' option on the ballot (maintaining a voter's privacy, as opposed to the current Canadian practice of not-so-subtle intimidation in one having to 'decline' one's ballot out loud instead). This could be important IMO given the dearth of quality politicians and quality political parties in the world (a result of the decline of moral absolutes in the world in many nations). A published high number of such 'none of the above' votes might encourage more decent folks to run as independents or start their own political parties.

I see not too high a level of merit to looking at nations in the rest of the world as far as their political systems go. Much of the world is in a sad state, if only morally, and last I heard Canada was still one of the best places in the world to live in (which may not say a lot about the times we live in). The state of the UN mirrors the world's sad state that I write of. In any event, each nation is unique and Canada is no exception. I suspect, like Paul, that, at the federal level, for example, any one party (such the NDP) has its own interests at heart as far as their desired changing of the way elections are carried out.

[Alvah Mayo]

Re: Federal Canadian Election - The Frantic Left

Bob, that will never work! Strategic voting by parties is a pipe dream.

Besides, I don't want my "fringe" party candidate to be bullied into backing another party.
Also, voters should not be "bullied" into strategic voting.
Both of these concepts are unacceptable. True electoral reform is the answer.

If we adopt a modern electoral system, like many other countries have, we can achieve a more democratic system.

There are alternatives, ranked balloting, proportional representation, etc.

Bob G., you don't fix what isn't broken. The current system has worked and continues to work very well.

I don't recall this wailing and gnashing of teeth from the left of centre voters when the Chretien Liberals "ran up the middle" for multiple elections while Reform and the PC's split the right wing vote.

[Mathieu Cloutier]

Re: Federal Canadian Election - The Frantic Left

Best of luck to you.

But there's no way I would support anything Trudeau related. That guy is bat**** crazy and should be in a psych ward.

[Egidijus Zeromskis]

Re: Federal Canadian Election - The Frantic Left

As sport is on a federal level, what will be yours (Gary G.) active actions to move and recognize chess as the true sport? :)

Your riding boarders mine, thus no voting power over there. Otherwise, lets the best win :)

[Gary Gladstone]

Re: Federal Canadian Election - The Frantic Left

It is safe to say, that if I am successful, I will assist in every way possible to further chess at all levels. I have seen first hand the positive impact that Chess has on all participants. You can, of course, count on me as a strong advocate.

Once again, at this point, the way to support is to speak to people in the riding and encourage them to register to vote at the nomination meeting. I'm also, always looking for volunteers.

Thanks for all of your encouraging comments.

Please check out www.garygladstone.ca for full details

Gary

P.S. I've attached a photo from last night's event. Snow couldn't keep the people away :)

[Ken Craft]

Re: Federal Canadian Election - The Frantic Left

The Liberal candidate in our riding is Wayne Long, President of the QMJHL team, Saint John Sea Dogs.

[Gary Ruben]

Re: Federal Canadian Election - The Frantic Left

Not being tied to any political party I always consider if the candidate lives in this riding. Often what we get in this riding is parachute candidates. In the US I believe they are called carpetbaggers.

[Nigel Hanrahan]

Re: Proportional Representation in Canada

More on declining voter turnout.

1. Compulsory civics classes doesn't address the common complaint among many who see no point in voting; many simply argue that voting changes nothing, that the system is corrupt, that all politicians are not held to any sort of honesty requirement, that they can say whatever lie they wish during the election and get away with it after the election, and, of course, that FPTP is a rotten system anyway, for the reasons enumerated by MP Crowder. The reasons why people don't vote really should be respected, and solicited, instead of being treated as a criminal act (as in Australia) or mental defect.

Incidentally, treating Prop Rep as an NDP conspiracy, etc., is a mistake. Where the current system benefits the NDP, as in Manitoba where they have formed the government for over a decade, they don't seem to have any interest in reforming the system and getting rid of FPTP despite having the reigns of power for so many years. Then again, why would they reform their province when no one else has any intention of doing so? Does FPTP really serve the people of Alberta with such a lack of diversity in their legislature?

2. We used to have the right to "refuse" a ballot, i.e., "none of the above" but this has been taken away from us in the last 10 years or so.

3. Declining voter turnout is a Canadian problem. Making reference to some uniqueness of the Canadian system, or disparaging the rest of the world as of "weak" morality, does nothing to solve this very serious problem. We now have a situation in which a minority of a fraction of all possible voters decides who forms the government. Democracy is failing. Things should be going in the other direction, and they're not. This is called "the hollowing out of democracy" in which people have less and less of a say about how they are governed, the political parties come to resemble each other more and more, and the neo-liberal kool-aid is drunk by all governments, all of whom apply brutal austerity to one degree or another. Meanwhile, a whole raft of global and Canada-wide problems fester, not the least of which is a catastrophic global tipping point for the environment which poses a serious threat to human life on the planet. Politicians fiddle while Mother Earth burns. We're running out of time.