CanPol: Thread of the Year Edition

[Asher]

Did you ever consider there are other possibiliites than perhaps a US/Aussie or a Canadian senate system?

Maybe a division by region: X elected senators in Western Canada, X elected senators in Quebec, X elected senators in Ontario, and X elected senators in the maritimes?

[Asher]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
The federal government in Canada doesn't have absolute say. That's the purpose of our Charter and of federalism in general.

Those don't have to be enforced, apparently.

Trudeau's NEP was in direct conflict with previous agreements and treaties with the provinces, and no one stopped him til his party left power.

[Flinx]

Originally posted by Flinx
Here are my seat predictions based (solely) on polling data collected by The Strategic Counsel between Dec 8 and Dec 13 (n=2500)

Canada .....123 94 24 67 0
BC ..........13 12 11  0 0
AB............0 28  0  0 0
SK MB.........6 20  2  0 0
ON...........71 27  8  0 0
QC............8  0  0 67 0
NB NS PE NL..22  7  3  0 0


Everyone can now get back to discussing the issues

Comments on the Numbers:
- it’s a fun exercise nothing more
- I used a very simple model
- I am applying provincial/regional polling data to individual ridings, this ignores all local realities like local candidates and local concentrations of party votes within provinces/regions.
- In Quebec the liberals are 10% below where they finished in the 1994 election (and down 8% since the election call), and the Bloc is up 7%; that erases a 17% spread in “the average” riding. This causes a lot of ridings to flip from Liberal to Bloc in the model. Again, things like Liberal voters are concentrated in Montreal and Bloc voters are on average more likely to be in the rest of Quebec are ignored, as well as the fact that the Liberal party has traditionally been better at getting it’s voters to the polls on election day etc. etc.
- In BC both the Liberals (+4%) and NDP (+3%) are polling above their 1994 finish and the conservatives (-5%) are down. There were 19 ridings where the winner was less than 10% ahead (12 with a lead of less than 5%) in 2004. A lot of BC ridings are in play…

[KrazyHorse]

What's really funny is that the *****ing about "Central Canada"s political domination is out of date. QC has been majority Bloc seats for almost a decade now.

Tell me, Asher, why is it preferable that a government formed of majorities in the West, NB and NS should have complete political domination rather than majorities in QC and ONT?

Your system does nothing to "protect" those residents of QC and ONT. It's domination by 50% + 1 again. The only difference is that your system dictates that QC and ONT can't get a 50% + 1 "tyranny", wherease the West + Maritimes can.

[Flinx]

Originally posted by Asher
Did you ever consider there are other possibiliites than perhaps a US/Aussie or a Canadian senate system?

Maybe a division by region: X elected senators in Western Canada, X elected senators in Quebec, X elected senators in Ontario, and X elected senators in the maritimes?

That is the system used now!!!
West 24
Ontario 24
Quebec 24
Maritimes 24
Newfoundland 6 (Joined in 1949, messed things up)
Territories 3
Total 105

[Asher]

Canada is a huge, diverse country. It is unacceptable to have the government formed based out of the interests of central Canada alone.

We have the house of commons which is representative purely of population base interest, and the senate should be used to protect the interest of the minorities outside of central Canada. They are people and they deserve a say in this government, too. The Senate cannot create bills, only strike down unfair ones.

I'm sorry you feel that the system is perfect as it is, but some of us strive for just a bit more.

What happens if oil prices hit $100/barrel and Ontario/Quebec decide it's time to nationalize the resources away from the West and Marintimes? There's nothing stopping that, because slightly more people live in Central Canada than everywhere else.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Asher
Did you ever consider there are other possibiliites than perhaps a US/Aussie or a Canadian senate system?

Maybe a division by region: X elected senators in Western Canada, X elected senators in Quebec, X elected senators in Ontario, and X elected senators in the maritimes?

That's closer to what I was going for.

If you didn't notice I already posted my suggestion.

I don't think that Quebec should be guaranteed 1/4 representation (as its share of pop continues to decline). I don't think that the West should be limited to 1/4 representation (as its share of pop continues to grow). I don't think that anything about the Maritimes makes them deserving of 1/4 representation.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Flinx


That is the system used now!!!
West 24
Ontario 24
Quebec 24
Maritimes 24
Newfoundland 6 (Joined in 1949, messed things up)
Territories 3
Total 105

a) Senate is not elected

b) Senate is castrated

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Asher
Canada is a huge, diverse country. It is unacceptable to have the government formed based out of the interests of central Canada alone

Canada is a huge, diverse country. It is unacceptable to have the government formed based out of the interests of Western and Maritime Canada alone.

I'm sorry you feel that the system is perfect as it is, but some of us strive for just a bit more.

I didn't say it was perfect. I already posted my suggestion for change.

[Asher]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
Canada is a huge, diverse country. It is unacceptable to have the government formed based out of the interests of Western and Maritime Canada alone.

Since when could a regionally-based senate even propose bills?

It's impossible to have a government based out of the interests of Western and Maritime Canada alone.

The Prime Minister and his cabinet, and all proposed bills, come from the House of Commons, which is based purely on population.

Let's get real here now...remember the role of the senate.

[Asher]

I also have to stress all of the abuse the current senate has seen.

Alberta has consistently elected people to represent us in the senate, and then we have our selections ignored. The Prime Minister, almost always from Quebec, appoints one of his liberal cronies to represent Alberta in the senate. That's not only ridiculous, it's insulting. It's a blatant example of how central Canada dictates how the rest of Canada should think, act, and be governed. Their opinions are ignored.

The current senate has got to go, simple as that.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Asher

Since when could a regionally-based senate even propose bills?

It's impossible to have a government based out of the interests of Western and Maritime Canada alone.

No it isn't. Toss in some stuff in Western Ontario and you've got a majority in Commons (just like the majority Liberals picked up the requisite seats in the West and Maritimes)

Or what about the Mulroney PC which had majorities based in the West and QC.

Where was the protection for Ontario?

[Asher]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
No it isn't. Toss in some stuff in Western Ontario and you've got a majority in Commons (just like the majority Liberals picked up the requisite seats in the West and Maritimes)

Or what about the Mulroney PC which had majorities based in the West and QC.

Where was the protection for Ontario?

Since when does Ontario need protection? When have they ever been exploited?

And how do those exploits compare to stuff like Quebec raping Newfoundland of its hydro, or the Liberals raping Alberta of its energy revenues?

[Ben Kenobi]

Yes, "Central Canada" has more than half the population of Canada. It therefore deserves more than half the representation. In all chambers of our government.

Including the judiciary? So that is why there is a quota on Supreme court justices from Quebec. I am proposing a trade off, in having rep by pop in the Commons, so that Central Canada will be proportionally represented in parliament. If you believe that Central Canada ought to be proportionally, rather then over proportionally represented, then I don't see why you would reject rep by pop in the Commons.

Now, for the Senate. Canada is a federal union and not a legislative union. This means a balance between representation by population, and regional representation. We already attempt to do this through our commons, which really results in Central Canada having all the power, and everyone else has nothing. A Senate where each province has representation, ensures that all parts of canada will have a voice and an influence in Canada. Why do we bother with a castrated senate still on the public purse, when we can elect senators, and make good use of them.

Just because you've decided that Western Canada needs more say doesn't make it so. As is patently obvious from your attitude, your support for the US and Australian-style senate is motivated by your dislike of Central Canada.

Yes, Western Canada is taking the shaft, in both the Commons and the Senate. These changes rectify the imbalance.

[Asher]

Ontario is big enough that even if the conservatives gain power, they can't do anything bad to Ontario.

Even you pointed out that conservatives need support in Ontario to even gain a majority...