Proportional Representation

[The Green Barbarian]

The only electoral system change I could support is STV (single transferable vote) coupled with campaign and party financing reform.

Isn't that what Justin wanted? After the bi-partisan committee said that this was just self-serving garbage that the Liberals wanted?

[hobbyguy]

The only electoral system change I could support is STV (single transferable vote) coupled with campaign and party financing reform.

Isn't that what Justin wanted? After the bi-partisan committee said that this was just self-serving garbage that the Liberals wanted?

No ya silly goose. There was a multiparty committee to reach consensus on what should be proposed to Canadians. The CPC, in their usual obstructionist fashion, sabotaged it. Face it, the CPC is toast without vote splitting in a progressive country. Nobody else will dance with them (halitosis?) and the CPC would be shut out forever under PR - so they obstructed, filibustered, and generally sabotaged the effort.

Trudeau correctly realizes that imposing electoral "top down" on Canadians is NOT right. That the CPC sabotaged the correct kind of process is on the CPC clown car, not Trudeau.

None of them wanted campaign and party finance reform. It doesn't matter a whit if you have electoral reform and do NOT chop the heck out the big money industry that politics has become - you would just get more gaming and nonsense. And I don't mean Horgan's nonsense "get big money out of politics" which he switched to having taxpayers pay the salaries of the hordes of "back room boys and girls". I mean something like parties being limited to $10 per month in donations per person, no corporate or union donations, and Elections Canada actually running the campaign mechanism so anyone can run - not just rich lawyers and old money types. None of this garbage like insisting on $300K to be allowed to run for party leader.

[The Green Barbarian]

No ya silly goose.

Yes ya silly goose.

There was a multiparty committee to reach consensus on what should be proposed to Canadians.

Finally - some truth. Yes, on this we can agree.

The CPC, in their usual obstructionist fashion, sabotaged it.

And back we go to the lies. Sigh....

Face it, the CPC is toast without vote splitting in a progressive country.

Oh good grief, back to this "progressive country" BS. Canada is not some zombie-like automaton country that willingly votes for dumb regressive garbage. I realize that this is the myth that those that love communism want to keep peddling, but you look like such fools doing it.

Nobody else will dance with them (halitosis?)

Dumb.

and the CPC would be shut out forever under PR -

Nonsense.

so they obstructed, filibustered, and generally sabotaged the effort.

And more lies.

Trudeau correctly realizes that imposing electoral "top down" on Canadians is NOT right.

What that scumbag "realized" was that someone was calling him on his BS promise on electoral reform. And so he had his minions pull the plug. This is all on the scumbag Justin, no one else, no matter what the BS history revision that happens now.

That the CPC sabotaged the correct kind of process is on the CPC clown car, not Trudeau.

Nope, it's all on the "clown car" Liberals, those guys that hopped in bed with the Chinese communist party, and still lost the election. The Liberals just plain suck.

How Trudeau lost his way on electoral reform

In an alternate universe, Justin Trudeau wasn't standing before the cameras on Tuesday, trying again to explain why he had walked away from a campaign commitment to pursue electoral reform.

Because during June 2015 in that alternate universe, Trudeau had stood before the cameras and vowed that a Liberal government would implement a ranked ballot for electing MPs.

Alas, in reality, Trudeau made an open-ended commitment to reform and vowed it would be in place for 2019. A committee was struck to study the issue, dozens of town hall forums were convened, an online survey was conducted and postcards were mailed to millions of households inviting Canadians to participate.

Only then did Trudeau's government walk away. But only then did Trudeau publicly confront the actual possibilities for reform.

And, as it turns out, his preference for a ranked ballot and his opposition to proportional representation, first stated in 2012, were left standing.

SNIP

Perhaps even more crucially, it is believed that a ranked ballot could benefit the Liberal Party, as a conceivably second-choice for NDP and Conservative votes — the NDP-aligned Broadbent Institute effectively poisoned the chalice in December 2015 when it released an analysis suggesting the Liberals would have won 217 seats had that year's election been conducted under a ranked ballot.

"The NDP were anchored in proportional representation as being the only way forward, and I have been consistent and crystal clear from the beginning of my political career — you can look at the speeches I made here in Ottawa at the convention in 2012 or debates I had onstage, particularly in Halifax during the Liberal leadership — where I think proportional representation would be bad for our country," Trudeau said.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudea ... -1.4179928

[nepal]

Germany recently held their federal election. It’s interesting to see their modified proportional coalition system.

Video showing how Germany elections work:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gn45xqlK0uA

[nucksRnum1]

Germany recently held their federal election. It’s interesting to see their modified proportional coalition system.

Seems Complicated

[hobbyguy]

Yup, the German system, like most PR systems. relies on party lists of political insiders who never face the voters. Any system that utilizes "party lists" is junk in my opinion.

If you have a representative who is bad news, like say Bev Oda or Ramesh Sangha or Erin Weir, instead of getting sent to political wasteland, parties can "hide" them on "party lists".

One of the arguments made for PR is that it makes government more diverse and elects more women. The % of women representatives in Germany is pretty much bang on with the % of women MPs in Canada.

Trudeau's sometimes denigrated "gender balanced" cabinet has worked to propel more women into the upper echelons of the power structure. Some of those women could easily challenge for party leadership and be favorites to win.

Our last election now has 8 LGBTQ2S+ MPs - giving it even more diversity.

More and more when see pictures of elected MPs we see all backgrounds of MPs elected: https://www.hilltimes.com/2021/09/21/mi ... ent/318533

In essence, as the parties themselves seek out more diverse candidates (it just makes political sense) we get closer and closer to the diversity of backgrounds that makes up the mosaic of Canada.

You don't need PR to get diversity of representation, just a society that accepts it and wants it. Overall Canadians have adopted that acceptance and desire - and it is coming to pass.

As I have said before, I can see the point of STV in the context of full political system reform, but not MMP systems, which tend to bog things down and entrench party insiders who actually represent no one, and can not be "fired" by the voters.

[nepal]

.
Polarized Canadian politics as we head toward another federal election. What ever happened to the idea proportional representation for Canada?
.

[GordonH]

.
Polarized Canadian politics as we head toward another federal election. What ever happened to the idea proportional representation for Canada?
.

Just another broken promise by JT.

[rustled]

.
Polarized Canadian politics as we head toward another federal election. What ever happened to the idea proportional representation for Canada?
.

It didn't resonate with voters.

The ranked ballot is FAR easier to understand, and less likely to result in coalitions where politicians are making deals among themselves to keep themselves in power.

[nepal]

.
Electoral boundary manipulation, gerrymandering taints democracy.

Video explaining gerrymandering:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGLRJ12uqmk
.
The next Federal Election outcome might already be determined(rigged), by Gerrymandering electoral boundaries. This may be why your town is being lumped together with some illogical far away town, to cluster party votes in favour of one party.

Those who are politically appointed to draw the electoral boundaries, might be those who largely determine the outcome of the election, not the voters.

Boundary maps: https://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?s ... dex&lang=e

Appointed(by current governing party) positions mainly draw boundary maps: https://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?s ... dex&lang=e

Who draws the Canadian Federal electoral boundary lines? ‘It is chaired by a judge appointed by the chief justice of the province and has two other members appointed by the Speaker of the House of Commons.’

So for BC, who exactly are the people appointed and which parties do they support? Just curious, for transparency sake:

- chief justice of the province; Name/party:

- a judge appointed by the chief justice of the province; Name/party:

- Speaker of the House of Commons; Name/party:

- two other members appointed by the Speaker of the House of Commons; Name/party: Name/party:

The Commission is composed of the Chair, the Honourable Justice, and two members, and an appointed member. Their bios are are available.

More information about the process is available on the federal web site

[Babba_not_Gump]

Oh please, not this again.

[GordonH]

Based on the popular vote in last federal election:
My idea representations based on votes cast. Of someone has to use some mathematical way to continue screw voters over.

Conservatives 114
Liberals 110
NDP 60
Bloc 26
People’s 17
Green’s 11

Of course a liberal & ndp coalition could be the government, if greens jumped on board it would be majority (with ndp running the show).

[hobbyguy]

Based on the popular vote in last federal election:
My idea representations based on votes cast. Of someone has to use some mathematical way to continue screw voters over.

Conservatives 114
Liberals 110
NDP 60
Bloc 26
People’s 17
Green’s 11

Of course a liberal & ndp coalition could be the government, if greens jumped on board it would be majority (with ndp running the show).

The thing you need to keep in mind is that the key word is "representation". If you have any "representatives" selected from a list who do they represent? - only their political party.

There are significant differences in the needs and priorities of say, Fort St.John and Victoria. So even if you were to assign representatives to look after the needs and priorities of those places, you could wind up with a PPC MP in Victoria and a Green Party representative in Ft. St.John. Both of whom would be out of touch with the needs and priorities of that community. It would also be possible that said "representative" has never set foot in the riding assigned to them. Thus the needs and priorities of those significantly different communities would not be expressed.

That's where STV is superior. STV also allows for locally in touch independents who really know the community to have a shot. You might have a former mayor who wants nothing to do with the mainstream parties that would be, in the judgement of the voters, the best to bring their voices to Ottawa. You could then cast your vote for that independent, and place your second choice with party driven candidate.

The end result in an STV election is someone who is a bit of a compromise (democracy is an exercise in compromise) and who would necessarily have to understand the diversity of needs and priorities of the community.

The other thing that STV does is that it works against polarizing politics. Most candidates are going to need second and third choice votes in order to win. That means that they can not simply play "base politics" as we currently see done in Kelowna where 43% "base politics" wins FPTP but might not win with STV - where other candidates have a shot at 57% of the vote.

In the end, all voting is choosing between candidates/policies who do not fully represent your views. You might have one candidate that hits 85% with you and another at 65% and another at 40%. If you can't have the 85% person, then it is obvious that the compromise of the 60% person is far better than the 40% person who will do a terrible job of representing you. You have that option with STV.

And in the end, STV means that MPs can be "fired" at the next election. With MMP lists - a bad and corrupt politician who has "connections" in the party could continue on as an MP forever and the voters could not "fire" them.

While not as "proportional" as MMP systems, STV results in governance that is more adaptable and produces higher quality MPs than MMP. In the end, STV gives better governance - and isn't that the objective??

[Gone_Fishin]

Trudeau just sucked in the votes from Greenies in 2015 with his massive lie that "2015 would be the LAST election with FPTP."

Local Greens were so stupid they withdrew from the election and got hosed by that Liberal MP (what was his name again, the guy that did nothing and then got punted without a pension?).

Trudeau used the dopes from the Greens and many NDP stoolies with a promise he had no intention of ever keeping. That just shows how brain dead the left really is, and how corrupt and disingenuous Justin Trudeau is.

The whole thing was a sham.

[liisgo]

I usually do not defend trudeau, yes he is an idiot. But, as above, I wont give him credit to being able to plan and work out anything himself. Or anyone in his party. All the happenings around this loser liberalism is by the hands of those that control this party. From foreign control to the rich. The liberal party is just their means achieve.
They are making all the orchestrated, manipulating tactics' take place.
Trudeau has zero ability to figure anything out himself.
He's just a puppet.