NDP / Other Parties Thread

[MoMack]

The problem I have with your analogy is that we're not talking about making an election campaign interesting - we're talking about running the country.

The reality is that we have a first past the post system. Therefore the Greens are redundant.

Now I'm all for proportional representation (what good NDPer wouldn't be) but thats not what we have here. On top of that it arguably isn't the best thing given the fact that we are such a rural country and unless we drastically increased the size of parliament proportional rep could really leave some places without a voice.

Sounds like you're discounting their ideas before even hearing them... I don't know their platform now' date=' but i'd like to hear it, and hear it debated alongside the others.

if the bloc can get in the debate, the greens definitely should

AD[/quote']

I am discounting them without hearing the specifics of their platform. The reason is they are redundant and a poorly used resource IMO. My understanding is they originally were a 1 issue party, but have moved away from that. Great. But if they are taking other issues seriously, then why would they not attempt to join and influence the left wing party that has at least an iota of making a difference.

Mind you the same can be said about NDPs moving to the Liberal party, and it happens quite a lot (e.g. Trudeau and the current Health Minister) but the difference is a) the Liberals are much much further to the right (I know all the liberals are going to bite back here - but face it, its true) and the NDP do have a presence which the Green do not.

However, if the Green was truly concerned with having their voice heard, and the environment brought to the forefront they would throw their what 1 or 2% (or was it 4%?) of votes behind the NDP to boost them from 16% or 20% to 20-24%.

And keep in mind the fact that the NDP ALWAY have a much higher proportion of the popular vote then they do seats. I'm not a stats man, and could be wrong, but to me this means that they get quite close in a lot of ridings. The Green vote may be enough to push them over the hump. It may also mean that more people see the NDP as a viable alternative instead of voting Liberal to keep the PCs out. If not now then by the next election.

And for the record - I believe at the current time that Canada is best served with a Liberal Minority and a strong NDP balance of power. At the current time that is.

So yes, I am discounting the Greens without hearing about their platform. And I feel entirely justified in doing so.

Greens should be in too, no doubt!!! It's all about fragmentation... just think how boring the NHL would be with only three teams... Or if Elections were akin to The best team from the NFL having to play the best team from the NHL... and the Championship game was the only thing on CNN.

Welcome to 20th centruy politics, hope the 21st is better, been an interesting start to say the least.

~W

[bradm]

I think I asked this before (and I've read the Wiki info), but I didn't get an answer, so here goes again: in a system with proportional representation, how are regional/riding issues handled? My MP is my representative in the federal government, and if I have an issue with the feds, I can turn to her for help. If MPs are chosen to meet some proportion of the overall vote, irrespective of where the individual votes came from, who, then, is my (and my neighbours') federal representative?

Aloha,

Brad

[SmoothedShredder]

I agree, and will admit that my opinion is that of an Agitator.

There's this documentary called "The Take" which I absolutely love.

Brief Sonapsis: Naomi Klein asks after the G20 in Quebec City why her side had only problems to point out, and no solutions. She went looking for one (which she concluded had to come from outside the boundaries of the system), and she found it in Argentina. After the Economic collapse there and the WTO and IMF left town cleaning out any sellable asset from the factories and then bolting the door shut behind... the workers were left wondering what to do, as the only unsellable moveable assets from the factories.

So here are these workers... and these dormant facotries where they used to work... and no bosses around... and nothing to do (cause, gee willigers, people like to work when push comes to shove), so off the locks come, and just like that industrialist song from loony tunes... they get it going. They start making tiles, and start selling them. They used to profits to rebild hospitals and schools, they teamed up with other industries and created a robust, diverese, and sustainable local economy. I happened in like two years, most of it captured by the director (some older news footage). It was actually an older group of women who reclaimed their textile factory first in the country. They were growning, and fast. Then the IMF noticed. The bosses said "I own that land". And they were shut down. The protest scenes alone are worth watching. Where the passion for protest is usally lead by the youth in North America, it was the Mothers and Grandmothers on the front lines, and blows were exchanged. I CANT BELIEVE THIS ISNT THE MOST TALKED ABOUT MOVIE...

Anyways, the point I'm trying to make comes from this film. In the factories, everyone gets paid the same, and when there is a decision to be made, all the work stops, everyone gathers around and votes... one of the workers comments and I paraphrase:

"Used to be such a big deal before when we voted, becasue we rarely did, and if we lost we would take it hard. Now we vote all the time. Sometimes when you vote you vote for the winning side, sometimes when you vote, you vote for the losing side, but it's never a big deal because we do it all the time.

And if this is the system that can resurect a Factory like a glorious Pheonix from the ashes, whe the IMF and their owners had abandoned them, then this simply is the solution.

So my final point is this... we don't vote enough in Canada... a referendum is another vote, and the last result was damn close... we need another one, and more voting in general, we just have to do it for about 1/1000th the cost of the last election. Has anyone heard of the internet... perhaps the solution lies in there? More votes I say! We should not have to wait so long for progress. Conservatively. Yikes, my stripes.

~W

PS: Here's a wicked page for the site with some links.

The Take

[d_rawk]

Depends, bradm, on the type of PR. It is a wide, wide field. Usually, here, when we talk of PR, we are talking about a MMP system ... you would still have your (directly elected) MP, but your riding (which would probably be slightly larger than it is now) would also have a member selected from a party list depending on percentage of popular vote.

[edit to account for SmoothedShredder's post which happened at the same time as mine:]

I have a longstanding mega-crush on Naomi Klein. That documentary is great.

Although I dislike referenda as a general political tool, because I think that they tend to be divisive, expensive (you addressed this), and reduce complex situations which have a multitude of potential solutions to simple binary yes/no responses. You lose the ability to arbitrate in a meaningful way, and lose all the nuance and subtlety.

However, I am absolutely all for co-operatives and worker-ownership. I think the union movement lost its way a long time ago, and now settles for trying to extract tiny concessions from management. The workers should be fighting for equal ownership and stakes in the companies that they labour for.

Edited December 15, 2005 by Guest

[SmoothedShredder]

I think I asked this before (and I've read the Wiki info), but I didn't get an answer, so here goes again: in a system with proportional representation, how are regional/riding issues handled? My MP is my representative in the federal government, and if I have an issue with the feds, I can turn to her for help. If MPs are chosen to meet some proportion of the overall vote, irrespective of where the individual votes came from, who, then, is my (and my neighbours') federal representative?

Aloha,

Brad

Conversely (or perpendicularily), how often are your needs as a minority ignored becasue your MP has to vote on Party Lines...

I think if power gets transfered from the federal to the Provincial this would solve things (No more Federal Liberals vs. Provincial Liberals vs. No Alligence City Counsillors for example, the coulours would be more colourful and distinct)... any Military fighting abroad should do so under a gloabal banner, so each provice would effectively donate their soliders to the international effort (I'm dreaming big, but the solution seems so simple when you let go of the "national ego")... I mean really what are the Feds good for in General, some sense of "togetherness" that nobody seems to really empower, except when it comes to which group of teams you would prefer to see in the playoffs.

I just think the solution has got to come from within, and then next, powers that are within arms reach. This is IMO a more sustainable system, and one which the Federal government inherantley works against when considered to Provincial scales, and one which local municipalities trump the province. At the tail end of the age of Empires, we should realize that we cannot conquer the world, so there is no need to own wholesale portions of the map.

Hope that answers your representation question Brad. But I don't think it did.

Edited December 15, 2005 by Guest
Had to edit something