It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is the Canadian System Flawed?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 02:10 PM
link   
Taking a look at how we Canadians vote, I really disagree with our format. The people we elect to speak for our communities, are not capable of voicing our opinions due to the fact they have to tow the party line more often then not. Our system is set up for the candidate to brown nose in order to recieve our vote, and then brown nose to the party to pursue their career.

Seems like every election year I find myself in a bind between the individual and the party. The individual I want to represent our area, is not supporting the colors I want our country to support. I am forced to choose between the better man for our area, or the better party for our country and well I think its a decision we as the people should not have to make.

So to my fellow Canadians, to you agree with our election format? Is our southern counterpart a step ahead of us in their format? I think they have room for improvement as well, but they are the lesser of two evils.

Your .02?




posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 02:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by chissler
Is our southern counterpart a step ahead of us in their format?


Definately not because you have a choice between only 2 parties down there. Our system might not work perfectly but I can at least vote for one of many parties with at least 4 of the parties in Canada standing a decent chance at winning some seats.



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 02:39 PM
link   
A good point. But do they really vary on their stances much? Seems like all of them are more then willing to agree with everyone on alot of issues.

Americans do have more than two choices, just the media would not allow you to think it.



posted on Jul, 24 2006 @ 07:07 PM
link   
I too go through the same debate every election, national or provincial. Do I vote for my local candidate as my voice in Parliament/Legislature, or do I vote for the party/leader that best represents me?


It hasn't been a problem for me provincially as of late (I like my local candidate and he is a member of the party of preference and the leader of my choice as well. So voting is really been a formality for me lately.

I don't think an American style would suit us well. To much beauraucracy. Less is more.

I think that this current system is ok, but I have to say that I hope Senators start going through the election process and start contributing to the process. Hell, if not, I can stamp all the bills coming out of the House of Commons for $20/hour.




posted on Jul, 25 2006 @ 11:30 AM
link   
Yeah the selection process of our senators need to be revamped. It should be an elected process not through appointment. Some accountability needs to be installed as well.



posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 09:21 PM
link   
I had a really hard time voting last election for that very reason. The only candidate I liked was from the party I really didn't want to vote for, the NDP. In the end, I went ahead and voted for her, justifying it to myself with the fact that the NDP supports electoral reform.

I prefer our system to that of the USA's, but they do have some good ideas that we could incorporate. I kind of like how they only let the President hang around for two terms. And we definitely need to move to an elected Senate.



posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 09:42 PM
link   
i too as well as a lot of people i know agree that we do need some changes for the same reasons, do i vote for the best representitive from my area or the party leader.

i would love to vote seperately for the leader and area representitive, just as long as there is no electoral collage to ultimately decide who actualy wins, so in effect your vote dosn't actualy count. i also think for amusement we should be able to vote "none of them" in which case if enough people vote that way, they need to pick new people to run and try again. mabe that way we could get rid of all the dead weight canadates.

i will also agree that we need an elected senat. a senat that actualy has a valid function, and apointees must actualy attend and not be in another country most of the time.



posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 09:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by chissler
Taking a look at how we Canadians vote, I really disagree with our format. The people we elect to speak for our communities, are not capable of voicing our opinions due to the fact they have to tow the party line more often then not. Our system is set up for the candidate to brown nose in order to recieve our vote, and then brown nose to the party to pursue their career.


The alternative (in a democracy) to a district system is a party-list system, I think that'd make what you're complaining about even worse.



posted on Aug, 2 2006 @ 03:59 PM
link   
I read a letter to the editor once from a New Zealander who couldn't understand why, with left and centre parties having received more votes, the party now in power was one that doesn't represent the views or the choice of most voters... Together, the NDP and the Libs would've had 131 seats, enough to beat Harper.

His view was that Canada has yet to explore all the possibilities that coalition governments offer. I kind of agree.



posted on Aug, 2 2006 @ 05:04 PM
link   
The party or the candidate - over and over... ad infinitum, we need to elect someone, that's a given. I'm a Libertarian-Socialist (don't ask) and I would love to see our nation take the lead and (gulp, Vic knows he's about to be gang-burnt for his opinion) go way, way, way, back before the time of Whig/Grits/Tories as parties to a time of what was known as "Loose-Fish". Independent candidates - every last one. Look it up in "Ooooooooooold text books" or the net.

The party system - Make 'um ILLEGAL! - they subvert the will of the majority and sometimes the best interests of our citizenry and sovereign identity to the point of killing us. Elect people with who don't have the yolk of Party Policy to limit their (and our by extension) expression of the will of the majority of the people. This won't work (we can't change seemingly - Vic dares all) as there is too much legacy to allow for such a "Tabula Rasa" of self-determination and free expression of ideas and will. We need policies of the "NATIONALLY" representative view not "PARTY" policies that only can really benefit most those supportive of, and bound by, the stated "Party Policy".

I really want something like (Vic sees eyebrows raise and fears human spontaneous combustion for heresy) a Co-operative of elected delgates to a Parliament much like we have now, but with the execution and "maintain-ance" of all government activitiies by a civil service of a caliber and scope better and more permanent than we have now.

Each member of Parliament would be free to do anything their electors required - and be subject to recall as a check-balance.

But who'll create "NATIONAL" policy across all the specific departments and issues... Uh, they would, all 367 or whatever of them. How? By good old fashioned the "best" idea wins Darwinian-logic. Listen, the bureaucrats have the existing policies as rules right? - all these folks have to do is modify existing stuff and handle new emergent and long term issues.

But what about being fair to our cultural and regional interests and minorities - uh, sorry eh, each voice is valued equally through NOT "First Past The Post" but something similar to what's being tried in BC... Kind of a proportional representative vote with 1st choice, 2nd choice, 3rd choice, etc. on your ballot.

Notice how glacially slow things are in ALL our Canadian governments and how inefficient and wasteful the "machinery" is? How it dosesn't do what "WE" want? That'll have to stop and be fixed in at least a couple of ways.

Number one, the Auditor General (we have the best on the planet - you know) has no-holds-barred access to whatever he/she needs in resources and bucks and supra-governmental investigative and prosecutorial clout. Ninja/accountant.

Number two, uh this is the 21st century eh, and a virtual Parliament and voting system is a doable thing so elected members would be able to have BETTER coms within gov't AND (the important bit) stay in their ridings where they are more in contact with you and I (afterall we're THEIR bosses eh). Technology is one of the ways to get out of this can-o-worms Gordian Knot mess.

Number three, the Senate. Click, dial-tone.......... lullabye 'um. G.G. - buh-bye too.

Number 4, you and I as citizens would be issued with a government of Canada citizen's secure digital account if we so desired and we'd still keep all the legacy franchise electorial infrastructure in place and functioning and retire it by attrition. Not voting would be ILLEGAL! - but "gently" enforced as an incentive to participate. If you vote you pay less taxes - how's that?

Number 5, I love municipal governments, we need a federal gov't. I want to "pass" on the provincial level 100% and give them way more autonomy and real power to respond on behalf of their constituents at the local and especially regional level.

Number 6, immigration - gonna shut 'er down for a bit (except for humanitarian emergencies) and get all the folks not working or underemployed or uneducated/whatever in a proccess to get us all working at or near full-sustainable-healthy potential and then we'll open the door. Open it wide. Oh, and work visas, lots. Education visas not one, sorry Canadian schools are for Canadian people only. I don't care how much you'll pay - go elsewhere. We are going to need people, bright creative peaceful Canadian people, of every imaginable sort and MILLIONS of them as full Canadian citizens.

Number 7, no more hypenated Canadians or dual citizen status. ILLEGAL. Would you like to be a Canadian? Do you really want to live HERE IN CANADA permanently? Are you sure? Really, really sure? Not gonna spend half or more of the year elsewhere? OK, sign here on your contract. BTW - violations are ILLEGAL! and subject to tax penalties of the most extreme sort.

Number 8, health care - "one payer" the national purse - no cosmetic procedures, only truly medically neccessary stuff and for God' sake take care of the kiddies and elderly and mentally challenged as if they were - hey they are - family. I've worked as an RN - our health care system is techno-good but organizationally BAD. Want good healthcare organization? Cuba has the best - really. Mostly run by Nurse Practioners - MD's are important and needed but should not be frontline as they screw even the simplest things up to the point of iatrogenicity - been there, done that, got the T Shirt - some get dead.

Number 9, the cyber-risk thing. I want us to have the finest, most advanced and (the most important bit) ETHICAL grinders-of-code workin' for us - not against us - as part of our new "Canadian Services" 20 year recruitment strategy.

Number 9.5, the police and military, no more different agencies - one team, one boss, one goal - "Canadian Services". Oh, yeah and no more CIA on, over, or in, or under this sovereign Canada, thank you - no integrated infrasture for Diebold and Lockeed Info Systems. ILLEGAL!. No private police! ILLEGAL! No spying. ILLEGAL!

Number 10, Foreign affairs. My old boss. First, we get the UN the heck out of NYC and put it in the Maritimes. Second, our UN delegate will be elected during national elections from within the diplomatic corps of our civil service and subject to recall.

Number 11, resources - development of all kinds - crank 'er up large - mostly sustainable development with the rights of the government/people above the corporatti and the ability to nationalize whatever, whenever it is in our best interest as decided by our elected officials. We must (should already) lead the globe in this respect and would be an enormous responsibility requiring a concerted national effort that would insure us as a global player for centuries (if we survive the M-E and Global Warming).

Uh, yeah I'm a Libertarian-Socialist I guess - that's what I call myself - way right by some, way left by others. That's OK. They're only ideas... add stuff/trash stuff as you folks like, it is here for discussion ONLY on the Canadian thread at ATS. Where else? Huh? Eh!... Eh!, Huh? Eh! Salutaions and thanks Amigos-3.

I'm not much of a dee-bater/baiter or anything but I will enjoy "seeing" folks think and respond to this - "It's A Good Thing". Really.

Victor K.
Remember our 9.

[edit on 2-8-2006 by V Kaminski]



posted on Aug, 2 2006 @ 05:09 PM
link   
That's why I don't vote.. I can't trust any of them!



posted on Aug, 2 2006 @ 11:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77

Originally posted by chissler
Taking a look at how we Canadians vote, I really disagree with our format. The people we elect to speak for our communities, are not capable of voicing our opinions due to the fact they have to tow the party line more often then not. Our system is set up for the candidate to brown nose in order to recieve our vote, and then brown nose to the party to pursue their career.


The alternative (in a democracy) to a district system is a party-list system, I think that'd make what you're complaining about even worse.


For one, I ask you to elaborate. (Before I assume anything ofcourse)

How is a system that measures accountability worse?

Todays system does not measure accountability because we can easily pass the blame onto the party line.



posted on Aug, 3 2006 @ 09:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by chissler
For one, I ask you to elaborate. (Before I assume anything ofcourse)

How is a system that measures accountability worse?

Todays system does not measure accountability because we can easily pass the blame onto the party line.


In a party-list system like what exists in countries such as the Netherlands and Israel, you don't vote for a person, you simply vote for a political party. Then representatives are divided by a percentage of the vote nationwide, therefore only giving allegiance to the party without regard to any special needs of any one area of the country, like the district system in the U.S. and Canada and most other democracies use.



posted on Aug, 4 2006 @ 04:54 PM
link   
Yes I understand where your coming from now.

However is the lesser of two evils acceptable? Sure it could be worse, I would cringe at the thought of simply voting for a party and not sure of who will be representing our voice. I just wish the name on the ballot could have more of a say, rather than towing the party line.

We Canadians could have it alot worse in alot of social aspects, this is the same for our electoral process. But we do have room for improvement I feel.



posted on Aug, 6 2006 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Is the Canadian System Flawed?


Take a look on the $20 bill and it shall reveal who really runs the country today. That's not just paying respects to the Queen of times long now past. Canada has never been free from the Venitian Guelf's, period.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join