The Glade 4.0
https://gladerebooted.net/

The cost of political gridlock in Canada
https://gladerebooted.net/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=5863		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Talya [ Thu Mar 31, 2011 10:19 am ]
Post subject:  The cost of political gridlock in Canada
Don't get me wrong - I love the operating results of political gridlock. Canada has had "Minority Governments" since 2004. To make this simple for you two-party system Americans, a "minority government" would be better named a "plurality government." The party that ends up leading the house does not have a majority of seats in parliament. Oh, they probably have more than any other single party, but the other parties can band together to defeat them.

I have loved the results of a Conservative party "minority" in Canada, which we've had under PM Stephen Harper since 2006. Usually, it results in less polarizing, less controversial government actions, because the party in power must get support from outside its own caucus to get anything done. This means we have benefited from Harper's economic sense (usually -- the other three parties in parliament banded together to force him to participate in these ridiculous "stimulus plans" during the economic crisis), but none of his corporate pandering or socially conservative idiocy.

Of course, the downside -- these governments are not stable. During any session, parliament can call for a vote of confidence. (Or, certain critical bills in the system may be labeled a "confidence issue" before the vote - so for instance, if the government fails to pass the budget bill, it can be considered a vote of "no confidence.") "No Confidence" dissolves parliament and forces an election.

No Confidence has been called. We go back to the polls on May 2nd. Again. This will be the 4th Federal Election in 7 years. This appears to have been a bad move for opposition parties. Harper may just have enough public support for a majority in Parliament. I'm hoping he doesn't. I'd rather deal with an election every 2-3 years (normally it's 5) than see any of these parties get carte blanche to put their own crazy **** into place.
Author:  Elmarnieh [ Thu Mar 31, 2011 10:41 am ]
Post subject: 
Who has elections every odd number of years? You crazy Canada people.
Author:  Talya [ Thu Mar 31, 2011 10:55 am ]
Post subject:  Re:
Elmarnieh wrote:
Who has elections every odd number of years? You crazy Canada people.


Technically, any british parliamentary system is the same that way. (UK, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, India, etc.) Hell, any system that allows a "recall vote" (like California did with Davis) can have irregular election periods.
Author:  Stathol [ Thu Mar 31, 2011 12:52 pm ]
Post subject: 
I guess that explains why they're having problems getting election pregnant.
Author:  Hannibal [ Thu Mar 31, 2011 1:01 pm ]
Post subject: 
Birth control can regulate periods too. Maybe France slipped a roofie into Canadas poutine? That would explain Quebec. Perhaps Mexico can give Canada RU486 just in case.
Author:  Talya [ Tue May 03, 2011 8:25 am ]
Post subject: 
Big changes after all is done yesterday. Stephen Harper's Conservatives now have a majority in Canadian Parliament, taking 167 of 308 seats. This will result in some good things, and some bad things I'm sure.

More interesting:
The centrist Liberal party which has been called "Canada's default party" since they seem to hold power about 2/3rds of the time was reduced to a distant third at a paltry 34 seats.

The New Democratic Party (NDP), a pro-union socialist type of party, made huge gains, now the "Official Opposition" for the first time in Canada, taking more than triple their previous number of seats, at 102.

The Bloc Québecois has utterly collapsed. This Québec separatist party has won the majority of seats in its province for two decades straight. This election saw them lose 44 seats, down to a total of 4 (mostly in favor of NDP candiates).

The Green Party has had a major breakthrough, with its leader winning her district, and thereby getting their first representative in Canadian government. Still just one of 308 seats, but it's the first one they've ever had.
Author:  Xequecal [ Tue May 03, 2011 8:41 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The cost of political gridlock in Canada
Does the Canadian parliament work like the UK parliament where the minority party(ies) are all but powerless? In the UK the party leader can tell his party members how to vote on a topic, and refusing to do so is grounds for expulsion. Since parliament appoints the prime minister as well they can pretty much do anything they want.
Author:  Talya [ Tue May 03, 2011 8:56 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The cost of political gridlock in Canada
Xequecal wrote:
Does the Canadian parliament work like the UK parliament where the minority party(ies) are all but powerless? In the UK the party leader can tell his party members how to vote on a topic, and refusing to do so is grounds for expulsion. Since parliament appoints the prime minister as well they can pretty much do anything they want.


Internal party politics are up to the party. If the party leader has enough support in his party, he can lay down the law and anyone who doesn't vote the way he wants, can be kicked out of the party. In very strong majorities with a popular party leader, yes, this usually means the opposition is almost irrelevant in parliament. (See Jean Chretien.) However, in reality, it rarely works this way.

Crack the whip too hard, and you'll have an internal party rebellion. The party leader is only as strong as his support within his party. Force your ministers to vote against their conscience, and you'll either alienate your voters, or be forced to act on your ultimatum. If one person votes against you and you kick them out of the party, they proceed to join an opposition party, and your government is weakened, and the MP you kicked out becomes a living martyr. Others in your party may side with him. The conservatives only have a 12 seat majority, which isn't enough to afford losing several seats.

Lastly, the official opposition party gets a hell of a lot of face time, getting to question your every move, debate every bill, and win over the hearts of the people in the process. Even with a majority government, you've only got about 4-5 years until you've gotta win again.
Author:  FarSky [ Tue May 03, 2011 9:09 am ]
Post subject:  Re:
Stathol wrote:
I guess that explains why they're having problems getting election pregnant.

This made me ALOL.

And now back to your regularly-scheduled thread.
Author:  Lex Luthor [ Tue May 03, 2011 9:18 am ]
Post subject: 
Can the Queen still dissolve the Canadian government if she wishes?
Author:  Xequecal [ Tue May 03, 2011 9:22 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The cost of political gridlock in Canada
Talya wrote:
Xequecal wrote:
Does the Canadian parliament work like the UK parliament where the minority party(ies) are all but powerless? In the UK the party leader can tell his party members how to vote on a topic, and refusing to do so is grounds for expulsion. Since parliament appoints the prime minister as well they can pretty much do anything they want.


Internal party politics are up to the party. If the party leader has enough support in his party, he can lay down the law and anyone who doesn't vote the way he wants, can be kicked out of the party. In very strong majorities with a popular party leader, yes, this usually means the opposition is almost irrelevant in parliament. (See Jean Chretien.) However, in reality, it rarely works this way.

Crack the whip too hard, and you'll have an internal party rebellion. The party leader is only as strong as his support within his party. Force your ministers to vote against their conscience, and you'll either alienate your voters, or be forced to act on your ultimatum. If one person votes against you and you kick them out of the party, they proceed to join an opposition party, and your government is weakened, and the MP you kicked out becomes a living martyr. Others in your party may side with him. The conservatives only have a 12 seat majority, which isn't enough to afford losing several seats.

Lastly, the official opposition party gets a hell of a lot of face time, getting to question your every move, debate every bill, and win over the hearts of the people in the process. Even with a majority government, you've only got about 4-5 years until you've gotta win again.


Yes, but doesn't booting someone from the party remove their ability to vote? Even if they join the opposition, you won't have to worry about them until the next election.
Author:  Talya [ Tue May 03, 2011 9:54 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The cost of political gridlock in Canada
Xequecal wrote:
Yes, but doesn't booting someone from the party remove their ability to vote? Even if they join the opposition, you won't have to worry about them until the next election.


No. They were individually elected by the people of their riding (electoral district) to be a minister of parliament. They retain their seat in parliament on their own merits, their party affiliation is irrelevant. The seat is owned by the representative who won it, not the party they belonged to. They continue to vote as an independant, or a member of whatever party they join.
Author:  Stathol [ Tue May 03, 2011 11:07 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Re:
FarSky wrote:
Stathol wrote:
I guess that explains why they're having problems getting election pregnant.

This made me ALOL.

Necro ALOLs are the best ALOLs.
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/