Thursday, June 02, 2016

The Liberals, the NDP, and the Con Apocalypse



You had to see the look on Rona Ambrose's face today. For she wasn't smiling or giggling like she was after she called Justin Trudeau a woman. 

She was screaming like a banshee.

The Liberals and the NDP have finally agreed on something. 

The Cons are on the road to ruin.



And it is the beginning of the Con apocalypse. 

After weeks of criticism and controversy in the House of Commons, the Liberal government has agreed to support an NDP proposal that gives no one party a majority of seats on the committee that will study electoral reform. 

At the NDP's suggestion, seats on the committee would be allotted proportionally according to the popular vote in last year's federal election. The 12-member committee would be composed of five Liberals, three Conservatives, two New Democrats, one member of the Bloc Québécois and Green MP Elizabeth May.


Electoral reform will now almost certainly become a reality. And the Con's hopes of ever forming another government are almost certainly doomed.

So they're not just shocked they're desperate, and like Scott Reid are crying foul.... 



"Support of one other party or indeed of every other party is not a replacement for the people," Reid told reporters. "What's being proposed today is, in my opinion, wildly undemocratic and quite frankly if it leads to the kind of changes the prime minister has favoured all along it will be unconstitutional."

Even though the Cons are the last people in Canada to scream about something being undemocratic or unconstitutional...



And this must be like adding insult to injury. 

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says the government is collaborating better with the opposition parties now because he feared they were behaving too much like the previous government under Stephen Harper.

A Prime Minister willing to surrender his majority on a committee, so his government doesn't look like them...



"We heard the opposition’s concerns, that we were perhaps behaving in a way that was resembling more the previous government than the kind of approach and tone that we promised throughout the electoral campaign and we’re happy to demonstrate that absolutely, we’re looking for ways to better work with our colleagues in the House, to better hear Canadians and their concerns," he said.

Which is truly remarkable. The Con media is trying to portray it as a defeat for the Liberals, but I think it's a brilliant move that makes him look reasonable even magnanimous, while cutting the Cons out of the action.

So it's all good. The NDP gets something constructive to do instead of playing dumb games in parliament. The fabulous Elizabeth May gets a chance to fully participate in the proceedings. And the Bloc gets a chance to...um...show they're still alive !!

But of course the battle to change the way we vote is just beginning.

The committee must decide which system is better for Canadians. They must consult widely so all Canadians have a chance to contribute to the debate.

And above all they must crush the Con demands for a referendum.



Because the reason that ad looks like a funeral announcement is because they know that unless they get one they're DEAD. 

So after first claiming they have no idea why we might want change a system that gave them three election victories in a row...



You can expect them to beat that drum wildly...



And the problem is that the Con media have also been beating the same drum, so at the present time a referendum is favoured by most Canadians. 

As Justin Trudeau’s Liberal government took its first step in overhauling the country’s electoral system, a new poll suggests nearly three-quarters of Canadians say any changes should be put to a national referendum. 

The poll, conducted exclusively for Global News by Ipsos Public Affairs, found 73 per cent of respondents “agree” (37 per cent strongly/36 per cent somewhat) that the Liberals shouldn’t make any changes to the country’s voting system without a national referendum first.

So it will take a massive educational campaign to change their minds, win them over to the idea of electoral reform.

And then convince them that a referendum will only preserve the status quo.

But at least now we're off to a good start at last. And as I've always said, when progressives work together NOTHING can stop us.

Congratulations Liberals, NDPers, Greens, and Blockers.

See you at the mob funeral...



Please click here to recommend this post at Progressive Bloggers

24 comments:

  1. Anonymous10:31 PM

    Well well well looks the chicken has come home to roast.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. hi anon...yes set the oven at 350 degrees, butter up the Cons, pop them in the oven, and cook for at least 50 years... ;)

      Delete
  2. Anonymous10:36 PM

    Where's Bernie these days?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. hi anon...Bernie is campaigning for the big California primary, where according to the latest poll he is in a virtual tie with Hillary Clinton. If he wins that state Hillary might still be ahead, but the super delegates might have to consider their support for her, so who knows what might happen...

      Delete
  3. A possible compromise between the NDP/Green position MMPR, Liberal position of Ranked Ballots, and the Tories belief that it should be decided by referundum could be have a referubdum where FPTP is left OFF the ballot, making the choice between Ranked Ballot and Mixed Member Portonional Representation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. hi Gyor...If the FPTP system was left off the ballot my objections to a referendum would be greatly diminished. For as I'm sure you know when dealing with a choice between the familiar and something new, the status quo tends to prevail. This is the best chance we'll have to convince people that the FPTP system was responsible for the reign of Stephen Harper, while that nightmare is still fresh in people's minds. So we should go for it with all the strength we can muster....

      Delete
    2. Anonymous10:10 AM

      I guess having a limited referendum is enough democracy to swallow in one bite. I guess winning a referendum, like winning an election, requires too much education of the stupid unwashed. Oh well, if we can have a modified Prop Rep, we can have a limited referendum.

      I wonder how it would be perceived if a province (no particular one) were to have a referendum asking if you agree to separation using your own passports or separation still using the Canadian one. That is separation one way or another but no choice of the status quo because the unwashed don't like change.

      Delete
  4. Wish I was on twitter so I could introduce Rempel to the concept of math,

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. hi Steve...I'm afraid that would get you quickly blocked, for I am blocked from her site even though I never sent her a single tweet. As I am from Jason Kenney's Twitter site even though I never sent him a message either....

      Delete
    2. Now Simon, that is real fame. Congradulations.

      Delete
  5. I have no problem with a referendum, as long as the status quo isn't one of the choices. If fact, if the government does have a referendum in which people can choose between two good reform options, that will render the Cons point moot and shut them down.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. hi Kirby...yes as I just told Gyor my objections to a referendum would be greatly reduced if the FPTP system is not on the ballot. But as you can see the Cons who claimed they weren't against the idea of electoral reform are now starting to wail and ask what was wrong with the old system? And some in the Con media are also echoing that question. And of course should it end up on the ballot then our chances of blowing the whole exercise would rise exponentially. For first of all, by the time we decide whether to hold a referendum there would be very little time to organize one, and there could be all kinds of problems which could lead to people challenging the result. And secondly, trying to explain the intricacies of the new systems to those who are too indifferent or too ignorant to follow these matters, would also suffer from a lack of time.
      So again that would tend to favour the status quo. But at least now that the progressive parties have agreed to work together, we can argue that it has broad support and that we don't need a referendum. Finally, having lived through a couple in Quebec, and one in Scotland, I know that they are incredibly divisive, and this country has enough fault lines, so I really don't think it's a useful exercise...

      Delete
    2. Yes, no doubt there are problems with a referendum. But the trade off might be worth it if we take FPTP off the table. It would certainly knee-cap the Cons. The fact is that people overwhelmingly vote for the status quo in referenda and making the status quo not an option would be very unusual for a referendum so it is difficult to say how people would react. Either way, I agree that the Con's claim that we somehow "need" a referendum is utter nonsense. The Con's attempt at making changes to the electoral system were far more sinister and potentially far reaching than anything that is now being suggested and they didn't even want to talk about their changes, let alone bring them up in a referendum.

      Delete
    3. hi Kirby...yes all that you say is true. But I note that the Con media is not only pushing for a referendum, they clearly are also pushing for the FPTP system to be on the ballot. And keep arguing like Rempelstiltskin that the Liberals have not made the case for getting rid of the FPTP system...

      Delete
  6. Anonymous9:29 AM

    Um, we just had a referendum. It's called an election, and Canadians made clear they were disgusted with the harpercons and tossed them on the garbage pile of history.
    Instead, I propose we have a referendum on whether harper should face criminal investigation for tax fraud. It's claimed his personal wealth has ballooned to $5-$6 million. Considering the amount we paid him, the math doesn't add up. Then, we need another referendum to decide if Canadians would be in favour of charging all his ministers for sedition/treason. Isn't it the conservatives who sent millions of our tax dollars to the Republican party?
    Oh, yes let's have many referendums, but let's have them for the right reasons.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. hi anon...I agree, those referendum questions I could go for. We did have an election. We did not have a referendum to give women the vote which was a big deal, and of course the Cons did not bother to consult us when they brought in the Unfair Elections Act in an attempt to suppress the vote.

      Delete
  7. That is one creepy fucking picture of Rona you have happening up there, Simon. Well done!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. hi Omar...that one is just for you, courtesy of a $2 app on my cellphone which I use to take pictures of my friends and show them how they really look... ;)

      Delete
  8. Anonymous10:58 PM

    Not surprised the NDP are favoring proportional representation.Unless there are some strong protections put in place the natural outcome of proportional voting systems are minority governments which then empowers coalition governments.Elbowgate revealed the silly games the NDP were playing with a majority government imagine what would happen if they had a string of minority governments to play with.In an ideal world where politicians of all stripes work together for the common good proportional representation would be a very effective form of government but given the number of clowns that Canadians seem to elect it would be a total disaster. An ineffectual Italian or Greek style of government with a strategy of kicking the can down the road forever.At least a simple ranked ballot would settle things at the ballot box and not in back rooms ....
    RT

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. hi RT...yes, it does seem to tilt the balance in favour of proportional representation. As I've told you before it's the option I presently favour because I would enjoy the sight of progressive politicians exercising our genius for compromise. However, your comments have made me realize that I need to educate myself more thoroughly, and decide whether that would be the best system for a country like Canada. And thanks to you I will take a closer look at the ranked ballot system. And when I do I will also bear in mind that the simpler the new system the better, because if it is too complicated we'll never be able to explain it to many Canadians in time to get a new system up and going...

      Delete
    2. Anonymous9:10 AM

      Hi Simon I am not all that well informed on the intricacies of proportional representation but do realize that some politicians run on very personal objectives once elected and could cause significant mischief with a proportional system.A brief literature search of the Italian proportional system indicates that in order to get back to a majority system of government they proposed giving the party with the largest percentage of the popular vote an extra 50 seats.Of course this proposal went nowhere because the did not have a majority to push it through the legislature.Imagine how utterly dysfunctional the current government would be if the Liberals held only 40% of the seats.Its a bit of a stretch to believe that angry Tom and Pinocchio Rona and their minions would suddenly behave in a much more responsible manner.Perhaps there are safeguards that can be put in place to prevent this type of behavior that I am not aware of.
      RT

      Delete
  9. Anonymous11:52 PM

    Justin continues to amaze me, even after R.E.B's outright lie against him he still wants to work with them. He's a better person than me. I won't forgive or forget that nasty little game she played with his reputation as she let him be smeared around the world while still clinging to the lie. Let's hope she learned about a thing called "personal space" and staying out of it.
    Great pic of Rawna, I think you've really captured her essence. That could be your Cover for the book, but somehow I think Harper should have that honor. Sunny Ways ! Pamela.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. hi Pamela...yes I too thought that Justin's musings about not repeating the mistakes of the Cons was extremely generous and noble. I mean can you imagine Stephen Harper giving an inch on a matter like that one? Or surrendering his majority on any committee? I can't. As for Rawna I'm glad you like that creation. As I told Omar, I was in a bit of a hurry and was having some computer problems (thank you Windows 10) so I used a cheap little app on my cellphone, and I must say I was pleased with the result. So I must do that more often... ;)

      Delete
  10. http://www.pressprogress.ca/conservatives_ran_out_of_ideas_in_2010_says_stephen_harper_ex_chief_of_staff

    ReplyDelete