The Conservatives are ready to re-visit the issue of subsidies for political parties, a welcome assertion of the importance of individuals in the political syst
From Monday’s Globe and Mail Published on Sunday, Jun. 20, 2010 10:00PM EDT Last updated on Monday, Jun. 21, 2010 12:28PM EDT
The Conservatives are ready to re-visit the issue of subsidies for political parties, a welcome assertion of the importance of individuals in the political system, and a necessary move given the subsidy’s failure to make politics cleaner or more inclusive.
The subsidy gives political parties that got at least 2 per cent of the vote in the last general election $1.95 per year for every vote they received. Dimitri Soudas, Stephen Harper’s director of communications, told La Presse recently that the elimination of the subsidy would be “written in black and white” in the Conserative Party’s next electoral platform. Read more…
Canadians’ tax dollars are being used legally but quite flagrantly to finance a party that wants to break up the country
From Wednesday’s Globe and Mail Published on Wednesday, Aug. 11, 2010 5:00AM EDT Last updated on Wednesday, Aug. 11, 2010 1:46PM EDT
The law of unintended consequences can be seen by a quick reference to Elections Canada’s website.
There, details of party financing are revealed. The story of those details shows how the Liberals have been hurt by their own legislation, and how the Bloc Québécois has walked away the big winner from public financing of parties. Read more…
“No member of our caucus, whatever other title they have, is allowed to invent their own policy,” said Mr. Mulcair. “We take decisions together, parties formulate policies together, and to say that you’re personally in favour of boycott, divestment and sanctions for the only democracy in the Middle East is, as far as I’m concerned, grossly unacceptable.”
Mike De Souza, Canwest News Service · Tuesday, Jun. 15, 2010
NDP deputy leader Libby Davies is in trouble with her own caucus over comments she made at an anti-Israeli protest when she appeared to question the Jewish state’s right to exist, while also suggesting that she believes it should face a boycott and sanctions. Read more…
Candidacy sets stage for three-way race for coveted Florida Senate seat, with Governor Charlie Crist favoured to winKonrad Yakabuski
Consider the following comments about this article before reading it:
Comment 1:
“I am not so sure this will hurt the Republicans in the long run. Likely in the short run, though. Christ, who is definitely a Republican in behaviour, has said he will continue to vote with the Republicans if elected, and is clearly feeling bullied enough that he will tow the party line after this experience, if elected, which is bad. The irony of all this blacklisting by Republicans is that it is becoming elitist where only a few decide Republican policy and who runs. Only a few decide for the entire party which is less input for the rest. Strange times. Those who care about fairness and justness would really hope this ‘experiment’ by extreme Republicans fails miserably.”
and
Comment 2
“Just to help out the Globe and its collection of insulated readers, I am helpfully posting a link to the Politico article on Mr.Charlie and his ‘principled’ crusade. I know I am throwing away all that cash from my winnings on that pool I suggested earlier, but I’m just a helper at heart.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0410/36575.html
Charlie’s chances of winning in November – Slim & None and the bus is all but warmed up as they say.
Charlie’s chances of going out of politics as both a buffoon and a poltroon. Excellent.
I look forward to his forthcoming utter humiliation as a salutatory lesson to all the other poltroons out there in political land. Self-absorption and self-regard are NOT ENOUGH.
You have to both offer something and more importantly BE something.”
Washington — From Friday’s Globe and Mail Published on Friday, Apr. 30, 2010 4:55AM EDT Last updated on Friday, Apr. 30, 2010 10:30AM EDT
It’s Ross Perot in reverse.
Florida Governor Charlie Crist’s move to quit the Republican Party to run as an independent candidate for the U.S. Senate this fall illustrates just how far the GOP has swung right since Mr. Perot ran for president in 1992.
March 15, 2010
Jim Coyle
“By silencing her caucus, Horwath probably did assert her leadership and avoid potential rifts. But, in the doing, she backpedalled from some of the long-standing, and laudable, traditions of her party.
And she gave the young another reason to roll their eyes at a business where fearless minds and independent voices need not apply.”
There are at least two ways of looking at any issue. And Ontario NDP Leader Andrea Horwath was likely getting eyed from a couple of angles for ordering her MPPs not to participate in a forum on whether the province should end public funding of Catholic schools.
On the one hand, Horwath – just a year on the job as leader – demonstrated authority, discipline and a wary eye for what’s historically been an incendiary issue. Read more…
“Consider what happens now when you elect someone to go to Ottawa.
No sooner have they spent their first term in office than they’re emailing home to explain why they voted for something their constituents didn’t want.
The reason, of course, is party discipline. They’re “whipped,” i.e., told to vote with their party or else leave caucus. Most stay and do what they’re told. Without the party, it’s very difficult to get re-elected.”
February 22, 2010
See also the British proposal to elect the members of the House of Lords.
Senator Elaine McCoy
Michael De Adder/Artizans.comStephen Harper has for several years now claimed that his proposed reforms for the Canadian Senate are about bringing accountability and democracy to the much-maligned second chamber.
With his most recent prorogation of Parliament, however, it is clear that for all his rhetoric, his reforms are less about a thoughtful reinvigoration of our political institutions and more about maintaining political power. Read more…
What public function does Parliament serve? Give up?
Ian Hunter
From Wednesday’s Globe and Mail Published on Tuesday, Feb. 09, 2010 6:48PM EST Last updated on Wednesday, Feb. 10, 2010 9:36AM EST
As prorogued parliamentarians twiddle their thumbs, the time is right for voters to ask themselves: Do we need Parliament? Read more…
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/article747167.ece#comments
Note the following comment on this article:
“This is fascinating. Not sure what the legal basis of this decision was, but this is a great victory for democracy in Canada. Each of the Conservative, Liberal and NDP parties are (under their constitutions allowed) to appoint who they want as candidates in any riding. This is how Michael Ignatieff won his seat in Parliament.
The parties have forgotten that Parliamentary democracy is not about the Party but about Parliament. Parliament is made up of MPs which are elected to represent their individual ridings. MPs are not elected to “do the bidding” of the party in power. MPs are elected to represent the constituents in the riding.
Many years ago, MPs started out as Independents – they were beholden to their riding. As Scott Brown put it in his recent victory in the Massachusetts Senate Election, when asked how he would feel in Ted Kennedy’s seat, he said:
“With due respect, it’s not the Teddy Kennedy’s seat. It’s not the Democrat’s seat. It’s the people’s seat!”
The seat in Parliament belongs to the people in that riding. It does not belong to the member and it does not belong to the party. There is a disturbing trend of MPs “crossing the floor”. MPs who “cross the floor” seem to thing that, the seat belongs to them. Wrong. “It’s the people’s seat.”
A party that comes in and overrides the wishes of local riding associations is exhibiting a contempt for the people in the riding.
If parties are allowed to swoop in and decree who is the candidate in the riding, there is no point in having a Parliament at all.
As it stands now, MPs are required to vote the party line. If they don’t they will thrown out of the party. Remember Bill Casey!
Next election – vote for an independent.
Independents are the only candidates who represent the interests of the riding!”
________________________________________
CALGARY — Canadian Press Published on Friday, Mar. 16, 2007 2:15PM EDT Last updated on Tuesday, Mar. 31, 2009 10:20PM EDT
An Alberta judge has overturned the controversial Tory acclamation of Calgary MP Rob Anders and ordered a new nomination meeting.
Court of Queen’s Bench Justice Jed Hawco issued a court order instructing the Conservative Party of Canada to restart the nomination process in Calgary West.
Eleven disgruntled Tories have been fighting Anders’ unchallenged nomination since last summer, claiming the party did not widely advertise important dates or adequately search for qualified candidates.
Robert Hawkes, lawyer for the anti-Anders group, says the ruling is a “good thing” for all Conservative party members.
But because of a potentially imminent federal election, it’s unclear whether there will be enough time for the Calgary constituency to hold another 30-day nomination process.
Mr. Anders has won the Calgary seat four times in a row — each with large majorities — but his time in office has been dogged by controversy. He once made headlines by dismissing former South African president Nelson Mandela as a terrorist and a communist.
Recent Comments