Poll shows voters want no majority, lots of compromise
It’s not been a glorious week on the Hill. Elizabeth May and the Nazis. Taliban POWs and torture. Sean Doan and the inquisition. John Baird and his brown plan.
All in all, I’d say the country would have been better served if 308 MPs had stayed home and hung out with their constituents, because we didn’t exactly improve the quality of life, let alone the national conversation. QP’s a joke. Cooperation has crapped out. The opposition is testy. The government’s arrogant. Most importantly, the public is pissed. Righteously.
This will be poignantly portrayed tomorrow when my pollster buddy, Dan Baril, releases a groundbreaking new survey that he shared with me a few hours early, tonight. Dan, you may remember, worked for the Green Party for a few months as their hired gun strategist, quitting recently, claiming his client was not taking his advice. He also expressed reservations about the arrangement between the Greens and the Liberals not to run a Grit candidate against May in Central Nova.
In any case, he is a smart guy, quite politically unaligned, and his latest work is a shocker. To my mind, it underscores just how abysmally politicians are failing Canadians, and how deeply suspicious they are of us. This poll clearly demonstrates the last thing in the world people want to do is hand any group in Ottawa a majority government.
Where most pollsters ask, Thinking about a federal election, which party would you be most inclined to vote for at this time?, Dan asked, How many seats do you think each party should ideally have in Parliament?
Right now the answer to the traditional question will be something like, Liberals 31%, Conservatives 30%, NDP, 18%, Greens 13%, Bloc 8%. But when the seat allocation question is asked, here are the results:
Baril says the difference here in polling methodology is that his company, Core Strategies, “specializes in figuring out what Canadians really want, not what politicians want Canadians to want.†If this poll of 1,000 people has validity, and it would appear to be covered with it, then what we have is a national cry for help – for electoral reform, for an end to the way Ottawa now operates, for a far more consensual governance.
In Baril’s House of Commons, neither Cons nor Grits could govern absolutely with the support of only one other party. In fact, to get anything passed, members of at least three parties would have to lend their backing. This suggests the current practice of party block voting could lead to frequent Parliamentary paralysis. It also suggests voters are looking to MPs to be more free agents than trained seals, and it certainly suggests Canadians are looking for leaders who know how to compromise, instead of being blinkered macho ideologues.
Obviously, the People’s Parliament also shows some dangerous signs of PR – proportional representation, where seat counts are tied to the popular vote. This gives the little guys and regional parties – the Greens, the Dippers and the Bloc – vastly bigger caucuses and a major influence on the national agenda. It ends the bizarre electoral realities of today – where 600,000 people voted Green, yet no MPs were elected, and where Stephen Harper’s Conservatives formed a government elected by just 23% of eligible voters.
Some will say this is a recipe for Parliamentary disaster. A prime minister would have to become so through diplomacy, bridge-building and coalition. Policies would need consensus to become law. MPs would have to stray from narrow party platforms, forced to make voting decisions based on the greatest good for the greatest number. Conflict would be counter-productive. Question Period might even yield some answers.
Hey, maybe elections would be about ideas instead of leaders. Maybe voters would concentrate on picking the best citizen-politicians to be MPs, instead of voting for the party with the coolest TV ads. Maybe we would end up respecting those people we send to Ottawa more than the guys who sell used cars (sorry, car guys).
Of course, this will not be the result of the next election. Our first-past-the-post system, combined with the growing trend towards lock-step party discipline, the steady neutering of MPs, and the Presidential, leader-centric style of government which has evolved will likely see the next Parliament looking eerily like the current one, whoever forms government.
But it has to change. My experiences over the past 15 months have underscored this fact. I now know what happens to an MP who tries to put voters ahead of party. It is not the People’s Parliament yet.
154 comments ↓
Have you looked at the Shane Doan petition recently? Read the comments?
There are a lot of uninformed Canadians. Seemingly blissfully ignorant.
Maybe we have the government that we deserve.
I am disheartened.
Interestingly, if you phrase the question as to “which party”, I would be inclined to say none of the above. I can’t say I am happy with any party at the moment.
As a life long small ‘c’ fiscal conservative, I can honestly say that I don’t recognize the current Conservative Party. It is nothing at all like I envisioned it would or should be.
On the other hand, my trust of the Liberal party and my suspicious nature make it truly difficult to even consider them.
If you ask me which candidate I would vote for, I would honestly say I am teetering on the brink of giving my vote to Garth again. (Trust me though, I find this to be an extremely difficult decision).
I continue to believe that of all the politicians on The Hill, none work as hard as Garth. And none, are attempting to communicate with the electorate as he has done.
I do strongly believe that we need more MP’s like Garth. I believe him to be more honorable, and more trustworthy than anyone else in that chamber.
When my children were growing up, we had many discussions at the dinner table about supporting candidates vs supporting political parties. I told them that I thought you should listen to the message from each party, and get to understand how they felt about the issues and then how there thoughts ‘meshed’ with each party. Then I suggested they follow that, unless they were impressed by a particular candidate in their riding. If a particular candidate impressed them, they should seriously consider ignoring party affiliation.
I believe that Garth may be that candidate.
I am also quite sure that when I send my angry emails to Garth at 11:43 PM during the next election campaign, he will respond before midnight; just like he did in the last election. Garth will never let a potential vote slip away from him without a fight.
(If the Conservatives are smart, they will find a way to crash the Blackberry network during the election. That would be Garth’s ‘kryptonite’.)
No idea what you’re talking about bram. Care to let me in on the disheartendness?
As for that forecast of how parliament would look if a vote took place right now…. I would agree with the idea of that. Except the cons would be where the bloc is….and the bloc would be non-separatist
I will totally agree that our current voting system is broken though, and needs a thorough overhaul. I wonder what party would have the balls to do it. I cannot see it happening any time soon thats for sure.
I’ve lived in Alberta for many years. I’ve mostly voted NDP, and as a result, my vote has always been wasted. The only way my vote out here would count for anything, would be to vote Conservative, which isn’t an option for me.
Now, if I were to live in Holland, this wouldn’t happen. Over there, they have a system of proportional representation. My vote would never be wasted. The government is a coalition of different parties. The system seems to work. Why can’t something like this happen here, granting that Holland and Canada are different countries? We need electoral reform badly.
And another thing: in the Dutch House of Commons” (Tweede Kamer) an MP who has a questions, steps forward to a microphone to ask that question without being interrupted. Some minister will then asnwer the question without being interrupted. It’s all quite civilized, and easy to follow.
What happens here during QP makes me sick and makes me feel embarrassed. Ever since Harper and some of his goon-MP’s set foot in the House of Commons, civility has gone out of the window.
What happened in the House prior to Harper and his goon-MP’s wasn’t always something to be proud of. But Harper came in with the promise that he would do things differently: he kept his promise once again because things are done differently: there is no civility left.
Garth, just like the 93% of Cdns that don`t trust politicians you know as well as us that the federal government is dysfunctional and can`t be fixed.
It was founded in corruption and appears to be completely immersed in corruption on some issues and up to it`s ears in most.
Will Canada manage to put decades of political corruption in the past and repair the federal government? If your thinking about it you`re really dreaming, la la land.
A nominated federal government has all the advantages of Baril’s House of Commons without the electioneering, just work or get fired and we`ll send in a new crew.
Will it happen, of course not, why should it. You and your cohorts have already proven that there`s not one of you that has the courage to take on the justice industry let along unseat the corruption that surrounds you.
Example. The markets knew Goodale would drop the income trust tax plan with an election around the corner. All they needed was when, which was what Scott Brison supplied them with.
Carbon trading right out of the annuls of history called the oil for food scam that starved a million Iraqi children, same crew, same idea, same MO.
Gore said the Tory plan on `climate change` was a fraud, he`s right. The Tory plan is for limiting GHG in order to reduce global warming. To say it`s in any way connected to climate change is a fraud. The mean temperature of the Earth has remained constant since 1998, hasn`t warmed up so no global warming. But then Gore is a fraud trying to connect his imaginary global warming to climate change.
Pollution is real, fix that and make plans to adapt to climate change because it`s real even if global warming isn`t. Carbon credit trading to reduce global temperature from it`s the previous 9 years of constant temperature is a bigger fraud than the Tory plan expressed as a climate change plan but not as big a fraud as our federal government.
Get with the program Garth, it`s not going to change so keep your mouth shut and your pockets open and you`ll breeze right on to a great pension.
It sure does have to change and the sooner the better. Looking at those smiley rude faces still makes me angry. They are disrespecting colleagues and the citizens of Canada. Sad, sad, sad.
What is,really,needed is a political party with a compelling vision for the nation .
Something the country can hang their hat on like NAFTA or Meech lake .
Total tax reform so that it is fair and balanced for all levels of society and incomes .
A “Green” plan that makes monetary sense as well as doing the job of reducing GHG’s .
All parties at this juncture are flying blind into the side of a mountain .
Harpo’s agenda (?) was unambitious in the extreme .
What did we get for fifteen months of our investment .
A stupid accountability act that the government (?) ignores on a daily basis.
If no one can excite the electorate with a clear and noble vision ,for this great nation ,we will have a totally dysfunctional HOC into perpetuity and an ongoing series of minority non-governments .
You have to have an issue to fire the electorates imagination .
At this time no party has a handle on any issue with which to move the body-politic .
Reform without substance is a waste of time .
If no party can articulate a clear vision for this nation I will be sorely disappointed and tempted to sit out the next election .
Don’t be disheartened. All we can do is hang in and hope and keep trying to make a difference.
I read a lot of those comments on the Shane Doan petition too. Sigh, but a lot of them were good and a lot of them were angry, a good angry. It’s the few idiots that stand out always tho.
Garth, you are making a huge difference, difficult as it is at times. There will be missteps as we saw this week. I don’t think Elizabeth May’s talk in the church was such a misstep, it was just nasty people willing to twist words so that the ignorant would rise to the bait, and they did.
I like how your friend asks his polling question. I’m surprised the cons still poll so high as that.
Maybe we should start an online apology book like they did after Bush was re-elected in the states. Did you ever see it. People would send in pictures of themselves holding a piece of paper saying “sorry, we tried”. thousands and thousands were sent it. It’s still up.
We could set one up and we could send in pics with notes apologizing to the rest of Canada and the world because Harper never will for such things as ” I’m sorry for Harper not apologizing for the residential schools, but I would like to”. or “I am sorry Harper and O’Conner don’t want to follow the Geneva Conventions, and look after our troops, but I do”. Any of the lies would work.
Anyone who could host the site and monitor the images?
This is the american sorry everyone site.
http://www.sorryeverybody.com/
Just an idea, I’m sure someone could work it together better than I could.
More con corruption?
Oda faces heat over aborted fundraising event
Minister’s riding association still cashed donations from senior members of broadcasting industry, records show
BILL CURRY
From Friday’s Globe and Mail
May 4, 2007 at 4:16 AM EDT
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070504.woda04/BNStory/National/home
My apologies for being off topic, but a number of contributors have expressed interest in this recently. I will ask again, Garth, what is your and your new leaders position on this?
And yes, we desperatly need both electoral and parlementry reform, because what we have right now is simply not working and is not representitive of the voters wishes.
APRIL 25, 2007
NDP WINS FIRST PARLIAMENTARY HEARINGS ON SPP
From behind closed boardroom doors into the public eye, demands Julian
OTTAWA – The Standing Committee on International Trade will hold the first ever hearings on the so-called “Security and Prosperity Partnership” (SPP) of North America thanks to the efforts of NDP International Trade Critic Peter Julian (Burnaby – New Westminster). Julian is pleased that he succeeded in bringing this before the committee and that the members will have the opportunity to study the North American deep integration project that has until now been discussed only behind closed boardroom doors. The televised hearings will be held on April 26, May 1st and 3rd 2007 in Ottawa.
“This is the only the beginning,” stated Julian. “We must have a full and accountable public debate and expose the entire agenda around the SPP. The NDP will continue to push for full parliamentary oversight and public disclosure of SPP”.
The SPP was launched in March of 2005 by the former Martin Liberal government, who played a lead role in creating the SPP, also called deep integration. The SPP is a trilateral initiative to fast-track the integration of Canada and Mexico with the United States. The SPP is now being pushed more aggressively by the Harper Conservative government.
The NDP has been the only party in Canada’s Parliament to oppose the deep integration agenda and to propose an ethical and fair trade model……………………
Much more including full minutes of the hearing at http://www.vivelecanada.ca/article.php/20070502102540179#comments
Personally, I like the idea of a parliament where people have to discuss, negotiate and reach consensus to get things done. The ability to ram things through nearly always ends up with single-minded, dogmatic policy that serves one part of society at the expense of many others.
The problem is that the current minority situation suggests that for some dogmatism will stand in the way of doing what is right for the country.
Yep, Canadians are ignorant. They are not well informed about the issues. When this whole debate about Afghanistan started last year, some people I talked to thought we were fighting the Taliban in Iraq! Duh… How many Canadians actually know what the Greens stand for BESIDES the environment? Not many. I fear future governments will have a difficult time making tough decisions just because people are so tuned out.
It’s partly our own fault. We won’t vote for a candidate if the candidate tells the truth. We want nice promises, vote for the marketing of soap suds campaign and then find out all we got was soap suds.
Sometimes truth is hard, but if you want honesty then don’t punish the candidate for honesty – vote for honesty.
I find the Harper method/tactics offensive. Treating us like children, like we’re stupid. Joe Klein, a well known, well respected political journalist in the U.S. wrote a book about the “new” strategies in the U.S. by the Replican party that plan their strategy by treating people like they’re stupid. The same pollster/strategists that Harper uses.
Perhaps we should reward the candidate that tells the truth, whether we like what they say or not and at some point politicians will get the message that no liar need apply.
ABC or ABS .. take your pick…both will do.
Anything But Conservative
Anything But Steve
CPC are OUT OF CONTROL! When will voters stop the madness?
http://www.globeinvestor.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070503.wtrusts0503/GIStory/
Rest In Peace Jim O’Connell, you will be missed.
(Respected ommentator, journalist Jim O’Connell of Canadian Business Channel RobTV now BNN.)
Good article.
http://www.thestar.com/Unassigned/article/210005
Uncommonly nasty Commons
Halton Liberal MP Garth Turner, a former Conservative, just laughed yesterday in the Commons when the Tories answered a question about high gas prices with talk about a Liberal “conspiracy.” Turner’s own question about income trusts was turned into an attack on his floor-crossing.
“I don’t remember this kind of dysfunctional question period, ever,” said Turner, who served in the Brian Mulroney government in the 1980s and as a cabinet minister under Kim Campbell briefly in the 1990s.
“It’s a very, very partisan, very political government,” Turner said. “They’re a little down in the polls right now, they’re extremely defensive, they’re fighting back tooth and nail.”
Thomas said she is sorry that political debate in Canada contains echoes of the Bush White House. “When they suck up to American presidents, they’re in trouble. I like them better when they defy us,” she said
With your experience in both the Conservatives and teh Liberals how do you feel about the PR system? would it actually result in more of a peoples Parliament as you put it. I understand that the votes would be allocated by party representation accross the country, which in therory is what you are wanting and I have to agree that the greeens not having a single MP with that amount of votes does appear wrong. However, my understanding of how PR would work is that the parties would have a list of 308 people ranked in order of their preference. so if the libs get 30% of the vote then they get their top 92 MP’s (if my maths is anything close to being right!!)
My question is how can this possibly be more democratic that the party central office would pick all the MP’s and essentially the public would have no say at all appart from phich party would pick the most from their list.
Your colleague Ms Fry would surely not have made the Liberal list back when she was running against the sitting Prime Minister at the time however she managed to pull off a great grass roots campaign and win. (i will not get into the merits of that campaign but the example is a good one)
I would be interested what you think
David
I am interested in your views on the PR system – would you support legislation that totally change the current system into a PR system?
David
Garth
Would you support a PR system of voting in Canada?
David
Why are you blocking my posts?
Hey, maybe elections would be about ideas instead of leaders. – Garth
PMSH could have had an election by now, and probably a majority if he had followed through with the ideas that he pushed during the last one. Transparency, accountability, not taxing income trusts etc…etc..etc..
(Promises made….promises broken.)
During an election, isn’t that all we have to go on, ideas, when for the most part, we have only a vague idea of who the candidates for PM are. I know there’s a lot of negative, scare mongering ads from the other parties; the Libs did it to SH, the CPC to Dion, but who takes these negative ads seriously anyway. After the second election, we knew what we were getting with Cretien.
Now we know what we’ll get with Harper. A leopard can’t change his spots.
The same isn’t true of Dion. We know some of his history, but how will he do as a PM? Will he try to follow through with his promises, or flip-flop like a floundering fish just like PMSH?
MPs lose touch with the common Canadian so often its now expected. Take a look at the GST, Mulroney forced it through even though the outcry was huge. Chretien, when confronted at a townhall with his promise to remove the GST, dared the questionner to prove when he said such a thing. Martin set up that tax on foreign ships so that he wouldn’t get charged when he put a Barbados flag on his ship and fired Canadians who worked on his ships and hired Ukranians. Look at the traditional marriage issue, the rallies in support of traditional marriage were huge. The rallies in support of homosexual marriage were tiny at best and yet, our government didn’t listen to Canadians. People’s Parliament? Hah!
Yes, the current system is a mess, but consider why this is so. RP or MMR does not affect the nature of the political animal – the politician and how he operates.
What it does change is the politician’s dependency on constituents. If he does not appeal to them, he won’t get elected. That dependency then is transferred to the party – if he does not appeal to the party, he won’t get one of it’s seats. A Baird or van Loan would be even more of a party soldier, because if he is good to/for the party, the party will reward him with a position on its list or roster that will assure him a safe seat, not just the chance at a cabinet post if he clears the constituency hurdle.
So parties become even more important. And, since the object is getting power or retaining it, they will make any deal or compromise that gets or keeps them there. In other words, parties will continue to govern for their own purposes, and there still won’t be anyone attending to the good of the country. And the Gong Show can’t be cancelled.
I’d rather retain the possibility of a massive change of the pigs at the trough if they don’t acord with the wishes of the voter. PR or MMR will cement all or at least 30% to their seats.
‘Pigs at the trough’? Your comments had some merit until that gratuitous smear. — Garth
You fret about finding a New Vision for Canada? Feggitaboutit. It will never come from our politicians who are occupied discussing Hockey and four letter words. Others have a Bold Vision for North America and A New World Order. Canada will provide the role of the resource base.
CNN Video describing the Vision:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XdxI0zClV_Y
It seems Mr. Williams is positioning himself to take over from Mr. Dion when the Federal Liberals give Mr. Dion his pink slip? What comes after ABC? D for Dion… I’se the b’y that builds the boat!
Is Mr. Williams performing a reverse Mr. Charest?? Time will tell…
“Get a Rope” – get a life and stop believing the manipulative rhetoric. I worked for 20 years in the administration level of public companies. There’s no way on earth that the brokerage/financial institutions didn’t have an instinct that Goodale would have to do something because an election was pending. They thrive on speculation – put two and two together. That’s how they get rich – smart, instinctive speculation.
If you want to believe the CPC and NDP go ahead – but it isn’t unreasonable to think there was nothing illegal going on.
The CPC and NDP and their suspicious timing says it all.
Implementation of the North American Union is “going forward”. Should this be discussed in Parliament under our current “regime”? Noooo, they don’t have the time.
Check the detailed plans and maps for the Security and Prosperity Partnership and links given in this multi-page PDF slideshow from the Sierra Club of Canada site:
http://www.sierraclub.ca/national/postings/water-threats-nafta.pdf
Another tin-foil hat, leftist, nut-job, conspiracy theory?
According to the memorandum signed by Secretary Chertoff: “…The [Security and Prosperity Partnership] has, in addition to identifying a number of new action items, comprehensively rolled up most of our existing homeland security-related policy initiatives with Canada and Mexico, and ongoing action and reporting in the various U.S.-Canada and U.S.-Mexico working groups led by DHS [Department of Homeland Security] should now be driven by a single agenda: the SPP.â€
from Judicial Watch site:
http://www.judicialwatch.org/6216.shtml
CPC are OUT OF CONTROL!
When will voters stop the madness?
http://www.globeinvestor.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070503.wtrusts0503/GIStory/
By Captain George on 05.04.07 8:16 am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjD2KZbnFfg
CPC are OUT OF CONTROL!
When will voters stop the madness?
http://www.globeinvestor.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070503.wtrusts0503/GIStory/
By Captain George on 05.04.07 8:16 am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjD2KZbnFfg
RBC–”Flaherty didn’t do his homework! WE SHOULD WHACK HIM!”
Hey, my RAZZBERRY still works great, even in the fresh saulty air. I just flipped one of yer cuzzins into the dory after I jigged ‘im Sean P.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X93q2a4t9AA
“specializes in figuring out what Canadians really want, not what politicians want Canadians to want” Bull-f**king-shit, if you can’t see the problem when having just wrote about it, geez!
I think you are more of the problem than I am. — Garth
I remember hearing Dion refer to the German method with resepct to PR, etc. Obivously, he’s been considering this issue. He said he is willing to look into this.
I don’t know the German method and will have to try to find out.
“What is,really,needed is a political party with a compelling vision for the nation.”
By Jackie Chan’s Left Hand on 05.04.07 1:53 am
I agree with JCLH. We need a political party that actually speaks for the people – one that is not left wing, or right wing, but does the right thing and the things the people want. Garth, this blog gives you the opportunity to do exactly this. We need more MPs that seek constituents input on issued.
Garth, I had really hoped that while you sat as an independent you would consider starting your own party…a people’s party…i am sure that many MPs would sit with you…and that you would fair well in an election.
Secretary Chertoff: “The [Security and Prosperity Partnership]“***
from Judicial Watch site:
http://www.judicialwatch.org/6216.shtml
By Charles on 05.04.07 9:27 am
*** David Emerson & PMSH made a $720 Million charitable donation to that guy under the softwood lumber agreement to help rebuild N’Orleans! Concurrent with that, Emerson & PMSH [ever pliant servants of Bush-Ido] also gave a $.5 Billion to the US lumber lobby to help them defray their cumulative legal costs
…I’m also heavily involved in a PONZI chain-letter, ‘canine stoop and scoop’
for another cultural endeavour.
Participants will save the accumulated stoop and scoop, co-ordinated by a PERT critical path chart, for routing to Mount Rushmore to begin a likeness of George Dubya Bush-Ido! [er, is it Bush-Idder?]
Man, really like this saulty air. I got a ‘pointment to meet the man, Danny Williams today … I heard, “Danny’s got da bomb.”
REMEMBER YOUR A,B,C,’s you[z]e guys!
Tell all da mainlanders ‘hey’ fer me!
RAZZBERRY still workin’ fine.
Pyotr, you’re not making any sense. Try some ESL classes bud.
By slg on 05.04.07 9:24 am
“”There’s no way on earth that the brokerage/financial institutions didn’t have an instinct that Goodale would have to do something because an election was pending. They thrive on speculation – put two and two together. That’s how they get rich – smart, instinctive speculation.”"
That`s exactly what I said, I repeat the only thing they didn`t have was the timing which Brison gave them.
btw I was once one signature away from starting my own public and learned early what you missed all together.
Here`s a thought.
Start the day off with every MP apologizing to Canadians for the ongoing daily screwup starting the day after an election.
Something like `We apologize for the lack of any type of governance but we have the next election to win`.
Summer,s coming.The house will shut down in a few weeks,in a month or so hockey will be over.
I don’t see any election until 2009.Tammy Faye Harper will go over to the G8 with his make-up artist in hand.
And the country will probably go back to sleep until the guy carrying that big door knocker on his shoulder starts the next session of Parliament,Harper will do a little shuffle and hope we forget.Garth will make sure we don’t.
By Ann on
Mr. Williams as Liberal Leader.Naw,Not now.Election in OCT.But Danny as leader of a small upstart party dedicated to just the interests of NF on a fed level at some point in time.Maybe.
This country though needs a leader who the people trust.Someone who will fight for them.Elected MP,s who will fight for them.
Has anyone come up with an answer to my question yesterday?
Is there any reason for Helena Guergis?
Garth,
So what do you think the reason for this — I like you to think not as a politician but as a scholar?
I think the reason is on everyone of us. We are so much rely on media and politician to think for us; we believe there is a quick black/white answer to every question; we stop short on asking why and chasing for answers… and ultimately, media thinks they can drive up revenue by coming up with shocking news titles; politicians start to treat voters more like animals rather than someone with a functioning brain…
If i were right (i hope i am wrong), do you think human is savable?
cheers
Kudos to Bonnie Brown, Liberal MP for bringing the Security and Prosperity Partnership to the attention of our Parliamentarians.
Thanks to Mr. Turner for providing this Freedom of Expression zone for Canadian citizens. You have created a bridge for us to our representatives.
Even though I have pushed the envelope a number of times aiming my verbal jabs at Garth, he has published these in the true spirit of freedom of speech.
This is off topic but IMHO Jack Layton and Stephen Harper are cut from the same piece of cloth. Note Mr Layton’s stunt of last Friday, sending a letter to the other two opposition parties asking for the liberals to bring up the return to parliment of bill C30. Looked good didn’t it? Made Jack look so green and the liberals so bad because they didn’t do what the wanted and waste their opposition day. But what’s this the letter went out after the deadline for setting the next week’s agenda. Even if all three parties had voted for the motion what would it have accomplished. NOTHING the conservatives are not bound to act upon it. To my mind this just proves that Jack Layton and PMSH are political opporunist.
What I would like to see is a mass floor crossing of all the progressive conservatives who have become tired of being muzzled. Either that or a collabration between all three opposition parties. Ah but that’s not going to happen because that would mean Jack and Giles would no longer be leaders.
Pigs at the trough’? Your comments had some merit until that gratuitous smear. — Garth Re: Herb 05.04.07 8:56 am
But isn’t that the whole point, with yourself excepted, government and opposition MP’s under either system are seen as self serving, either themselves or their party, but definitely not the average Canadian.
‘Pigs at the trough’? Your comments had some merit until that gratuitous smear. — Garth
My “smear” will be gratuitous as soon as you assure me that everyone on the Hill is working the way they are soley for the good of the country.
As I’ve said here several times before, if you can’t change the behaviour of the pigs at the trough, change the pigs.
I’m happy to report that Ontario will include a referendum on Proportional Representation during the next Provincial election in October.
The Ontario Citizens’ Assembly members voted 94-8 in favour of recommending the MMP (Mixed Member Proportional) system. This system would allow you two votes. One vote is to chose a MP to represent your riding with possible competing Party members (more that one candidate per party running in the same riding). The other vote is for the preferred percentage of party representation at Queens Park. This is achieved through extra non-riding seats to help achieve better representation of overall Party votes to seats. This second vote will always count.
http://www.fairvotecanada.org/en/
Which brings us back to the primary purpose of government:
“…to instill, primarily by example, the great personal virtues that need to be prevalent in the huge herd that is to be governed; necessary not only so we can all get along better with one another, but, primarily, — and here I refer directly to the Confucian notion of good government22 — so as to make the governed follow its legitimate directives, willingly and without the expense and destruction of compulsive government force.” 1
Obviously, the People’s Parliament also shows some dangerous signs of PR – proportional representation, where seat counts are tied to the popular vote. This gives the little guys and regional parties – the Greens, the Dippers and the Bloc – vastly bigger caucuses and a major influence on the national agenda.
Actually, not. Little guys – yes. However, one of the few upsides to PR is that it hurts the regionals. Regionals like the Bloc are able to elect a good number of MPs under the current system because they have a very geographically concentrated base of support, and so are able to make first past the post in their area. This is also how the Reform party started.
However, small parties with a national agenda are able to elect few if any members, because even though they have higher support nationally than a regional party, it’s spread thinly and they’re no riding’s top pick.
(But really, I still favour single tranferable ballots, because I distrust and dislike the further entrenching of the parties that PR would bring.)
Maybe voters would concentrate on picking the best citizen-politicians to be MPs, instead of voting for the party with the coolest TV ads.
Wishful thinking, but you may be overestimating the willingness of the average voter to become more knowledgeable in the political field. To someone who doesn’t follow politics between elections, the ads are the personalities.
The smiley guy having so much fun? Evil Jay Hill
http://www.garth.ca/weblog/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/commons55.jpg
Garth, why does the woman behind Jay Hill [to his right], stick her gum behind Hill’s right ear? My word[ings], what a disgusting habit!
By Jackie Chan’s Left Hand on 05.04.07 1:53 am
“What is,really,needed is a political party with a compelling vision for the nation.”
Wow, Jacqueline comes back to earth, well almost.
Why does it have to be a political party that has a compelling vision? How about the people, isn`t that why Garth keeps wading through the partisan buffoonery? To hear what we, the people have in for vision of Canada?
The federal government is totally dysfunctional, non-repairable. The elected federal government must be terminated and replaced with a nominated federal government. It is the only answer and it contains more vision than a federal 24/7 election campaign.
Garth, thanks for the advice on protecting my credibility.
Having the courage to keep this blog running in open mode puts your credibility well ahead of your cohorts but as an elected MP any used car salesman could walk a mile in your shoes.
You could try earning a little credibility for the feds by taking on the justice industry. Tell Toews to answer the question. What happened to the instructions to the courts in implementing the report, `For the Sake of the Children`.
I want to know why my children were intentionally forced to grow up without their father.
It was the most callous, brutal and cruel act I`ve ever personally witnessed on Cdn soil. This is Canada not some communist country and when abuse like this happens on Cdn soil I want some answers for the tens of thousands of children that have suffered similar abuse.
No answers, no credibility. No credibility, no need for an elected federal government.
May I suggest that we have seen this problem at another venerable institution of ours. The problem of the rules and behaviour of the players being contrary to the purpose of the game. The other institution was the Good Old Hockey Game (GOHG). GOHG solved its dysfunctionality by having a committee of players rewrite some rules—not owners, not managers, not coaches but some players. There’s a fellow who might help you with the process. Brendan Shanahan. He headed up the GOHG process. He’s doing extra shift work as write this but check with him in the summer.
Garth, please excuse me for saying this next thing, but you’d not be a good player of Parliament to head up a player’s committee. You’ve thrown too many elbows. Not that the refs noticed and a not everyone can be a finesse player.
A VERBAL LASHING…and justifiably so!
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=c69fe54b-8628-47ca-87c8-040c3891b22f&k=76757
I’m happy to report that Ontario will include a referendum on Proportional Representation during the next Provincial election in October.
The Ontario Citizens’ Assembly members voted 94-8 in favour of recommending the MMP (Mixed Member Proportional) system. This system would allow you two votes. One vote is to chose a MP to represent your riding with possible competing Party members (more that one candidate per party running in the same riding). The other vote is for the preferred percentage of party representation at Queens Park. This is achieved through extra non-riding seats to help achieve better representation of overall Party votes to seats. This second vote will always count.
By Marc Kobayashi on 05.04.07 11:2
I’ll be ready to vote against this when the referendum comes.
Pyotr, you’re not making any sense. Try some ESL classes bud. – Sean P. Hogan.
I understood. I would assume Sean, that you don’t have a dog, or that you don’t stoop and scoop. Just one smell would make you understand the reference to making a fifth head of Dub’ya at Mount Rushmore!
PS. I wonder how QE2 is making out keeping an eye on the colonies? Could she take Dub’ya, Cheney and Rumsey back to the “Tower” with her?
Polling is an inexact pseudo science that no one really has a handle on .
I am sure Mr. Baril makes nice graphs but they do not adequately reflect voter intention .
Here is why :
When reading opinion poll results pay close attention to how large the sample size and “undecided” figures are. A large sample makes for more accurate results, particularly at the regional level. A small undecided figure means that the polling company has probed with follow up questions to finding out who a person is most likely to vote for, and included them in the pool of decided voters. But these leaners, as they’re known, are expressing a preference, not a decision. They can also be quite volatile and either change their party preference or even decide not to vote at all. Also be cautious in reading too much into polls that were conducted with only one day of interviewing. Generally speaking, several days of interviews are thought to be preferable in order to ensure more chance of capturing a wider range of society in the poll’s sample.
And further to this :
Polls results often loosely proclaim “40% of decided voters… etc” However, that final figure may be based on having to prod the respondents at least twice into expressing a preference: 1) “If an election were held today which party would you vote for?” and, if they say don’t know, then they are asked 2) “which party are you leaning towards voting for?” The second group are only leaning and should not be viewed as actual support. But even those who name a party on the first question may be actively considering another party (or whether to vote at all). It would take other specific questions to establish that the voter has settled their choices and is not likely to switch parties.
And to finalize :
Thus, we in the public often miss the fluid nature of public opinion when polls are reported. Every now and again, however, a news item puts a little spot light on the problem. For example, CTV News reported on its web site on December 8, 2005 that almost half of voters were ‘leaners’ or did not know whom to vote for. A large poll by Decima conducted between Dec 7-9 also found that 49% of voters said they could change their minds before election day. These little snippets provide much more insight than the current state of the horse race reporting.
The events of the 2004 election demonstrate the impact of voters changing their minds in the final days of this election. The most recent published poll in the 2006 campaign to reveal the potential for changing party preferences in the dying days of the 2006 camapaing is one conducted by Léger between January 12-17th:
So all polling must be taken with a pound of salt as no one has a fool proof system / program for determing voter intent .
Nik Nanos is always very,very close in his predictions .
Personally I wouldn’t put much stock in this poll though .
I’ll be ready to vote against this when the referendum comes.
By KPK on 05.04.07 12:31 pm
Any comments as to why you would vote against it?
Pyotr, you’re not making any sense. Try some ESL classes bud. – Sean P. Hogan.
By James – Chatham on 05.04.07 12:43 pm
Thanx fer coverin’ my back, James.
Sean, is a religious dyslexic moron trying to un-tie everyone in his common cause.
[But don't tell anyone, because I'm in competition with him, what with being an 8th-day inventist meself.]
James, Pytor’s writing is scatter-brained at best. Hence, my comment.
Well, looks like Harper and Co. have really stepped in it this time. Harper and Co. have repeatedly claimed that the “allegations” of prisoner abuse by the Afghans were simply invented by the “tahliban” and that the government had no evidence that prisoners were in fact being abused. Turns out, that there was plenty of evidence that in fact prisoners were being abused and that the government knew about it.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070504/afghan_scandal_070504/20070504?hub=Canada
This story, along with the escalating amount of evidence coming to light, proves that the Harper government knew that prisoners were being tortured and abused and that they have deliberately lied to Parliament and to the people of Canada. The only other possible explanation, is that Harper and his gang are so grossly incompetent that they had no idea what was going on.
In short If Harper knew about the abuse, then he’s a liar. If he did not know about it, then he’s incompetent.
Actually, I think that what is really going on is a bit of both. Harper and Co. did not know what was going on (i.e. they were incompetent), and then tried to cover up their own incompetence by lying to the Canadian people when the facts became revealed.
By Jackie Chan’s Left Hand on 05.04.07 1:00 pm
“The events of the 2004 election demonstrate the impact of voters changing their minds in the final days of this election.”
The voters didn`t change their mind at the last minute, internal Liberal polls and Liberal door knockers both reported the Liberals were in the lead the whole time. The presstitues manipulated the polls to add to the `solders in the streets` fear Liberal fear tactics to push voters to the Liberals.
It was a fixed election not that it makes a difference and the next one won`t either.
A VERBAL LASHING…and justifiably so!
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=c69fe54b-8628-47ca-87c8-040c3891b22f&k=76757
By Captain George on 05.04.07 12:23 pm
Beautiful throw, right on the plate, from center field, Cap’n. You’re the one they call “the kid with the clothesline arm.” Keep ‘em coming pls.
Added to the pile of “Whack Flim-Flam, Dim-Jim Flaherty, Tony [I can get you temp RN's $1,000/day during this crisis] Clement, and John Boo[!]-Birdie [Who needs a 100Mw generator?] Baird.
Just jigged ‘nother of Sean P Hogan’s cuzzins. Dory’s almost full … Had a couple dozen lines over the side,
…jigged one sea lamprey, prolly looks like Sean P.
Man, this RIM RAZBERRY be a fine technology. Off to see Danny, ‘Has I ever got a bomb fer you,’ Williams soon.
Elias, can you quit the bolding for at least 1 post in a row?
There is no people’s parliament. MP’s are elected as a result of their support base, since the majority of Canadians don’t vote. If you have a strong support you can get elected and start picking up the cushy benefits gor doing very little. Jus consider all the wasted money in question period.
The days are short, the benefits are the best in the country and pension plans are enormous. The MP’s argue that this is to provide equal benefits to industry. But they do much better than industry. As a result we get a large number of MP’s who are in it for the bucks, all you need to do is put up with the monotony. As a result we get what we vote for – lazy, no good and biased representatives. Occassionally we get a representative who wants to do the best for their constituent. I think Garth may be one of these.
Party politics is just what it says. So if you jump on the bandwagon, as a potential MP, of what may be the party to get elected, for whatever reason, you just might get this cushy job.
Fringe parties like the NDP and Green will only ever elect a few members and they’ll always think that they are an important contribution, when in fact they are probably a greater liability. But if I were in a strong union constituence, then I might run as an NDP’er. As the current flock of MP’s have shown, you don’t have to believe in the party line, just need to get that support.
But as you can see what the election numbers we have in government what we deserve. The more we keep the government in a minority the better the opportunity to weed out the rift raft MP’s and right now it looks like over 80% fall into this category.
James, Pytor’s writing is scatter-brained at best. Hence, my comment.
By Sean P. Hogan on 05.04.07 1:29 pm
Maintain that uncharitable attitude, and you’ll miss YOUR God’s COMEUPPANCE!
Elias: Actually, I think that what is really going on is a bit of both. Harper and Co. did not know what was going on (i.e. they were incompetent), and then tried to cover up their own incompetence by lying to the Canadian people when the facts became revealed.
I agree. O’Connor and Day both need to go… and Sandra Buckler should be shown the door as well. This shit has gone on long enough.
It seems a little odd that a poll like this could actually turn out statistically legitimate results. Has Dan Baril posted a full methodology of his poll and subsequent data treatment anywhere?
Any comments as to why you would vote against it?
By Marc Kobayashi on 05.04.07 1:17 pm
Sure.
1) Perpetual minority governments. People vote for a party and their platform. In a minority government you don’t know what you may end up with in terms of government policy ie more unknowns. Not to mention all the time wasted on political haggling.
2) To make the government proportional people are chosen from party lists. The theory being you can get better representation of minorities and women. The problem is no-one directly voted for these people. It makes the system LESS democratic. Under the proposed system, 30% of the legislature would consist of those chosen not by the people but by political parties.
And I have a few more..
“Actually, I think that what is really going on is a bit of both. Harper and Co. did not know what was going on (i.e. they were incompetent), and then tried to cover up their own incompetence by lying to the Canadian people when the facts became revealed.”
Elias,
And/Or the bureaucracy screwed up as well which would explain the interdepartmental fighting.
Jackie Chan’s Left Hand: Without being discourteous, I take issue with your statement that nobody has a handle on polls. Statistics is a well established and well understood scientific discipline. In fact, it is a trivial matter to obtain a highly accurate scientific poll of political opinions or party support. However, your points as relates to published polls are correct. Those polls are not intended to scientifically measure voter intent, they are designed to shape public perception. Typically, these polls are funded by people and organizations with a partisan agenda. Those polls are specifically designed to skew results in favour of one party or issue using one or more “standard” fudging techniques. You illustrated one such technique – another, commonly used technique, is to carefully select the people being polled to “weed out” people who are likely to poll the “wrong” way. This is the primary reason why I pay no attention what ever to “On Line” polls.
YES! Garth, your post is right on the mark my friend!
This is very interesting news. Everyone I’ve talked to about it in the last six months would seem to concur too: no one wants a majority government and they’re sick of wasting their vote in our antiquated electoral system.
Actually, I think that what is really going on is a bit of both. Harper and Co. did not know what was going on (i.e. they were incompetent), and then tried to cover up their own incompetence by lying to the Canadian people when the facts became revealed.
By Elias on 05.04.07 1:29 pm
If this situation weren’t so serious I,d have to laugh at the neo-cons mis-handling of the Afghanistan file .
This is truly troubling and bound to impact on Canada’s sterling reputation for years to come .
We had only just let the Somalia incident fade into the mists of time and now we are confronted with something just as horrendous and bone chilling .
Yes,the neo-cons are mostly idiots who haven’t a clue on how to operate in honesty or above board .
Yes, they deserve to be tossed on the scrap heap of failed governments (?)
Yes, I despise these clowns pretending to represent Canada on the world stage .
Yea, I cannot wait for them to drop the writ so we can send these bozos back to their dirt farms and ranches .
Re: L’affaire Doan. Final thoughts; Jeffrey Simpson sums it up quite nicely in the G&M today:
The Liberals lit this flame with the frivolous stunt of Mr. Coderre’s lawsuit. Liberal leader Stephane Dion, who is looking more gutless every day, caved to the claque of Quebec MPs seeking to make hay from the Doan non-affair.
The Bloc’s performance was predictable. The party uses these tactics to stoke resentments in Quebec. The Liberal and NDP performances, by contrast, were disgusting. The Conservative effort was anodyne and weak, since none of their MPs would call a halt to the kangaroo court that made the Commons look like an ass.”
Well said. Not a good day for parliament at all. Each and every one of them should be deeply ashamed, and ought to apologize to the Canadian people.
SPP – Security & Prosperity Partnership
- USA, Canada, Mexico
“Presentation on the SPP to the International Trade Committee (PDF), Maude Barlow, National Chairperson, The Council of Canadians, May 1, 2007″
http://www.canadians.org/DI/documents/trade_committee_presentation_May107.pdf
I fail to see how this new survey “specializes in figuring out what Canadians really want, not what politicians want Canadians to want.â€
The results (percentage of support)are not significantly different than the recent polling results of any number of competing firms – Decima for example.
So, how one could then draw conclusions between the methodologies, as Baril has done, is questionable to me.
While you suggest he is “quite politically unaligned”, you have on this blog acknowledged he has and continues to provide free advice to you (which you failed to mention here).
Also, he has stated on his own blogsite that he had advised Elizabeth May, in Feb to “follow my then advice which was, in light of the Greens failure to land Garth Turner, for Elizabeth to also join the Liberals with a good chance of becoming Environment Minister, or worse case scenario, environment critic for the official opposition.”
Any quid pro quo going on here in promoting his polling results and methodology?
Get serious and stop insulting us. — Garth
With all due respect Elias .
Statistics to my mind is people caught drunk driving ,the number of assaults per 100,000 et cetera .
Polls and polling numbers are too easily skewed (looking at you Alan Gregg ) to have any real bearing on an election .
SES though is consistently close with their per centage of votes vs. numbers of seats obtained .
Political parties pay polling firms for results (push polls ) as well as internal polling .
I’d love to be a fly on the wall when Harpo is read his latest internal polling numbers / results.
Bet he blows a gasket .
Totally agree on ignoring polls .
The only one that counts is election day.
Elias, can you quit the bolding for at least 1 post in a row?
By Sean P. Hogan on 05.04.07 1:46 pm
Temper, Temper now, Sean P. Hogan. We all know about Orwell, who explained your type thoroughly. There are several helpful sources ‘out there’ that differentiate between right brain and left brain conflicts.
I didn’t realize it ’til now, but the Neanderthal’s brain was much larger.
“Oddly, the Neanderthal people who failed to evolve into humans already had a brain size of 1500 cc — larger than modern man.”
Is that the basis for your feeling inadequate, Sean? Feeling like a throwback, in need of a rigid system to function?
Helpful anecdotal would be Pink Floyd’s Learning to Fly.
There, there, there! I just saved you $50 for your first psychotherapy session.
Ed Brooks: Jeffrey Simpson hit the ubiquitous nail on its prominent head with a twenty-pound sledge.
This infantile travesty of puerile interference by politicians into the affairs of athletes is being noticed — and ridiculed — around the world:
http://krohniskt.wordpress.com/2007/05/03/only-in-canada/
Some of you might want to bring this to the attention of your own MPs. Peter Stoeffer has already apologized to his own constituents, according to the radio news this morning.
I think all the people of Canada deserve apologies from their MPs. I think Shane Doan deserves an official apology from the government. And I think that the verminous weasel who started all this crap needs to apologize — in both official languages, not only for his own racist slurs, but for wasting the time and money of the taxpayers of this country!
HARPOON TRYING TO REVIVE AN INCOME TRUST INVESTOR.
http://www.thehammer.ca/content/2004/0430/images/stephen_harper_wake_up.jpg
“There is no people’s parliament. MP’s are elected as a result of their support base, since the majority of Canadians don’t vote.” By Bill R on 05.04.07 1:46 pm
Really? I must have missed when our national voter participation levels dropped below 50% of eligible voters. I am sure you can point all of us to where this is documented, right? Seeing as this is the first assertion of fact you are making it is important that it is actually factual, yet this does not track with everything I know on this point. So here is your chance to show I am wrong and you are right, just provide your source for this assertion of fact.
1) Perpetual minority governments. People vote for a party and their platform. In a minority government you don’t know what you may end up with in terms of government policy ie more unknowns. Not to mention all the time wasted on political haggling.
2) To make the government proportional people are chosen from party lists. The theory being you can get better representation of minorities and women. The problem is no-one directly voted for these people. It makes the system LESS democratic. Under the proposed system, 30% of the legislature would consist of those chosen not by the people but by political parties.
And I have a few more..
By KPK on 05.04.07 1:59 pm
The point of Garth post is that most Canadians don’t want majority governments anymore. Time used to on “political haggling” to arrive at a consensus is not wasted in my opinion. It’s what a true democracy should be.
An overwhelming 98 to 7 of Ontario Citizens’ Assembly members voted in favour of recommending Proportional Representation. These where randomly picked people from all ages across Canada (not from a bias think-tank). This displays that when people are educated about voting systems, with input from other Canadians who shared their values and concepts of democracy, our current first-past-the-post system is highly undemocratic.
How can you justify representation solely based on physical lines of riding boundaries which can divide votes? Do you honestly believe The Block Quebecois should have so many seats, and the Greens should have absolutely none? I find our current system completely absurd when elected MPs are too often required to tow the party line regardless of any negative impact on their respective constituency. The local effectiveness of “higher quality” MPs you may get in our first-past-the-post system is being completely negated. This is not an effective democracy, it’s become a proverbial “c$%p-shoot”.
James, Pytor’s writing is scatter-brained at best. Hence, my comment.
By Sean P. Hogan on 05.04.07 1:29 pm
Maybe, but it happens to us all at times. And that’s a good thing, because a little humour goes a long way.
Problem is some of us bloggers get a little bit too serious just to realise how stupid we look!
So if you are a religious nut, go watch the irreverant “Life of Brian” and “Take a look on the bright side of life!” (But watch out for the bad 70’s non politically correct language…ooops….the whole film is politically incorrect!)
The above poll isn’t worth spit. The Cons have lost the confidence of Canadians and aren’t likely to get it back any time soon. The Liberals have been tarnished but this is beginning to wear off and the previous 13 years of Liberal rule is starting to look pretty good. Harper is toast. Jack Layton talks the talk, talks the talk, talks the talk….does he ever do anything else? May may but is more likely “May not.” People want a sense of security, affordable housing, help with their childrn’s post secondary education and the ability to save a few dollars for a rainy day….a meaningful tax cut would help. Clean air, a safe environment and concern for the climate are in the mix but they don’t want to be frightened by the “Chicken Little syndrome.” They will vote for fairness, good judgement, integrity, accounatability, and a governament that is efficient and forward looking. If Dion can learn to walk softly and carry a big stick,look the people in the eye and honestly say “I hear you, I hear you, he has 165-175 seats on election day.
Nik Nanos’ impression of the Baril poll:
Nik here – Thanks for the post and the comment. I’ve never seen this line of questioning before. Unfortunately or fortunately we are all limited on the research front by the system within which we find ourselves. If we were in a democracy with proportional representation this would be more relevant but still likely biased in my opinion. There are two inherent flaws in this line of questioning. First, there is a likely bias against anyone forming a majority and, second, it is likely biased in that it over represents minority/small parties. My sense is that the majority/minority trend is cyclical and we are in a minority cycle right now. As the comment on “polling as to what Canadians want”…my personal preference is to “poll on what Canadians actually think.”
Cheers – NJN
Impressions by Nik are believable as he was out by 0.01 per cent in the last election .
Makes perfect sense to me .
Neat methodology.
When we adopted our current system, (and I date that at around 1837) we were a country of fewer than 1 million, of which the franchise was very restricted, and the ridings were largely rural.
The system doesn’t match the current realities, and sadly, we have an ammending formula in the constitution, which, according to the “five region veto” version and subsequent agreements between the provinces, requires the assent of every single province except for either Saskatchewan or Manitoba (depending on which way they vote with Alberta).
(And yes…under an agreement with Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and PEI, any effort must have PEI’s consent.)
There are solutions that do not require constitutional change however.
There are solutions that do not require constitutional change however.
By LoH_Numa on 05.04.07 5:33 pm
And they are ?
Get serious and stop insulting us. — Garth
A Peter Van Loan type of response to a serious question.
Notwithstanding that he is a competitor to Mr. Baril, I thought the comments by Nik Nanos reflected, in a more articulate way, my skepticism with this poll, noted above By Jackie Chan’s Left Hand on 05.04.07 5:09 pm :
As the comment on “polling as to what Canadians wantâ€â€¦my personal preference is to “poll on what Canadians actually think.†Cheers – NJN
On an important issue like this, I’d rather risk insulting two individuals, than the multiple numerous others through asking a simple question, ignored.
You suggested Baril and I were fudging poll results for mutual gain. I say shame on you.– Garth
-
Earlier this week I sent an e-mail to the Speaker of the House regarding the daily misbehaviour in the House of Commons. I also indicated that it is nearly impossible to hear and understand what is being said in QP due to the rude behaviour of some of our elected officials – and you KNOW who you are. I received an e-mail response within two hours from the office of the Speaker and was requested to supply my mailing address, as it is the practice of the Speaker of the House to personally sign each letter that is sent from his office. Now this shows me two things – first of all, Hon. Peter Milliken knows what is being sent to someone who has requested an answer to their question, and secondly, he will actually respond to a question. Whether a staff member actually prepares, prints and makes the letter ready for his signature, which is likely the scenario, does not matter to me. What DOES matter to me is that there will be attention paid to a queation and there will be a response that is physically signed by the politician to whom the request was made. I will advise all faithful bloggers when I receive my response.
In contrast, I have NEVER had any response from my many letters to the PMO, Treasury Board or DND regarding some of the short-changed Canadian soldiers serving a full year in Afghanistan. These MPs (military police) provide all close protection to the Ambassador, Embassy staff, visiting officials, etc., and these MPs have repeatedly been everywhere in Afghanistan, over and over again. Yet they are not to receive a service medal for their year of service, they do not receive tax-free income, nor do they receive regular hazard pay. Auditor General Sheila Fraser touched on an area in her quarterly report this week re: Foreign Affairs being far behind in compensating their Embassy staff members for working in dangerous places, and she specifically mentioned Afghanistan. When my son leaves Afghanistan in July, after nearly 54 weeks of serving there, he will not have a medal to wear on full uniform – a medal to show where he has been and what he has done for his country. The reason why? When an MP works at a Canadian Embassy – even in a war zone – they are paid by the military, but not considered deployed – and that ONE word decides that they are not eligible for the benefits that every other soldier in Afghanistan receives – including ISAF members that work in the building behind the Canadian Embassy in Kabul, and also a reservist who presently works at the Canadian Embassy in Kabul on a 6 month deployment. Although the reservist is not an MP, and does not provide close protection and all of the other duites – this reservist (God bless him for going there) is eligible for all full benefits – because he is deployed, not seconded. How insane is this arrangement? I have been contacting the government – which can change this arrangement with the stroke of a pen in Cabinet, I am told – and no one answers, no responds. Does it take a death of one of these fine soldiers to force the government into action? I hope not, but that seems to be the only time they care.
So a response from the Speaker is a start…and hopefully his response will outline if he has the authority to make the children sit up straight, pay attention and behave. Will let everyone know.
Garth,
I’ve been on the blogs for awhile now and have reached the conclusion that Canada is doomed.I promise not to do this again but read my blog at “stupidity is rampant” for the article
“How can you justify representation solely based on physical lines of riding boundaries which can divide votes? Do you honestly believe The Block Quebecois should have so many seats, and the Greens should have absolutely none?”
Marc Kobayashi
Ridings have roughly equal populations. The winner of the riding is the people’s rep – period.
I’m pretty sure this will not be ratified in the upcoming referendum. It has been rejected in other parts of the country already. People will not be comfortable with 30% of their refs being chosen by the political parties themselves with no public ratification of their choices.
Personally I prefer a non partisan system for of government with NO political parties – kinda like the NWT. People vote for their local reps and who they want to see as Minister of the Environment etc. That means you could get a left winger for Minister of Health and a right winger for Finance. They would have to work together for the government to function.
Garth,
I rarely agree with you but on this you’ve hit a homerun. It’s way past time for the government to govern and the opposition to stop opposing for opposingssake and do what they were elected for. Namely to give us options. But when Dion says the Liberals are opposed to a budget that hasn’t been presented yet then it’s time for him to grow up. I can cite examples of the same thing for all the other parties so don’t take offence. It’s way past time when the opposition parties started offering canadians alternative positions instead of “I oppose everything no matter what”
Is there any reason for Helena Guergis?
By Ted Browne on 05.04.07 11:06 am
I don’t think she likes Tim-Bits. Someone has to cover when they go to chow down? Other than that I see no reason for her at all. I turn down the volume when she gets going. Nails on a chalk board is that voice!
Gilles, I can see it, the future, just you and me babe! Forget Jack, he is not your type.
http://www3.sympatico.ca/ajsomerset/images/0506harper.jpg
http://www.roninnova.ca/
He has a blog as well. Thank goodness, someone who will hopefully set people straight that May is NOT left, never has been, never will be.
When our representative system started in Canada there were no parties. It was the adoption of responsible government that resulted in the creation of disciplined parties.
Putting in practice a system that ingrains the party system and gives more power to the centralized party system and the party leaders does not seem to be to be a solution to the current problems in Canadian politics. We are facing much deeper problems than a change in the electoral system can solve.
http://www.watchermagazine.com/?p=7009
More on this NAU for anyone interested.There’s gotta be something to this.No one could make all this stuff up.
I think we are all dreaming if you think either of the two major parties are ever going to allow PR, is not going to happen people, they both have to much to lose.
K. Murphy, As I have stated before, I think your son’s situation will get worked out eventually, and again tell him not to party away that huge back pay check he will have coming. I know it’s frustrating but that is the bureaucratic way off all government depts.
Here’s a quote from this blog:
“With your experience in both the Conservatives and teh Liberals how do you feel about the PR system? would it actually result in more of a peoples Parliament as you put it. I understand that the votes would be allocated by party representation accross the country, which in therory is what you are wanting and I have to agree that the greeens not having a single MP with that amount of votes does appear wrong. However, my understanding of how PR would work is that the parties would have a list of 308 people ranked in order of their preference. so if the libs get 30% of the vote then they get their top 92 MP’s (if my maths is anything close to being right!!)
My question is how can this possibly be more democratic that the party central office would pick all the MP’s and essentially the public would have no say at all appart from phich party would pick the most from their list.
Your colleague Ms Fry would surely not have made the Liberal list back when she was running against the sitting Prime Minister at the time however she managed to pull off a great grass roots campaign and win. (i will not get into the merits of that campaign but the example is a good one)
I would be interested what you think
David”
So ya, as for what the German system is, having done an Introductory Political Science 1000 Course at MUN (Memorial University of Newfoundland), i’ve learned that the German System is MMP (Mixed-Member Proportional).
What is MMP, you may ask? A Mixed-Member Proportional System is one in which Eligible Voters Receive Two Ballots (sometimes built into a ‘two-in-one’ ballot) on Election day: getting one vote for a local MP and one for a poltical party.
How would this work, some of you have asked? Well, the 1st vote would work just like our current system: whoever gets the plurality (the most votes) wins the Seat (Although you could add runoffs until someone gets 50%+1 if you feel so inclined!)
With the second vote, you’d vote for a political party. Now, how would these votes be tallied you may ask? Well, when you cast your votes for a party, there is usually an X number of seats assigned for proportional rep (the 2nd half of MMP). But prior to this, each party develops ‘a list’ of all their proportional candidates, ranking them from greatest to worst: with candidates closer to the top taking their seats first and more likely to get a seat.
So, for example, if the Greens got 5% of the popular vote nationally on the 2nd ballot, they’d get 5% of the proportional seats (e.g. if we assigned 100 seats for proportional rep, the Greens would then get 5 Seats in the HofC). So ya, the Green Party Leader Elizabeth May would then choose herself(if she put herself in the top 5), as well as the other top 4 candidates.
As for the German Model, it works based on the same general principles, yet they add in a threshold that any political party that gets less than 5% of the national vote gets no proportional representation (in order to avoid extremism). In addition, they only use proportional seats IFF (if and only if) the ‘first-past-the-post seats’(the 1st part of MMP) doesn’t reflect the popular vote.
To use the 2003 NL Provincial Election for example, the NL PCs got approximately 52-54% of those who were eligible to vote AND voted. So ya, if we had an MMP system and it was found (hypothetically) that although the PCs got 52-54% of the popular vote, that they got 75% of the seats, using the German Model, a complex formula is used to determine how many proportional seats are to be assigned UNTIL the popular vote ACCURATELY reflects the number of seats.
So ya, the German MMP System is a slightly more complex version of the Standard MMP System used in Australia and New Zealand.
So, does that clear things up?
On another note, we can make a difference in the way our Government operates: it just takes alot of commitment, time and energy. And mean after all, didn’t Martin Luther King Jr. help rally other people together to pressure the US Fed. Gov’t to give blacks the right to vote? Yes, they did.
An example of a way that young people can get involved and make a difference is through Local Organizations known as Youth Parliaments.
A Youth Parliament is a voluntary assembly of politically active young people who usually meet regionally over one weekend (twice a year) and provincially one a year (Note: I’m using the province of NL as an example).
So, what happens in these Youth Parliaments? Well, at least 3 people are ‘elected’ by their peers from these Youth Parliaments to be ‘Government Ministers’, each of whom put forward a Government Resolution for Debate: unlike our federal system, everyone is free to vote their conscience (everyone’s an independent, except the 3 Government Ministers, the Premiers, as well as the Leader of the Opp. and the 3 Critics).
If they’re passed, the Resolution has written at the end of it who the Resolution is to be forwarded to, so that (using NL as an example again) the Premier, 1 or 2 of his Cabinet, the Prime Minister and 1 or 2 of his Cabinet would receive a Copy of this Resolution.
In addition, Individual Members can put forward PMR’s (Private Member Resolutions), which can be debated just like a Gov’t Resolution. If passed, they too will be sent to Appropriate authorities.
I know this comment is long enough to be a Speech, But I thought that this clears up some issues that other people have brought up, in addition to showing a tangible example of how people can make a difference within our current Political System: Youth Parliaments!
I forgot to mention that being a Part of the St.John’s Regional YP that began meeting 6:30p.m NL Time until around 8PM (because we wanted to add in Question Period for a laugh, although I used my Question to ask the ‘Minister of Energy’ whether he’d like me to borrow him my copy of George Monbiot’s “Heat: How to Stop the Planet from Burning” ,which provides some good research to consider when trying to best figure out how to change where we get our Energy from in a way that’ll Protect our Environment!
Last, I plan on introducing a PMR at the St.John’s Regional Youth Parliament ( A Resolution Concerning 911 Emergency Service and Other Awareness Programs). Currently, only 54% of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians have access to Emergency services through dialing ‘911′: with only the Greater St.John’s and Corner Brook Areas being covered.
Yet, any other part of NL ISN’T covered by these services (According to the President of 911 Emergency Group Inc., which you can check out at http://www.911education.com).
Basically there, you’ll find a Petition for the province of NL, which people of the age of 18 or older than sign to call on Premier Danny Williams to Develop a Provincial Plan on this matter, as well as to develop Education and Awareness Programs and what services are and aren’t available throughout the province!
Indeed, like our Participation.
Take a good look at who is cleaning up with our tax dollars!
http://www.lecornichon.qc.ca/galeries_1/polcan/000059-gilles_duceppe.jpg
Marc K,
I heard interviews with the Chairman of the Assembly, first at the start of the process and then again months later after the study had concluded and a report had been issued, and he was absolutely delighted with the outcome. For him, at the outset it was by no means a forgone conclusion; rather, it became a discovery made en route through the process. He was categorically convinced in the end of the merit of the system of Mixed-Member Proportional Representation that the Assembly had finally recommended. As a consequence, it will now appear as a referendum question during this Fall’s Ontario election. I for one will be placing my X beside the “Yes”. The only unfortunate thing, if passed, is that we’d have to wait another 4 years to actually see it implemented, since it wouldn’t come into effect until the following election. There was also a suggestion that B.C. will try again [hopefully this will not become the equivalent of a Quebec Referendum, where one keeps trying until the proponents' desired outcome is attained]. Anyway, if Ontario implements it and the constituents are happy with the results, it’s only a matter of time thereafter for momentum to carry it through to other Provinces and perhaps even Federally (analogous to how rapidly SSM spread through the Courts and Legislatures of the land, once the more progressive Provinces implemented it).
As for the more provincial voters who are opposed to even trying it, there is nothing that casts the change in stone should it proves untenable. It is my understanding that New Zealand switched from First-Past-The-Post to MMPR, back to FPTP, then finally reversed itself once more, with voters finding they preferred MMPR after all [a second analogy here: like an old relationship whose reason for demise is dulled by time; it is not until re-exposure that the previously-effected synapses begin firing once more and reinforce just why the original decision was indeed the correct one].
Canada is not doomed.
We are on to something good here people…
(btw how is the new bike? Nice an’ shiney?)
By Henk Gal on 05.04.07 12:36 am
“And another thing: in the Dutch House of Commons†(Tweede Kamer) an MP who has a questions, steps forward to a microphone to ask that question without being interrupted. Some minister will then asnwer the question without being interrupted. It’s all quite civilized, and easy to follow.
What happens here during QP makes me sick and makes me feel embarrassed. Ever since Harper and some of his goon-MP’s set foot in the House of Commons, civility has gone out of the window.”
Hey, if you ain’t Dutch, you ain’t much.
To KH at 9:33
Thank you, but a large back paycheque is not expected – it is the service medal recognition that is sorely missed. These same MPs have been at KAF, providing security of course, and been at parades at which civilians have received a medal for serving 6 months in Afghanistan. No one begrudges them, not in the least. But it is awfully hard to take, knowing that each one of these MPs are not to be so honoured. This is by far the hardest part. We, his parents, want to see is medal – and hopefully it won’t be one of those damned (sorry Garth), darned things done posthumously – like setting a record straight 30 years after an event. I want a government that just steps up and does the right thing here – certainly not too much to ask. Thank you, off the soapbox, and good night.
Hey K Murphy on 05.04.07 6:20 pm, can you post us the Speaker’s email address or a link to it? I bet 80% of us would like to ask him why QP sounds more like a daycare than, well, a question period.
And to KPK’s
More than 30% of the legislature already consists of those not chosen by the people, in fact we’re looking at about 50% because of the winner takes all system – about 50% (actually calculated as more) of votes are totally wasted. So to me this looks like a 20% increase in efficiency and democracy. Actual numbers are even greater once you see voter apathy give way to voter interest under the new system.
I agree with the bit about a nonpartisan system; maybe the proposed PR system isn’t perfect, but it’s a closer step to that vision.
Jordan, you had us at the first post.
Your second and third totally lost us again however.
Garth, I can now see why you scare the HELL out of “Secrecy Steve”.
In the comments above, the whole country is represented.
From NL to VI there is participation.
Some of it is a waste of time but most is actually interesting.
Interesting and informative. Something our government is NOT!
That said, Please tell Mr Dosanj that it was NOT racial but rather plain old incompetence that got all those people killed. And then ass covering to hide the screw up.
It is an old story in our bureaucracy.
Those guilty will never be brought to justice. Just pensioned off.
By Captain George on 05.04.07 7:37 pm
You realize that picture was taken at a Holocaust memorial.
Shame on you.
Polls mean nothing.
Given the fact I know people, including myself that refuse to answer any pollster; given the fact that many people don’t have regular phones lines; and given the fact that some people like to play with pollsters’ heads, like to fib their responses.
The only true poll is election day.
So given what I saw this past 2 weeks from out so-called “honourable” MPs, bring on the election.
Garth:
You put pen to page to reinforce what most knew about the “House of Clowns” nothing changes, nothing changes. Canadains coast to coast to coast are increasing disguested with all our MP’s.
Garth it is time for you to bring a motion to floor to reform QP to a standard of debate we would expect to see our children and grandchildren particapate in a High Shool or University. To do otherwise would not be providing good goverment and accoutabilty for our children to built their country upon.
David Bakody
Dartmouth N.S.
STEVE DID IT TO INCOME TRUST INVESTORS AND HURT SENIORS AS WELL.
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/sports/story.html?id=653ef609-561c-40bf-82dc-d1ee40a2c47b&p=1
Our tax dollars wasted and soon HARPOON will play cards with someone new at the table. Who will dat guy be me wonders?
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070505.wxduceppe05/BNStory/National/home
To Tyler Martin @ 12:42 am -
Garth posted the address but it may have been a few blogs ago – please go to: spkrOff@parl.gc.ca and you should be linked to Speaker Peter Milliken. I tried the direct link provided earlier and could not connect, but by actually keying in the address, my system allowed it to go through. Good luck! You should receive the same response that I did about requesting your mailing address. If enough of us make our views known, perhaps some action will start humming…
More than 30% of the legislature already consists of those not chosen by the people, in fact we’re looking at about 50% because of the winner takes all system – about 50% (actually calculated as more) of votes are totally wasted. So to me this looks like a 20% increase in efficiency and democracy.
By Tyler Martin
Tyler,
Except for the point that not a single vote would be cast for the individuals on the party lists. That is what concerns me. At least in the system we have now every MP had Xs casted next to their name on ballots.
There should also be a house rule that censures MPs who don’t answer questions directly. There should also be be a rule that disallows similar or duplicate questions from the opposition. Questions about a Minister’s integrity should also be disallowed unless there is PROOF of wrongdoing.
Wainwright – you are wrong. It was a racial thing. You have to think back to the times 22 years ago. In fact, all the experts agree with this view.
Dosjanj(sp?) knows very well. In fact he went through some rough times then – beaten up and all.
Hi aye Catherine,
Simply a picture from google images. No idea where it came from , simply a picture of two despised politicians. So there you have it. Did you know you can purchase Clonidine, Venlafaxine and Xanax on the internet? If you are a Neo-Con, better to just take some Gravol, works fine for my landlubber guests on board my ship “The Gritty Slim”.
Natural on: maybe I should lighten up, but I never cared for that final comment of yours, “If it ain’t Dutch….” Yet, I can’t imagine guys like Harper, Hill, Baird, Anders, Kenney, Solberg, etc. behaving as they do in a Dutch parliament. Even a Dutch MP like Geert Wilders is civilized compared to the MP’s mentioned above. Judging from QP from the time when Harper was in opposition until now, the Conservatives’ program appears to be to smear the Liberals, to blame the Liberals and to chant anti-liberal mantras as often as possible (probably rehearsed in caaucus) instead of answering questions.
They act like a bunch of goons.
I have never been a friend of the Liberals, I remember the “Rat Pack”. But when I see a party that seems to be driven by hatred for the Liberals, then I know that we’re in trouble. Our hockey players are doing more for the reputation of Canada than the behavior of so many MP’s in the House of Commons.
Isn’t it really a HARPOCRISY?
ABC! ABC! ABC! ABC!
http://www.conservative.ca/
Everybody loves to quote Jeffery Simpson as though he is an objective unbiased journalist.
Is it well known that his son works for the Liberal Party.
Or that Gloria Galloway’s husband works for the Liberal Party?
But, don’t let the facts get in the way of a good media spin.
Well,
I missed a few days, but not much it seems.
I was able to view the site from my WiFi laptop, but could not make comments. Not sure why, and was too busy with real life matters to troubleshoot it.
At least Mississauga is modern and quite nice.
Later when there are some comments of interest.
I still am envisioning ‘V’ is for vendatta’ as a great solution failing self-correction by MP’s in HoC!
Anyone willing to buy and ship all the masks and capes? LOL
Garth, you’ve hit the nail on the head… again. But how do we fix it? Form a “None of the Above” Party? Find 308 reasonable, sufficiently irritated people willing to run as candidates and then change their names to Z.. ? Might work even if they didn’t change their names. At least enough to get the system fixed.
http://trustbreaker.blogspot.com/2007/04/some-of-stephen-harpers-broken-promises_05.html
This is an impressive-regressive-depressive list.
For those of us who remember the Liberal Rat Pack when Chretien was opposition leader today’s HoC is tame, tame, tame.
The difference is that it was not televised like today and all we saw were news clips (selectively I might add).
However, in order to get your facts straight I invite people to go to Hansard.
Sheila Copps, Alan Rock, and a gaggle of others were so over the top that their shreiking and muck raking had the entire country ashamed of our parliament.
By Captain George on 05.05.07 10:11 am,
So you’re really telling us is that you have no analytical and research skills.
By Lorraine on 05.05.07 5:19 pm
I remember the so called rat pack.Jeez
I couldn’t stand it.But that was then, what’s happening today still leaves a lot to be desired Since your in the mood for retrospect:Here ya go:
http://harperlies.com/who_is_stephen_harper.html
Re: comments of Lorraine 05.05.07 5:19 PM
What I continue to find disgusting is these constant attempts to excuse the bad behaviour of the new Conservative Government members by comparing to the Liberals whose behaviour was totally unacceptable as well.
I expect our elected representatives to have respect, be honest, and act as mature human beings. If they can’t, lets put people in office than can. Those who applaud the behaviour I see in Parliament are part of the problem.
Garth, you’ve hit the nail on the head… again. But how do we fix it? Form a “None of the Above†Party? Find 308 reasonable, sufficiently irritated people willing to run as candidates and then change their names to Z.. ? Might work even if they didn’t change their names. At least enough to get the system fixed.
By Bun Baxter – Beausejour, MB
LMAO. We can have a government like in that old TV show – the Prisoner. Everyone can have a number instead of a name.
Garth,
I hope you don’t take anything said here to heart as this is the most ill-informed rabble that I’ve ever had the misfortune to read. They are so wrapped up in their own ass*oles that the spicter is around their brain
Someone is going to have a swelled head!
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/world/story.html?id=a6bd1d45-1e95-4dfc-8c84-080b1665a94d&k=69102
By Captain George on 05.04.07 7:37 pm
You realize that picture was taken at a Holocaust memorial.
Shame on you.
By Catherine on 05.05.07 4:23 am
Get a life Catherine. Far, far less offensive than what the cons did and still continue to do to Dion and how they act during QP.
K Murphy,
you must have some charm I don’t. I sent the following e-mail to the Speaker and the party House Leaders on 22 Feb, getting a reply only from Libby Davies’ office:
“I write to express my absolute disgust and disappointment with the way Question Period has been allowed to degenerate into the romper room free-for-all I saw to-day. As a citizen, I have every right to expect those elected as Members of Parliament to behave rationally, professionally, and with a degree of dignity and decorum while performing their duties in the House.
Please remember that you and your colleagues have been sent to the Ottawa to govern Canada either as members of the Government or the Loyal Opposition. You are not there to score political points off each other, exchange cheap shots, settle personal or party scores, or disgust your voters.
As House Leaders, you are there to advise your leaders, implement their direction, and coordinate and regulate the conduct of your MPs. I suggest that you discuss among yourselves and with your leaders whether QP should continue in this manner, or whether party leadership and members should act in accordance with their high responsibilities. You might start by recognizing the Speaker and supporting his efforts to maintain order in the House.”
To Tyler Martin @ 12:42 am -
Garth posted the address but it may have been a few blogs ago – please go to: spkrOff@parl.gc.ca and you should be linked to Speaker Peter Milliken. I tried the direct link provided earlier and could not connect, but by actually keying in the address, my system allowed it to go through. Good luck! You should receive the same response that I did about requesting your mailing address. If enough of us make our views known, perhaps some action will start humming…
By K Murphy on 05.05.07 8:59 am
Well I just sent off a message and actually put my ‘official’ email addy and expect I’ll by on the CSIS watch list. I actually mentioned the words ‘ french revolution’. I’m just so beyond ‘pi**ed’ off with QP.
KPN
Yes and as House Leader, Peter Van Loan gets to dress up as one of those big bubbles to keep the opposition in line. Somehow it would be fitting to see Harper riding around on one of those penny-farthing bicycles, dressed in a blue-and-white striped suit and straw hat. I can just see the campaign signs now…
Wainwright – you are wrong. It was a racial thing. You have to think back to the times 22 years ago. In fact, all the experts agree with this view.
Dosanj knows very well. In fact he went through some rough times then – beaten up and all.
By slg on 05.05.07 9:55 am
Actually I do not dispute that it was somewhat racially based. What I was trying to say was that it was MUCH more based in bureaucratic ass protection than race bashing.
BIGFOOT declares he will support the CPC!
http://www.civitatensis.ca/images/last-lib.jpg
Maybe this is a bit off topic, but remember Elizabeth May’s recent comment referring to Chamberlain and his dealings with the Nazi’s? She shouldn’t have made that statement, nevertheless she’s in “good company”: Peter MacKay made an almost identical statement last year and before him Jack Layton also made a similar statement!! (although these statements had no connection with the environment) Sourse: a tape that was aired on CBC radio a few days ago. Which goes to show how selective the cons’ outrage is! And how short their memories. And how forgiving of their PM when he smeared a new MP by suggesting that somehow, somewehere he had an connection with terrorists….
Hi Garth, i’m guessing you’ve decided to take a long deserved break from posting on the Blog, or are you dealing with some personal family stuff?
Oh well, I guess it’s important not to become obsessed!
SELL OUT CANADA FOR A MILLION DOLLARS?
http://files.myopera.com/klingoncowboy4/albums/96444/Dr_evil_mini_steve.gif
Yes and as House Leader, Peter Van Loan gets to dress up as one of those big bubbles to keep the opposition in line”
Dube,
LMAO There is a bubble reserved for Garth…
Poor Garth cannot get over the fact that Canadians vote with their wallets and the fact that CPC collected ten times more money than LPC in last three months (CPC – five millions to LPC half million). Even NDP collected almost three times more money than LPC (NDP – 1.2 million) .Considering that donation limit is set at $1000 instead of $5400 as it used to be in the “good old days” this disparity is even more significant as it indicates much greater number of supporters of CPC than any fake polls that Garth is posting on his website. All these people who alredy voted with their wallets for CPC have commited themselves to make sure that their money are not going to be wasted. This spells doom for LPC and for Garth’s political fortunes. Last Garth’s statement quote, “My experiences over the past 15 months have underscored this fact. I now know what happens to an MP who tries to put voters ahead of party. It is not the People’s Parliament yet.” just shows how detached from reality Garth really is. Garth Turner “party of one” so full of himself “puts his voters interests first” and this is why he decided to join LPC party of crooks and white collar criminals, LOL.
The hatred and intolerance for others, combined with a moral superiority and the petty vindictive streak of a schoolyard bully which personnifies you, and so many other Stephen Harper supporters, fills me daily with certainty that I made the right coice. Thank you. — Garth
Oh how glib we are!!!!! Haven’t heard anything about the liberal sleep over at Martha Hall Findley’s abode on the weekend. How many of you liberals attended? Just shows one how far this party will go to raise money…..Sleep over? What’s next? I hear its a Lemon aid stand next week.
To Herb and KPN 05.05.07 at 7:29 and 7:49 pm -
I don’t know if I charmed the Speaker Office or not, but thank you. As promised, when I receive the snail mail response, I will let everyone know.
My advice to “the shadow knows” is wake up & smell the coffee, get a little sunshine. Take a walk, do some deep breathing, (excellent for the brain)talk with your fellow men, do some volunteer work, Practice doing & saying something good. Choose a new blog name. You sound like your begining to grow moss.
Hi Garth, i’m guessing you’ve decided to take a long deserved break from posting on the Blog, or are you dealing with some personal family stuff?
Oh well, I guess it’s important not to become obsessed!
By Jordan on 05.05.07 9:19 pm
Spending time with his brand new Honda scooter in all likelihood .
Scooter? Don’t diss my machine! — Garth
Take a walk, do some deep breathing, (excellent for the brain)
Irene with all due respect that supposes that shadow actually has a functioning brain .
Scooter? Don’t diss my machine! — Garth
By Jackie Chan’s Left Hand on 05.06.07 1:16 pm
Note to Garth :
Where the hell have you been ?
Harley riders consistently call their hogs scooters and in the case of the Sportster a piglet .
Sheesh ! Relax
http://www.scooter-trash.com/
Here,get this inta ‘ya .
The hatred and intolerance for others, combined with a moral superiority and the petty vindictive streak of a schoolyard bully which personnifies you, and so many other Stephen Harper supporters, fills me daily with certainty that I made the right coice. Thank you. — Garth
By Karol Karolak on 05.06.07 12:07 am
Not hard to make that kind of money when you turn to thievery and deception to raise money .
Your numbers are way,way off .
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4N3N1MlvVc4
“It’s a mad world “
Interesting stats on the Afghanistan mission :
Nik on the numbers…
Popular wisdom is that elections are rarely fought on foreign policy issues. The upcoming election – if the Afghanistan mission continues on its current course – could be the exception.
Since the election of the Harper government – there has been a correlation between the issues and party support. When the public is focused on domestic issues, the Tory numbers move up and when the focus is foreign policy (code: Afghanistan)…the Tory numbers slide. This is especially true in the province of Quebec – one of the key battlegrounds.
Generally, Canadians are divided on the government’s handling of the mission (44% agree with how the mission is being handled, 48% disagree the rest were unsure). However, 55% of Canadians believe that Canada and NATO together have not deployed the resources necessary to succeed. Sixty seven percent of Canadians think our mission makes Canada more of a terrorist target and 55% of Canadians think that if the casualties continue Canada should pull out (39% of Canadians think that casualties are a necessary part of our mission).
Although the mission may be good at consolidating core Tory support it basically throws a wrench in any effort for the Tories to build a majority coalition (even 40% of committed Conservative supporters think the government should pull out if the casualties continue).
You can share your views, rate the opinions of others, and ask me questions about this poll or any other issue on my blog at http://www.nikonthenumbers.com.
Methodology
Polling between April 26th and May 1st, 2007 (random telephone survey of Canadians, 18 years of age and older). The margin of accuracy will be wider for subgroup samples. Readers should note that the data was weighted for age to match the latest Canadian census results. Results should be considered representative of the populations surveyed. Results may not add up to 100 due to rounding.
Do you think that Canada and NATO together have deployed or not deployed the necessary resources in Afghanistan to succeed?
Canadians (N=1,000, MoE ± 3.1%, 19 times out of 20)
Have deployed necessary resources 30%
Have not deployed necessary resources 55%
Unsure 15%
I am going to read you two statements and I’d like you to tell me which statement best reflects your personal view. [Rotate]
Canadians (N=1,000, MoE ± 3.1%, 19 times out of 20)
Casualties are an unfortunate but necessary part of Canada’s mission in Afghanistan. 39%
If the casualties continue, Canada should pull out of Afghanistan. 55%
Unprompted – Agree with neither statement 6%
Do you agree, somewhat agree, somewhat disagree or disagree with the Conservative Governments management of the mission in Afghanistan?
Canadians (N=1,000, MoE ± 3.1%, 19 times out of 20)
Agree 18%
Somewhat agree 26%
Somewhat disagree 14%
Disagree 34%
Unsure 8%
Do you think Canada’s mission in Afghanistan is making Canada more or less vulnerable to a terrorist attack?
Canadians (N=1,000, MoE ± 3.1%, 19 times out of 20)
More vulnerable 67%
Less vulnerable 18%
Unsure 15%
The detailed tables and methodology are posted on our website at: http://www.sesresearch.com.
Feel free to forward this e-mail. Any use of the poll should identify the source as the “SES Research National Survey.”
Cheers,
JCLH,
STATS? Stats on a Sunday? No STATS on a Sunday! LMAO!
JCLH,
STATS? Stats on a Sunday? No STATS on a Sunday! LMAO!
By Bill-Muskoka on 05.06.07 5:39 pm
Like: “Bodges ? Bodges ? we don’t need no stinkin’ bodges ! ”
LOL
Responses by Dan Baril…
First, my apologies for not responding sooner to some of the comments directed at or toward me above. I was “unplugged†for the weekend at our cottage. Here goes:
TO: JACKIE CHAN’S LEFT HAND ON 05.04.07 1:00 PM:
I disagree that “Polling is an inexact pseudo science that no one really has a handle on.” Some have a much better handle on the science than others, that is true. But to say that “no one” really has a handle on it is factually incorrect. Consumers of the science would do well to choose wisely based on many-many factors including especially he/she who demonstrates the best handle.
I said from the start, the purpose of the main question we highlighted was NOT to show “voter intention” but rather the voter perception of the ideal seat distribution between the major parties. We also asked the standard vote intention question (that’s how we were able to cross-tab the findings by party affiliation) and the results were identical to the Decima number published earlier in the week. Identical.
Your mini-dissertation on best polling practices is not inaccurate, although I don’t see the relevance of your listing some of the points you raise. Our poll was an N=1,000, with the usual margin of +/-3.1% …etc. As stated, we were in field April 26 to April 30 (5 days) not overnight, and like you I am not a fan of adding the lean vote to the decided vote and claiming they are the same.
As for voters changing their impressions, you will scarcely find a pollster who agrees with you more on this point. If you read anything I have written, you will note I am one of the strongest polling and strategy advocates that recognizes just how fast things change today compared to say 20, or even just 10 years ago.
I also agree polls need to be taken with a grain, not a pound, of salt. The margin-of-error does what it is supposed to do. But it is also up to the researcher to design his/her surveys with integrity. It’s far too easy to bias a questionnaire with wording or even just the positioning of a question within a survey. There are sampling and a host of other issues too. I try, like crazy, to account for these influences, not use them to deliberately skew a story. I leave that game for others.
TO: GDL ON 05.04.07 1:55 PM
To alleviate your fears about methodology here it is:
Interviewing
Data collection is conducted via CATI (Computer Assisted Telephone Interviewing) from dialling facilities in Toronto, Montreal, and Ottawa. Approximately 65 CATI stations, in total, are used to facilitate timely completion.
Data collection for this study was conducted April 26h through April 30th 2007.
Quotas
Each month a random sample is generated and the quotas for each region are disproportionately allocated as follows:
Atlantic 100 +/- 9.8%
Quebec 250 +/- 6.2%
Ontario 325 +/- 5.4%
Man/Sask 100 +/- 9.8%
Alberta 100 +/- 9.8%
BC 125 +/- 8.8%
Canada 1000 +/- 3.1%
Within the regional quotas assigned for Quebec, Ontario and British Columbia, CMA (Census Metropolitan Area) quotas are instilled to maintain an adequate number of completed interviews in Canada’s three largest markets; Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal. The data is weighted in tabulation to replicate actual population distribution by age and sex within region according to the 2001 Census data.
Respondent Qualification
Interviewers must adhere to quotas to ensure that an accurate representation of male and female respondents, 18 years of age or older, are obtained within each region.
All interviewing across the country is conducted by fully bilingual interviewers. The language of interview is “as it falls†on a national basis, which means that the respondent has the opportunity to complete the interview in either English or French, which ever they prefer.
Sampling Techniques
The survey uses the most up-to-date and accurate sample available on the market. Every Canadian household that has a telephone number has an equal chance of being selected for the study. New exchanges are added monthly.
Quality Control
Interviews are conducted by experienced staff who are thoroughly briefed by supervisors to ensure a complete understanding of the questionnaire content and flow. Detailed interviewing instructions form the basis for all briefings and are strictly adhered to, guaranteeing quality and efficiency in results.
Detailed verification and validation procedures at each stage of the process ensure field and data accuracy.
Data Analysis and Delivery
The data is cross-tabulated against a standard set of demographic characteristics including the following:
- Region
- CMA/Non-CMA
- Language
- Household income
- Gender
- Education
- Age of the respondent • Marital status
- Employment status of the respondent • Household size
TO: OLD ENOUGH TO REMEMBER ON 05.04.07 3:14 PM
The two questions posed (not to be confused with methodology) are vastly different from each other. They measure completely different aspects of public perception. The fact the aggregate data (in percentage terms) between the two questions (vote intention and ideal seat distribution) are so close is what makes the conclusions reached so unquestionable, not questionable.
Our survey “specialized in figuring out what Canadians really want, not what politicians want Canadians to want†because it allowed respondents to pick a seat distribution they saw as ideal, not one that forced them into accepting the outcome of a first-past the post system. My comment was also party tongue and cheek. I agree, the question we posed was purely hypothetical, for now, given current leaders of the biggest parties are likely the least interested in some form of PR. But that does not make what Canadians think and want any less relevant, just more frustrating that some of their views seem to fall on deaf ears.
To Garth’s comment that I am “quite politically unaligned,†that statement is correct within the proper context of the professional work I do. In other words I don’t give flowery advice just because a client is paying me for my advice. I always tell it as I (or my research) sees it. If I could be “bought” politically, I’d still be the Green Parties chief strategist. That does not mean I have temper-tantrums and quit if my clients don’t listen and do everything I say, but I do aim for a 80:20 versus a 20:80 ration of listen to don’t listen.
TO: JACKIE CHAN’S LEFT HAND ON 05.04.07 5:09 PM
I’d never seen this line of questioning either, until I thought of it. I think that’s what makes it so unique and is giving people food for thought.
It is factually incorrect to say the line of questioning is flawed because “there is a likely bias against anyone forming a majority.” Not so. If we were in a period in which Canadians were adamant they wanted a Majority and our poll suggested otherwise, then you could possibly say there was a bias against reality. But the truth of the mater is Canadians are split on the Majority/Minority debate and our data could not be more accurate, and unbiased, in reflecting Canadians feelings on this particular topic.
Secondly, the data do not over represent the small parties. The fact the total Canada seat percentages are so close to the results of the “voter intention” results is proof the smaller parties are not over represented, they are simply not under-represented as some are in Parliament. But the question remains, at somewhere between 10% and 15% support, do Canadians really want roughly 40 Green seats? Personally I think not. And this only confirms that what we need in Canada is not PURE Proportional Representation, but rather SOME FORM OF Proportional Representation. In fact, personally, I would argue for some form of Disproportional Representation that does not put us in a stalled quagmire where nothing gets done, but that also does not completely ignore say 600,000 Greens.
TO: OLD ENOUGH TO REMEMBER ON 05.04.07 6:12 PM
The difference between measuring what Canadians “want†versus what they “think†is, in this particular case, semantics. By answering the question pertaining to the seat distribution they believe would be ideal, Canadians are expressing both what they think and want. Canadians THINK there are problems with the current system and they WANT that to change. If you think I am wrong and want to prove it, produce your own data that suggests Canadians are just peachy with the current system.
Finally and for what it’s worth, I didn’t see Garth’s response as PVL like. A few people here in the comments thread appear to be looking motives, especially ulterior motives, that simply don’t exist. I commissioned this research out of my own pocket and gifted it to the community for no other reason than as a point of interest and for discussion. Had there been a paying client behind it, then maybe you could ask if there was some lobby-like spin to the research. There wasn’t, so please just accept it as I intended it, as food for thought and as a tool some strategists might want to start thinking about. I sure as heck am.
Dan Baril,
May 7, 2007
“The winner of the riding is the people’s rep – period.”
By KPK on 05.04.07 6:30 pm
Uh-huh, and Garth’s “booting” from the Conservatives is living proof of what happens when your rep tries to represent you and your best interests.
Note that you will still have a rep under the Mixed Member Proportional system, elected based purely on their own merits. Hence, higher quality MPs.
The remaining 30% percent that are elected by the Party list ensure that highly valued candidates become MPs regardless if they lost in their riding by one vote.
For example, I honestly believe that Peter McKay is a competent, intelligent, worthy MP who’s values perfectly mesh with the new Conservatives. I also Believe Elizabeth May is competent, intelligent, worthy of becoming an MP, and who’s values perfectly mesh with the Greens. Only one of these individuals, though both are deserving, will go to Ottawa under our current system.
Under our current system, many voters across the country vote for a preferred party, and not the individual. Incompetent party line towing MPs are elected, and quality effective candidates are left unutilized.
Don’t “knee-jerk” react to Proportional Representation. Do some genuine research. You’ll be surprised to find that your initial reasons for not wanting PR will actually be better valued and strengthened under PR.