Canadian Politics

[Nurvingiel]

Alright Canucks, today the Liberals lost a non-confidence vote 133 to 171. The full story is here.

The election will probably be in mid-January. You have the chance to vote for:

• The Bloc Québécois
• The Conservative Party
• The Green Party
• The Liberal Party
• The NDP

Plus an assortment of small parties. However, these five parties are more or less nation-wide.

Do you know who you are going to vote for? Any ideas? Is there anyone you are definitely going to (or not going to) vote for? If so, why?

There are three ways to vote in this country: by party, by candidate, or by leader (and possible PM). You can also spoil your ballot or refuse to vote if you don't like any candidates. (Unfortunately, abstention is not an option on the ballot.)

Which method or combination of methods do you use and why? I am tending towards voting for the party and leader, because it's a lot easier to do reasearch, and I'm thinking more big picture this election. (At the same time, I won't cast my vote for a useless candidate.)

So far I've narrowed down my possible parties that I might vote for. After, I'll eliminate leaders, and if there's still more than one party left, I'll go by candidate.

Already eliminated are:

• The Bloc Québécois - do not have candidates in BC
• The Conservatives - I really wish the old PC was around for me to elect, but sadly, we're stuck with these guys. They are off my list because they are anti gay marriage, and I trust Stephen Harper about as far as I can throw a piano.
• The Green Party - As much as this pains me, I can't vote for the Green Party. I really wanted to, until I read their current policy on forestry. They propose to ban clearcuts. This would be disasterous to BC forestry, and not much better for any other provinces, with the possible exception of the Maritimes. This policy is, as far as I can tell, not based on science*. They also have some rubbish about GMO trees on their site. I'd like to point out that the only country that plants GMO trees is China, so I don't know why the Canadian Green party is wasting their, and my, time.

*There are certainly a number of situations when it's not appropriate to have a clearcut. However, clearcuts are completely appropriate and sustainable in a number of common harvesting situations. I'm quite convinced the Green Party knows jack all about any of this.

I'm sorry for my ranting about the Green Party. I just really wanted to vote for them.

Parties who could still get my vote:

• The Liberals - I like Paul Martin. I think he's intelligent and competant. The Liberals aren't perfect, but they do know how to run a government. However, I have not forgotten the hideous Sponsorship Scandal. The Gomery Report doesn't implicate Paul Martin AFAIK, but I sure do! He was the freaking finance minister. That is the biggest strike against the Liberals in my opinion. They get points for being the government to legalize gay marriage.
• The NDP - I think Jack Layton is a classy guy, and I appreciate his support for gay marriage. I also like the fact that he doesn't just open his mouth to change feet (I'm looking at you Stephen Harper). One thing that might stop me from voting for the NDP is that thing with unions. I need to learn more about this, and I can't access the NDP Constitution without being a member of their site. This "thing" I'm talking about is how I think some union executives automatically have decision-making power in the party. If that's true, I couldn't vote for them. That's just not democracy. I also think unions have too much power in Canada.

So, I'm down to those two parties. I need to research the forestry policies of the NDP and the Liberals to make sure they aren't horrendous like the Green Party's.

What are the important issues for you in this election? Besides forestry, gay marriage, transportation, education, and NAFTA, I will be paying close attention to mud-slinging in this election. If people don't conduct themselves like adults I doubt I'm going to vote for them.

Let's get exciting about voting! You don't have to be a Canuck to join in the election discussion in this thread. This is the Moot, all are welcome.

[Edit: Originally called "Canadian Election: January 2006", but now the election is over, and we've started talking about politics.]

[Nurvingiel]

The election date is set for January 23rd.

Am I the only Canadian posting regularly right now? No one's jazzed about politics? Aren't you Americans curious what your northerly neighbours are up to?

[Earniel]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

Am I the only Canadian posting regularly right now? No one's jazzed about politics? Aren't you Americans curious what your northerly neighbours are up to?

Perhaps you're the only Entmoot-Canadian who can already vote?

What are clearcuts? Is it when you cut down trees, shrubs and everything in a certain part of the wood? It's not in my dictionary.

[Valandil]

I think a clearcut is taking all the trees on a particular tract of land - as opposed to 'thinning' the area by taking some of the trees and leaving others.

Clearcutting vastly simplifies the logging enterprise.

(and if we think we don't like it, let's think about our demands for wood)

I'm not familiar with the various scientific rationales though. I do think there can be more, and less, responsible ways of harvesting lumber. Mostly, that there be planting to replace the trees taken (something Aldarion took care of in Numenor, but not up the Gwathlo, sadly enough).

Anyway - I just heard on the radio about some hefty corruption in Canadian politics coming to light, but don't know the personalities involved to well or the details.

And hey... what's with this big storm front you guys just sent down here? And must you do it so regularly?

[The Gaffer]

I sympathise with your position, Nurv. I too would like to vote Green (here in UK) but as soon as you look at their actual policies you realise that they are an umbrella organisation for all sorts of nutters. (The deal-breaker for me was a proposed ban on animal testing.)

But that's pretty big news, first time ever a government lost a no-confidence vote. Or it would be, if it wasn't Canada and nobody cares! HA HA HA, just joking. Actually it made the news here, so we're not too parochial it seems.

Looking at the numbers, it seems like you are bound to get a coalition government whatever happens. So, the key question is likely to be who comes third, and therefore holds the balance of power. How are they squaring up?

Unions have a vote in Labour party policy here; I would say don't be put off by that. Union officials are (usually) elected by their membership, and required to represent their interests, which is helluva more democratic than the industry lobbyists who swarm around government and represent people in direct proportion to their wealth.

[The Gaffer]

On a side note, they have been doing clear-cut lately in parts of Scotland, my homeland. I'm sure it is analogous to harvest time in the wheat fields of Oxfordshire, but the end result sure looks like Mordor for years to come.

[Earniel]

Originally Posted by Valandil

I think a clearcut is taking all the trees on a particular tract of land - as opposed to 'thinning' the area by taking some of the trees and leaving others.

Thanks, I think I know now what the Dutch term is for it. I suppose it would make sense for a green party to ban such a thing (in Belgium clearcuts are regulated by permits and permissions but not banned) but I can see why it would put more strain on the logging economy.

Hey Nurv, notice how we're slowly turning an election thread into a forestry one.

[gollum9630]

man,its has been a long time since i posted.
Anywho, since i can vote now, i figure i will vote conservative. I dont like the liberals, esopecially with the sponsership scandal and everything. How can Paul Martin not know what was going on with the governments money while he was the financial minister. I just dont like NDP and theotehr parties are too fringe for me.

*sidenote*nurv, are u still at UBC. we dont start our exams at SFU untill next wednesday

[Nurvingiel]

Hopefully I can respond to all your lovely posts. *waves to Gollum*

Originally Posted by Valandil

Anyway - I just heard on the radio about some hefty corruption in Canadian politics coming to light, but don't know the personalities involved to well or the details.

Ah, you must be talking about the Sponsorship Scandal. That was about one billion of these -> for all of Canada.
If I recall correctly, there was a federal program to promote unity in Québec (which still has vestiges of seperatism). This program would put various national symbols like the maple leaf in prominent and positive places, like during sports car racing etc. (It was probably originally a better idea than it sounds here.)
The problem was, whoever was in charge of giving the ad grants mismanaged the money to criminal proportions. Millions of dollars were never seen from again, with no results. This was covered up for a while, but when Canadians found out, we were pissed.
At the time of the scandal, Jean Chrétien was Prime Minister, and Paul Martin (now PM) was the Finance Minister. (This is in the Liberal government.)
This is how the Liberals ended up with a minority government in the first place. Stephen Harper's complete incompetence was a big factor in the Conservatives losing the election after the Liberal scandal.

Originally Posted by Valandil

And hey... what's with this big storm front you guys just sent down here? And must you do it so regularly?

We sent you a storm?

Originally Posted by Eärniel

Thanks, I think I know now what the Dutch term is for it. I suppose it would make sense for a green party to ban such a thing (in Belgium clearcuts are regulated by permits and permissions but not banned) but I can see why it would put more strain on the logging economy.

Hey Nurv, notice how we're slowly turning an election thread into a forestry one.

This is the case in Canada as well. With the exception of the Maritime provinces (the eastern 4), most of the land is owned by the government. They don't let people cut trees willy nilly, you have to get a permit which legally requires you to reforest it properly. (This is the case in BC, and I'm quite sure that other provinces have similar situations.) Who can cut timber, and how much, is regulated by the provinces.

Why yes, I did notice this is turning into a forestry thread. (Incidentally, I've bumped "The Environment".) I don't mind, it all started with my rant about the Green Party.

Originally Posted by The Gaffer

I sympathise with your position, Nurv. I too would like to vote Green (here in UK) but as soon as you look at their actual policies you realise that they are an umbrella organisation for all sorts of nutters. (The deal-breaker for me was a proposed ban on animal testing.)

My beef was impractical environmental policies. Our Green Party attracts a few nutters, but this doesn't bother me at all as long as the policies are based on sound logic and our good for the country. Sadly, this was not to be.
I was looking to the Green Party to be leaders in the environment. I find other parties also have inadequate environmental policies. Unfortunately, the Green Party are not leaders at all. They seem to base their environmental policies on people's feelings. This should be taken into account, but it's part of a whole that must include science, the economy, and the values of all citizens.

Continued...

[Earniel]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

Why yes, I did notice this is turning into a forestry thread. (Incidentally, I've bumped "The Environment".) I don't mind, it all started with my rant about the Green Party.

Interesting to know that your Green Party is a bit like ours. But I'll take that (rant) over to the Environment thread.

But overall it's nice to know that other people's politicians can cause as much embarrassments as ours.

[Spock]

Nurvingiel, as the thread starter, has asked that the topic title be changed.

DONE!

[Last Child of Ungoliant]

did any socialist parties do well in the canadian elections?

[Nurvingiel]

Sorry LCOU, our only Socialist parties are fringe parties: the Marxist-Leninist Party and the Communist Party. They won no seats.

Actually, I think I'm confused as to what "socialist" means. We have the NDP, who are quite left leaning and could be called socialist, I think. They did pretty well and won about 30 seats (IIRC). (I posted the right answer back in the thread on election night.)

Originally Posted by inked

No Sharia for Canada ... and while we are at it, nobody else gets any either!

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/n...7adf39e&k=61024

What you think of this, Nurv?

Interesting article Inked. I have only read part of it, as I am out of Mooting time today (spent it all in the Olympics thread ). However, it's an important subject and I'll give it some thought.

I agree with the ruling from what I've read so far. That's my preliminary opinion.

[hectorberlioz]

Doin pretty foo in the Olympics indeed, just behind us last time i checked.

So whats brewing up there politically Nuvvy?

[hectorberlioz]

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

Doin pretty foo in the Olympics indeed, just behind us last time i checked.

So whats brewing up there politically Nuvvy?

what the...? I'm not that bad at spelling!
I'll reply in a sec Gaffer...


alright Gaffer, we won't go back into the argument...it's pretty clear with me in the Dragon's Area, and you on the edge of the world, your ship ready to fall, that stuff is just looked at differently.

What about the UK politics thread? I tried to look it up one day, and couldnt find it.
You should, and then fill us in on the next elections, and who'll be running etc...

[The Gaffer]

Are you still saying that global warming is a myth or have you moved on to the solar radiation gambit?

[The Gaffer]

Only a conservative could see the logic of linking feminism to this kind of industry.

The real cause is the free market in health care that operates in the US. Here we have a system where the wealthy can buy pretty much whatever they want - including a vast raft of high-tech stuff that doesn't work - while the poor are left to die of their preventable diabetes complications.

Funny how we don't see anti-abortionists lining up behind health reform. Could it be that they are a bunch of hypocrites?

[Rían]

Or perhaps the pro-life people have noticed that the people seeking health care are, like, at least alive...

You have to pick your battles.

[The Gaffer]

Originally Posted by RÃ*an

Or perhaps the pro-life people have noticed that the people seeking health care are, like, at least alive...

You have to pick your battles.

This seems a surprising battle to give up on: regulating the market to prevent this sort of service being offered to persons from another country, or indeed from your own country. You might find that you have a lot more support than for outlawing abortion as a whole.

I believe it is illegal in this country, for example. It is one of the reasons that radiographers won't tell people the sex of the foetus from an ultrasound scan.

That's a good example GM, another might be infertility services, which offer sex selection. Again, however, it is only legal in this country for specific reasons (i.e. medical ones) and using specific methods. That seems to have the balance about right to me.

[inked]

Oh, I say, South Korea has a much larger problem than Canada:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...aby-flesh.html

You would have thought that the Chinese would have realized that Jonathan Swift was joking in his essay on how to feed the Irish..........

But, really, ya'll, how does one police cross-country cultural ideals? Should Canada's trump those of the USA or South Korea's China's?

What defines the narrow line of one social equality from the other's?