Not if I can help it! 
New Zealand is an example of a non-FPTP system which is highly effective. Scandinavian countries have them too. I am really disappointed in BC’s rejection of STV but am encouraged by the push for electoral reform in Ontario: Dalton has committed to it and everything! I hope that there will be a referendum on electoral reform on the municipal ballot in 2006, it could mean that we have a better system in place for the 07 Ontario election. crosses fingers
It happened by disenfranchising most of the red Tories. I am in no sense a Tory (red or otherwise) but really lament the loss of their voice on the federal scene, as they represent an important ideological position that our country really needs. The Conservative Party simply doesn’t seem to reflect the ideals of moderates, who seem to be present in larger proportions in the east. Belinda Stronach’s jumping ship was a huge signal in this regard: they had a candidate who was not only moderate but also a woman (gasp!) - but couldn’t keep her.
Another reason we need electoral reform. It can incorporate some of the better elements of FPTP (like reserving spots for reps from each geographical region) but also elements of PR (like, well, allowing popular vote to be better reflected in outcomes). As an urban resident I am annoyed by the way rural power is weighted towards rural ridings - I can’t remember the stats exactly (am off to look them up), but there tend to be many fewer voters in rural ridings than in urban, which means that the vote of a rural resident is weighted proportionately more than an urban one. This IMO is one major reason for Toronto’s decline: our population keeps growing, and as it does each Toronto voter has a smaller and smaller say in electoral outcomes.
For everyone that is unhappy with all the alternatives: why don’t you run? Seriously? It’s easy and possible, and (at least) one of our own beloved Dopers has done it - you should, too. If you don’t want to run, you can certainly join a party and make it something you would like to vote for. I see this potential most strongly with the Greens but there are lots of parties in Canada, and not all of them are Yogic-flying-style kooky or Rhino-style protest parties. (Wikipedia should have good articles on any party you want more info about.)
Well, a couple of points.
-
Alberta’s minimum wage is now $7.00/hour, not the $5.90 that you quoted - I have no idea where that ranks Alberta in the list - perhaps still last, but we should at least know what we’re talking about.
-
The economy in Alberta is so strong (right now) that there are no jobs that pay minimum wage, because they wouldn’t be able to get employees. At last check, about $8.50/hour was the minimum a business could pay and still have anyone apply - that’s for flipping burgers, emptying trash, etc.
Now, you can continue to hate Alberta and Albertains if you like - but at least make sure you’re doing it for the right reasons. Personally, I think jealousy would be pretty high on most peoples’ lists, if not yours.
I do know that I’m going to enjoy spending my $400 cheque that I receive in the mail in early January, just 'cus I live here. There aren’t too many places that give everyone free money - my brother and his wife have 2 kids - they’re getting $1,600.
The problem I have with making the Canadian senate more then just a retirement home for Liberals and PC is the amount of power it may yield. In now way would I want the Cdn Senate to be as close to as powerful as the US one. The senate now is just basically a rubber stamp. While I could accept some form of power residing in the Senate, it would have to be much less then the House of Commons. This is because I feel it is okay that Ontario has more seats then any other province, we have more people don’t we? We give something to the effect of $28 billion to the federal gov’t each year to help out have-not provinces. Ontario has always been the engine of Canada, and deserves some recognition as such. I don’t mean special status, just a recognition of said importance.
And Stephen Harper once again proves that he just does not get it. Accusing the Liberals of being in bed with organized crime? When have the Liberals ever failed to milk idiotic comments like this for all that they’re worth?
From the CBC:
The story of the sponsorship scandal is amazing if you read about it. Protection rackets, envelopes of money slid under tables, books being cooked… It’s about as corrupt as a Canadian government could possibly get.
Why is it a problem that 62% of the country gets only 59% of the vote? Ontario should have more seats. Granted, so should Alberta.
Well, no, let’s be honest; it’s been ignored because the Liberals are terrified of opening the Pandora’s box of a Constitutional convention.
Sam Stone:
Geez, is it really growing that fast?
According to Statscan:
Alberta Population by Year - Population - Growth over Previous Year
2001 - 3,056,700
2002 - 3,116,300 - 1.9%
2003 - 3,159,600 - 1.3%
2004 - 3,204,800 - 1.4%
2005 - 3,256,800 - 1.6%
Gosh, if about one and a half percent is growth at a rate that Alberta’s infrastructure can’t keep up, the people who plan infrastructure must not be doing a great job. That’s a bit ahead of the Canadian average, but hardly a huge boom.
If every province had roads as bad as Alberta, they could have lower taxes too! They could also separate out Medicare costs!
RickJay - just so everyone is on the same page:
From here:http://www.calfasa.org/publications/fourth.htm
I think infastructure in Taber, AB is just fine. I think infastructure in Calgary is straining to keep up. Just the same as it’s stupid to suggest that what happens in Sudbury is indicitive of what happens in Toronto, it’s stupid to suggest that what happens in One-Four is indicitive of what happens in Calgary.
Those numbers may seem small to you, but compared to ‘normal’ growth rates for the rest of the world, they’re pretty high.
The U.S. had the highest growth rate in the world over the last 10 years, at 1.1%. Canada as a whole was just behind at slightly under 1%. Every other country on the planet was lower. Given those numbers to compare to, 1.6% average over 10 years is pretty substantial.
Or looked at another way, in the past 10 years the U.S. population grew 12%. The Canadian population as a whole grew 10%. Alberta’s population grew 17%.
And don’t forget that the 10% growth for Canada as a whole includes the 17% growth for Alberta. So to compare Alberta against the rest of Canada you have to remove Alberta’s contribution to the growth rate - which means that over the past ten years Alberta grew at roughly twice the rate of the rest of Canada, and Canada itself grew more than any other country other than the U.S.
The challenges to the infrastructure are real. It’s not just population growth, but the combination of population growth, economic growth, and large growth in some communities, especially in the oil patch. In addition, because of the ongoing trend towards urbanization, people are moving within Alberta from rural areas to the cities. Edmonton has grown on average closer to 2.5% per year, which really can cause a strain.
From Encarta:
I read an economic report a year or so ago (sorry, I don’t have a link to it) that said the biggest challenge to economic growth in Alberta was now the strain on the infrastructure. Roads, real estate, etc.
Oops. I have to correct myself. I said:
As soon as I read my posted message I suspected this is wrong. I believe the U.S. and Canada lead the G8, not the world.
How, exactly, do Ontario and Quebec “decide” the fate of Canada’s elections? Is there some secret cabal that I haven’t been invited to?
In all seriousness, I understand that the majority of Canada lives in Ontario and Quebec. I also understand that regions vote in blocks - but to assume that Ontario is one homogenous region, with Kenorans and Sudburians and Torontonians all locked in one big electoral embrace, is just not true. Same for Quebec.
Also, I believe part of the misconception that the east decides elections has stemmed from time zone differences. Elections Canada tried to fix that problem in 2004 with staggered ballot closings, so that a majority of the votes would get reported at the same time.
All that being said, I do believe we’re in need of some type of electoral reform. I simply feel that the “my vote doesn’t matter 'cause I live out here in Alberta” sentiment is more sour grapes than anything else. Perhaps that’s because I vote NDP, so my vote doesn’t matter anywhere.
My 2cents (1.6cents USD): I think this will be one of the most interesting elections for most Canadians, and one of our last.
In terms of the former, we’re going to see two big changes to this election: the NDP and the Green Party. This year we saw the NDP with 19 seats (I think) pass their first ever budget. A party with 19 seats was able to have more influence than both of the other opposition parties. I think they will actually have significance this time around. Layton can actually talk about what his party has DONE without using purely hypotheticals. The result is that they may be able to gain considerably more seats, and hence really take the balance of power. We’re probably going to have another minority government, but if the NDP and the Liberals form a majority, the NDP will have gained control. Make note here, that if the Conservatives some how won the minority, the NDP and Liberals can ask the GG to make them the ruling party. I think that’s fascinating, even if I think the NDP all a bunch of Ivory Tower Hippies and it makes me sick to think they’d have power. Another feature we’ll see is the result of each party getting $1 for each vote. That means the Green party will have something like $10 to work with, a 1000% increase in funding! I joke, but the Green Party might actually get to sit at the big kid’s table, and could actually win a seat!
Now for the dooms-day prediction, I don’t see another Federal election. The regionalization has just gotten too much. It used to be a battle of Canada vs the Separatists, now we’ve got Canada vs Alberta. This thread really reflects a horrible mentality that has emerged in Canada. Quebec is poised for another referendum, and I’m pretty sure Alberta will follow suit. There’s nothing holding this Country together, and the sad fact is that I just don’t care. I’m so sick of hearing it I just want it to end. For some reason each Province has taken a me-first approach to Federal Politics. Why is it that the losers always ask for election reform? My advice, if you want a voice in Federal politics STOP RUNNING A F*CKING PROVINCIAL PARTY IN THE FEDERAL ELECTION. I just don’t understand what Quebec expects to gain by running a Quebec-only party in the Federal Election. And face it; the Conservative Party is just a renamed Reform Party which is just an Alberta party. The people of Saskatshewan had the Saskatshewan Party to run things Provincially, but you don’t run them in the Federal Election. That’s just not how it works. The only two things I can think to say are, “grow up, and get over yourself.”
I don’t understand what you expect to gain? My impression seems to be that Alberta wants electoral reform until they have a way to make the Alberta Party the majority. Do you (people of Alberta) want representation based on Provincial growth? Your GDP? Land area? I don’t get it. Toronto alone has 12% of the population, and generates over 8% of the GNP (I’m quoting that form memory). Should they get any say? 33% of Canadians live near Toronto, do they deserve any less of the say? Do you realize that PEI has more power than Toronto? If PEI ran a Provincial party in the Federal election, should they be bitter that they still only get 4 seats? Why can’t you have a Provincial party run Provincial matters and a Federal Party run Federal matters? I’m just so tired of all this. We’re all screwed equally by our electoral system. Ontario has 39% of the population but only gets 34% of the seats, Alberta has 10% of the population but gets 9.1% of the votes. The only ones who win are PEI (.4% : 1.3%) and the Territories.
Well, I think there’s a little hyperbole there. Despite what Easterners think, there isn’t a whole lot of animosity towards Canada in Alberta. Sure, there are hot-button issues - adscam, the gun registry, Kyoto. But Alberta is nowhere near separation. It’s not really a topic of discussion here, other than among some fringe elements.
However, there is a growing problem, and that is that Alberta’s economy is outperforming the rest of Canada by a substantial margin, and our per-capita income is starting to pull away from the rest of Canada. That’s going to create all kinds of tension down east, and maybe the vitriol against Alberta we’ve seen spewing out of these threads is a symptom of that. Anyway, if this tension leads the east to decide to make a grab for Alberta’s oil, then I suspect you’ll radicalize the population here and you might actually see the growth of a separatist movement. But it will take something pretty drastic. Albertans aren’t troglodytes. We’re Canadians, and we’re much more integrated into Canada than Quebec is. Albertans have relatives throughout Canada.
As for what we want, well, a voice. Take the gun registry. Albertans hate the damned thing. It’s a giant boondoggle, it doesn’t work, and I’m just waiting for that to explode into the next scandal as we try and figure out how you can drop three billion dollars into a program to register 8 million guns, and still not have it work. But even though it was opposed by most Albertans, it happened anyway. I happen to think that federal governments work better when there’s more regional representation to prevent a tyranny of the majority.
Oh, you know what else would be nice? If the people down east would cut down on the Alberta Taliban rhetoric. We send billions of dollars a year to the rest of Canada, and it can be infuriating when the response we get is sneering and condescension.
Well, you would be wrong. Apart from a handful of cranks, nobody in Alberta want’s to seperate from Canada. Nobody. The idea is laughable.
It’s similar to saying that Ontario is going to seperate from Canada. Or maybe the Yukon. That is, totally moronic.
Furthermore, except for a handful of cranks, nobody in Alberta hates Ontario, or Quebec, or Saskatachewan or any other province.
I agree with Sam Stone (which is not something I’d ever thought I would say) - there’s a whole lot of people in Canada that are jealous of the wealth being generated in this part of the country. Really, really jealous. Any sort of animosity between provinces isn’t going to be generated by Albertains - hell, our premier just anouced a big funding anouncement for out of province students to study in Alberta on our dime. Nope - any animosity is going to be generated by people in other provinces who feel like they’re not getting enough of the Alberta pie, despite the massive transfer payments that Alberta makes every year, and has made every year senice transfer payments started.
Honestly, I don’t understand where this belief has come from regarding Alberta’s seperation. Toronto has a better chance of becoming it’s own province than Alberta does of seperating at any time in the near or distant future.
The country is not going to fall apart after this election.
Well, that’s assuming we’re not going to get a Bloc Quebecois/Western Block Party minority government.
emacknight, I believe you’re dead wrong about this being one of our last elections. But you live in Toronto, so I understand that you can’t relate to the rest of the country
What’s happening now in Alberta is what happened in Toronto during the '80s. Until head offices started arriving in Toronto in droves, nobody really cared much about that city on the lake. It was just one of several largish cities in the country, then it 'sploded thanks to wealthy ex-Quebecers running for their lives from the big bad separatists.
And they were wrong. But the paranoia of “Montreal’s rejects” stayed on.
Now that paranoia is being aimed at Alberta, and the wussy political pundits in Toronto can’t believe that a) someone besides themselves is making money in Canada and b) these people don’t want to live in Toronto.
The regionalization in Canada has not “gotten too much.” It’s just that in Ontario, the only viable parties are the Liberals and the NDP. In Quebec, you’ve got the Liberals and the Bloc.
Conservatives in Canada spend as much time infighting as Democrats in the U.S., and until they get their shit together* they don’t have a hope in hell of coming back to power. As soon as the Conservatives are able to make a party that will have some appeal in Ontario and Quebec, people will stop bleating about the end of days and actually elect a majority government again.
[sub]* By this I mean immediately turfing and condemning any member who espouses Christianity over all, an end to abortion, and banning gay marriage. Fiscal conservatism flies in Canada, not social conservatism.[/sub]
See, I’m not sure I get this. I was just vacationing with a Torontan and while she was jokingly upfront about her biases, she did indicate that she thinks this whole economic argument is silly, if for no other reason than Alberta’s economy is built largely on a finite resource - oil. What makes Alberta’s economy all that different in kind from Saudi Arabia’s or that of other Gulf States? Or in other words, just how ephemeral is this prosperity going to be? That’s a serious question by the way.
I just looked up Ontario’s economic stats and apparently it has 39% of Canada’s populatioon, yet generates 42% of its GDP. Seems as an economic engine it crushes the much smaller Albertan economy easily.
- Tamerlane
What evidence is there that that’s true, though? I really don’t think most people here (Ontario) are aware of what the relative wealth of other provinces are, or much care. There’s a general awareness to some extent that Alberta has some oil money, but it’s not something most people really give a flying crap about.
Look, I don’t mean to make it sound like people in Ontario are fools, but what’s going on in Red Deer just isn’t important to them. To most Ontarians, Alberta is where the Flames and the Oilers play, and where Banff and the West Edmonton Mall are. The comparative tax burdens and per capita household incomes of other provinces are not something most people are aware of or care about.
Politicians, now, that’s a different story.
In what alternate universe version of Ontario are the NDP a more “Viable” party than the Conservatives?
Votes by Party in Ontario, Federal Elections
2004: Conservative 31.5%, NDP 18.1%
2000: Alliance 23.6%, Progressive Conservative 14.4%, NDP 8.3%
1997: Reform 19.1%, Progressive Conservative 18.8%, NDP 10.7%
In 2004 the NDP still finished way, way behind the Conservatives in Ontario, and that was actually the best they’d ever done. Even when the Conservative vote was split between the Reform/Alliance party and the PC party the NDP finished way behind both of them, every single year. Never in their history have the NDP even been within shouting distance of the Conservatives in a general election in Ontario.
After the fun we had during the Bob Rae adminiustration, I don’t see them being serious contenders on a provincial level anytime soon, either; it is very telling that in 2003 provincial election they were just absolutely buried by the losing Conservatives despite Ernie Eves being about as talented a party leader as Ernie the Muppet.
If you want to know what bedevils the Conservatives in Ontario, it’s pretty clear from the fact that combining the two conservative parties simply did not work; the combined vote in 2004 was MUCH lower than the combined Reform/Alliance and PC vote had been. The Conservative party needs to nominate an Eastern, socially liberal leader; a Quebecois would be best. Had they done so before they’d likely have won the 2004 election outright. Harper’s a decent man, not the devil that fools on here make him out to be, but he’s not electable here, and I’m not sure he’s really leadership material - just because you’re smart and skilled doesn’t make you a party leader.
Yeah, I’m not getting the ‘conservatives are not viable’ thing either. The conservatives have come within a whisker of making up the government the last time around, and they get plenty of votes down east.
But here’s the problem: The Conservatives are a long way from being able to form a majority government, and they probably can’t get enough votes in the east to do so. So what, you might ask? Well, the problem is that a Conservative minority government is simply not viable. The Liberals can form a minority government because they occupy the political center, and therefore can split the opposition. That’s what they did to stay alive until now. The Conservatives, however, have every other Canadian party to the left of them, making it much, much more likely that should they try to actually enact any Conservative policies the government will simply fall on a vote of non confidence.
And in fact, it seems to me that the worst thing that could happen to the Conservatives this time around is that they form a minority government, get booted in a few months, and get tagged as being a party unfit to govern. That’ll set them back another ten years.
Rickjay is right. For the Conservative party to be a viable national party, it has to put some people from the east into the leadership. IMO, it also has to jettison some of the old social conservative remnants from the Reform party, and move back to the social center. I’d be very happy with a party that was socially moderate but pro-business, strong on defence, reasonably pro-American (at least without the knee-jerk anti-Americanism that you find in the Liberal and NDP parties), and focused on growth rather than regulation.