I'm running for Parliament!

Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share
21

One of the things I like about Pierre Trudeau was that he didn’t do things in half-measures. Whether it was decriminalizing homosexuality or bringing in the charter of rights or patriating the constitution or bringing in bilingualism (which I approve of) or suspending Quebec’s civil liberties (which I don’t), he did it flat out, bluntly, frankly. Unlike this current crop of pseudopoliticians who do good embarrasedly and bad surreptitiously.

There’s a reason why the word for the right to vote - franchise - literally means “frankness”.

Darn tootin’.

Actually, he’s a professor at McGill!

We call them “nominations” here, dear. Actually, since I’m unopposed for my party’s nomination in this riding, the nomination will be a formality.

They’ve elected a NDP MP one time, in Chambly. However, my riding includes the poorest neighbourhood in Quebec, so I’m hoping I can make some inroads.

who, I should point out, is a federal MP, not a provincial member, is actually a great inspiration to me. He’s one of the few people in Parliament I admire, because he’s one of the few people in Parliament who care about something other than getting reelected.

The difference is that the federal NDP is leftwing, whereas the BC Provincial NDP is further left than the federal Liberals (who themselves are now a centre-right party).

  1. a.k.a Not Goddamn Enough.
22

btw. If anything I said in that post seems to Canadians to be much too obvious, it was for the benefit of American who might not have a complete knowledge of our parliamentary system.

23

Matt, this is great news but I have to wonder how this is going to affect my quest to become Dictator of Canada. If the NDP ever assumes power they might accomplish many of the things I intend to implement and the population might not be as receptive of my socialist regime.

We share many of the same political ideology so perhaps there will will a place for you when I take power. :slight_smile:

24

But Matt is my new favourite gay NDP candidate! I agree that Svend is a great MP. Good luck, man.

25

Hmm maybe having a Doper in Parliament would be a good thing… I’d vote for you! Just make sure to kick Klein in the ass for pushing through Bill 11 (the Healthcare stuff btw for the Americans) Alberta is a cool place to be, though I love several other provinces just as much, and I don’t want to have the health care torn to shred when I really need it when I’m older. (Luckily right now I’m in decent health and such but who knows what the future may bring?)

26

News update: I might not actually be running in Verdun-St Henri: the guy who has first dibs is being coy, but the party is supposed to hear from him today. If he’s running in this riding, I’ll be running in St Laurent-Cartierville instead, in the northwestetrn part of Montreal. (Fortunately, it’s a straight shot by metro.) Further updates as events warrant.

27

matt_mcl said:

By which I take it you have stronger party obligations than in the US, which has very weak party obligations. (Not that I’m sure weak parties would work in a parliamentary system.)

I asked because I’m from Pennsylvania, which is notorious for being ass-backwards politically. For example, we have at least three statewide Republican office-holders (Governor, US Senator, and State Treasurer) who are pro-choice on abortion, while the national party is just the opposite. And the only statewide Democratic office-holder (Auditor General) is anti-abortion, as was his father, the former Governor, while the national party is completely contrary. I get the impression that this would be unlikely with the Canadian setup.

28

Ah! I understand better. As it happens, many provincial parties have policies quite different from the federal parties. As noted above, the BC New Democrats are quite right-wing, practically the opposite of the federal New Democrats. The Quebec Liberals are also to the right of the federal Liberals (if such a thing is possible).

These provincial parties (the ones that run for the provincial legislatures) must be distinguished from the provincial sectors of the federal parties. That is, there are both the provincial BC NDP (the right-wing ones that are sent to Victoria), and the BC branch of the federal NDP (the left-wing ones that are sent to Ottawa, such as Svend Robinson).

You can certainly belong to one and not the other. There is no provincial NDP in Quebec at all, for example. (I intend to vote Social Democrat when the next election comes.)

When I say I can’t run around contradicting party policy, I mean in terms of the party I joined and that I’m running for (the federal NDP). I have a good deal of discretion; for example, federal New Democrats in Quebec are often more radical than those of the rest of the country. However, it would be inadvisable for me to run directly counter to the party’s policies, for example by running on an anti-abortion or flat tax platform or some such. (If I believed in those, I probably wouldn’t have joined the NDP in the first place anyway.)

Also, voting on bills in the House is usually right down party lines, and there’s even a member called the Whip (no joke) who keeps errant members in line. “Free votes” are only called for very controversial issues. I disagree strenuously with the party line voting stricture.

29

Thanks for the explanations, Matt–as a poly sci grad and someone who used to be involved in party politics, I find this stuff fun.

One more question, if I might–what kind of money does it take to run a Parliamentary campaign up there? Does the party handle this, or do the candidates’ committees (if you have such a thing) have to come up with the bulk of it? Is it more expensive to run in a big media market like Montreal as opposed to smaller media markets (which is generally true in US Congressional races)? (Sorry…that was more than one question.)

I can’t think of any way that what I know about rural Pennsylvania politics could assist you–if you actually think of anything, please feel free to ask–but I certainly wish you the best of luck.

30

Does the NDP support proportional representation?

31

…a federal PR link…

32

good on ya, matt - have fun, and maybe even get elected! will you hire me as a flunky?

33

…and a whack of stuff about PR:
June 16, 2000
Ontario NDP focuses on PR

The Ontario New Democrats will focus on proportional representation as one of five “emerging issues” to be examined at the biennial convention in Hamilton, June 16 to 18.

Under the theme “New Century, New Democrats,” PR and internet voting will be discussed along with four other issues: water, public health, urban sprawl and the new economy.

The convention will be “webcast” and will feature a series of e-mail scrums with NDP leaders. The convention’s website is http://www.ontariondp.on.ca/convention2000.

                                                             MAY 18, 2000

MPs Debate Proportional Representation

MPs began debate on proportional representation today (Thursday, May 18) – the first such debate since 1923. The motion sponsored by Lorne Nystrom, NDP MP from Saskatchewan, reads:

"That, in the opinion of this House, the government should work towards incorporating a measure of proportional representation in the federal electoral system, making use of a framework which includes:

(a) a report on proportional representation prepared by an all-party committee after extensive public hearings;

(b) a referendum to be held on this issue where the question shall be whether electors favour replacing the present system with a system proposed by the committee as concurred in by the House; and

© the referendum may be held either before or at the same time as the next general election."

Alliance MP voices support
– Alliance MP Ted White expressed his personal support for the motion, with the qualification that he would like the referendum to take place in two stages.

This would give voters greater power to choose the kind of electoral system they would like. White said the Alliance’s policy on electoral reform aims at such a two-stage referendum. (For Alliance policy see below.)

BQ proposes amendment
– The Bloc Quebecois proposed an amendment to the motion which would add after the words “proportional representation” the words “by province.”

PR by province is more likely to give provincially-based parties like the Bloc a substantial number of seats than if seats were allocated on a nation-wide proportional basis. The House will hold two more debates on the motion. A vote is likely in the fall.

Supporters of proportional representation are urged to circulate petitions and contact their MP in an effort to build support for the issue."

-from Canadians for Proportional Representation

34

waterj2:

There is an age requirement, but it’s set out in a federal statute, not in the Constitution Act, 1867.

The Canada Elections Act, Revised Statutes of Canada, c. 14(1st Supp.), provides:

So, since matt’s older than 18 and a citizen, he’s an elector, and therefore eligible to stand for election as a candidate.

35

That’s odd. You people have a constitution that states a minimum age for being a Senator, but not for being a member of the House of Commons.

OK, realistically speaking, how much of a chance do you stand of winning? I know nothing about Canadian politics, so for all I know, the NDP is somewhere below the Libertarian Party here in terms of popular support. And what about going to school? Will you have to take a break from your studies? Oh, and will you still be able to maintain your promiscuous ways under the constant media spotlight that shines on Canadian Parliament members?

36

Matt! I’m so proud of you!

Now, as the babydyke journalist that I am, can I write a bio of you for the gay papers? (Actually, can I?)

Oh, heck… you know, I bet I can dig up some <coughcough> interesting <choke> posts of yours from YGS… interesting reading, those were. :wink:

37

Waterj2: Approximately nil. But the point for me isn’t to win, as nice as that would be, but to bring a third way to the debate. If I do get elected though, I suppose I’ll just have to start taking summer classes :slight_smile:

I’m told there are two gay bar scenes in Ottawa: one for the actual gay people and one for the rich closeted people and MPs and who all. Suffice it to say I’ll be taking door numero un. My people would be electing me to speak on their behalf in Parliament, not to live a lifestyle they favour (or care about).

Andy: You do and I’ll tell the whole thing about the girl from Vancouver, the butternut squash, and the Nuttella. I saved the emails. Pervert! :wink:

38

Andy: Yes, actually you can.

39

waterj2,

I assume that the reason for the difference is that in our political tradition, any elector is eligible to vote for the Commons and the provincial legislatures - there’s no added requirements like you guys have for the House of Representatives.

Since the standards for being an elector change from time to time, as society changes (originally there was probably a property qualification; males only; voting age; etc.), the qualification to be a candidate was not put in the Constitution Act, 1867. If it had been, you would need a constitutional amendment any time you wanted to change the qualifications for an elector.

By contrast, the Senate was sort of a “made-in-Canada” appointed chamber, similar to the House of Lords, and therefore all the requirements were put right in the Constitution Act, 1867 - they wanted the Senate to be changeable only by constitutional amendment.

40

Not for the NDP, which has no chance of being elected in Quebec anyway, as stated.

Actually, for a full campaign, it might even be more expensive in a rural riding. Abitibi, for example, is the entire northern part of Quebec. Not fun.