Just a reminder that it is voting and referendum day for anyone in Ontario!
-
Too many ads? Join our community of cat lovers now to reduce ads by 90%! Click here to join for free!
Ontario Votes
- Thread starter icklemiss21
- Start Date
Are you concerned about the referendum? I sure would have liked to have a lot more information about it. Since I don't know enough (for my own peace of mind), I intend to vote against it.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #4
I actually helped organise two referendum debates in Toronto and wrote my final paper on proportional representation systems, so personally, no, but for the rest of the province, yes!
There hasn't been nearly enough information on the referendum or parties for people to make an informed decision, with so much negative campaigning taking over the party platforms and the adverts about the referendum didn't actually even mention the system, just where to look online for information.
I think, as great as the work the citizens' assembly did on the subject, the follow through did not have enough time to inform people effectively to begin with and has been disappointing even with the time line they did have.
There hasn't been nearly enough information on the referendum or parties for people to make an informed decision, with so much negative campaigning taking over the party platforms and the adverts about the referendum didn't actually even mention the system, just where to look online for information.
I think, as great as the work the citizens' assembly did on the subject, the follow through did not have enough time to inform people effectively to begin with and has been disappointing even with the time line they did have.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #5
I did love Rick Mercer's explanation of it, of course it is a spoof and the Taliban are not going to take over the province, but at least he made an effort to explain it
I have no idea what a referendum even is! I remember when Quebec wanted to seperate there was one..is that like a vote for a big change or something?
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #7
Yes, before democratic countries (or in our case provinces) can make major changes to the voting system, constitutions etc they (or at least they should) hold a referendum to ask the people, especially if it is not something included in the Thone Speech (the first main speech the government holds each session to discuss what they wish to achieve in that session).
Interesting side point is the federal Throne Speech is next week and is a vote of no confidence, meaning if more than 50% of MPs vote against it, we are looking at having a federal election fairly soon, also, to give Harper a mandate (or not depending on how things go) to do the things he brings up in the Throne Speech and party platform during the election.
ETA: the official information on the referendum is here
http://www.yourbigdecision.ca/en_ca/default.aspx
Interesting side point is the federal Throne Speech is next week and is a vote of no confidence, meaning if more than 50% of MPs vote against it, we are looking at having a federal election fairly soon, also, to give Harper a mandate (or not depending on how things go) to do the things he brings up in the Throne Speech and party platform during the election.
ETA: the official information on the referendum is here
http://www.yourbigdecision.ca/en_ca/default.aspx
Bottom line on this referendum (from my understanding) is that we, the public, will be paying 20 more salaries and perks for these extra 20 seats. I already pay enough salaries and perks with my tax dollars thank you very much.
In some ways I like the American way of voting better than ours.
In some ways I like the American way of voting better than ours.
Pulled an all nighter on a lit review regarding the effects of retirement on leisure for older adults and then took a shower and voted.
Seems more and more important to do as I get older.
Personally, I've had some friends who would have really benefitted from the new proposal (such as someone who lives in the ghetto in Toronto and the conservative rep was much more involved with the area and would have done a lot of good, but she didn't want conservatives running the province).
So, because of personal experiences, with the information I was given via the little brochures and the webpage, I voted for the change.
Seems more and more important to do as I get older.
Personally, I've had some friends who would have really benefitted from the new proposal (such as someone who lives in the ghetto in Toronto and the conservative rep was much more involved with the area and would have done a lot of good, but she didn't want conservatives running the province).
So, because of personal experiences, with the information I was given via the little brochures and the webpage, I voted for the change.
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #10
I voted against the change. I am for more representation, but I do not like the system proposed.
Like Yosemite, enough of my money goes into paying politicians without making more of them who would end up being 'party people' more than usual because they have to stay on the 'nice list' to get a guaranteed seat on the list (they can be on both so if they lose their constituency seat they can still get a list seat) and I do not agree with politicians who are not accountable to us, there is no way we can say no to someone in particular
Like Yosemite, enough of my money goes into paying politicians without making more of them who would end up being 'party people' more than usual because they have to stay on the 'nice list' to get a guaranteed seat on the list (they can be on both so if they lose their constituency seat they can still get a list seat) and I do not agree with politicians who are not accountable to us, there is no way we can say no to someone in particular
You actually said it much better than I. I think we can all assume that those 20 people would do whatever they had to to stay "popular" so may not be voting in the best interest of the people but more likely in the best interest of keeping the cushy job.
I don't like the fact that under the new system the government elected would never form a majority and the fact that "un-elected" or persons with the "popular vote" would be apointed by the party... I'm sorry but if they have the popular vote why didn't they get elected on their own merit?
Anyhow I am Voteing NO on MMP. They have somthing similar in New Zealand and the government is basically powerless to do anything, with a constant minority barely any bills are passed and nothing is acomplished. On top of that there would be more of a chance to have a vote of non confidence in the goverment and we would be going to elections more and more often I say save teh tax payers the money and keep the old system that already costs us enough!
Anyhow I am Voteing NO on MMP. They have somthing similar in New Zealand and the government is basically powerless to do anything, with a constant minority barely any bills are passed and nothing is acomplished. On top of that there would be more of a chance to have a vote of non confidence in the goverment and we would be going to elections more and more often I say save teh tax payers the money and keep the old system that already costs us enough!
My main concern with the MMP was not the salary issue, but the cut off for seat eligability. A party would need a minimum of 3% to be eligable for a seat....that's pretty low. The system would have some benefits insofar as representation for existing parties that have support, just not enough to win ridings (ie green party), but I don't think that outweighs the potential for major boondoggles in the HoC.
Think of it like this (I admit that this is dangerously oversimplified, certainly
)....
Say I form my own party, called the "University Students for Tuition Decrease Party". I'm pretty sure I can get 3% of a provincial vote just by campaigning on campuses. Now, I've got a seat in the House. Maybe I have some views on other policies, but I'm basically just there to lobby for my agenda regarding tuition.
So, now, I'm sitting here with a vote. Potentially a deciding vote on any number of issues. And I don't really care about those issues, because I'm elected by people who are backing me on ONE major issue and will continue to do so, especially since I don't have to answer to a single riding constiuency. I doubt the students who voted me in are going to be closely following my voting record on health care reform, transportation funding, etc.
Okay, so back to me on the floor during a house vote on whatever, getting sweet-talked equally by the whips for the Liberals, PCs and NDPs.....and here I am with lots of power to mess with public policy in exchange for votes or support for amendments and bills related to my one issue.
Now, lets say I'm far from the only new, short-agenda party in the House. How much policy-setting do you think will be happening?
It's hard enough to get anything done.....I just think this would make it harder.
I'd rather we, the constituents, become more involved in our ridings and representatives, hold our government to a higher standard, demand change where needed and protection where appropriate, and champion an informed and engaged public, than expand the ballots in what is likely a futile effort to level the playing field in the hopes of jump-starting policy influence for parties in their infancies.
We haven't successfully demanded adequate and accurate representation from our current House members, who answer to constiuencies; how would adding free-floating "representatives" advance the setting of public policies if we are risking the flooding of the House with minor, short-agenda parties?
Think of it like this (I admit that this is dangerously oversimplified, certainly
Say I form my own party, called the "University Students for Tuition Decrease Party". I'm pretty sure I can get 3% of a provincial vote just by campaigning on campuses. Now, I've got a seat in the House. Maybe I have some views on other policies, but I'm basically just there to lobby for my agenda regarding tuition.
So, now, I'm sitting here with a vote. Potentially a deciding vote on any number of issues. And I don't really care about those issues, because I'm elected by people who are backing me on ONE major issue and will continue to do so, especially since I don't have to answer to a single riding constiuency. I doubt the students who voted me in are going to be closely following my voting record on health care reform, transportation funding, etc.
Okay, so back to me on the floor during a house vote on whatever, getting sweet-talked equally by the whips for the Liberals, PCs and NDPs.....and here I am with lots of power to mess with public policy in exchange for votes or support for amendments and bills related to my one issue.
Now, lets say I'm far from the only new, short-agenda party in the House. How much policy-setting do you think will be happening?
It's hard enough to get anything done.....I just think this would make it harder.
I'd rather we, the constituents, become more involved in our ridings and representatives, hold our government to a higher standard, demand change where needed and protection where appropriate, and champion an informed and engaged public, than expand the ballots in what is likely a futile effort to level the playing field in the hopes of jump-starting policy influence for parties in their infancies.
We haven't successfully demanded adequate and accurate representation from our current House members, who answer to constiuencies; how would adding free-floating "representatives" advance the setting of public policies if we are risking the flooding of the House with minor, short-agenda parties?
I feel so awful. I forgot to vote!!!! This is the first time in my life that I think I have forgotten! I've been so caught up in work lately that the date slipped me by. I honestly thought it was next week...... I'm such a bad citizen!
I guess it was such a big majority, that my vote wouldn't have made a difference, but still.....
I guess it was such a big majority, that my vote wouldn't have made a difference, but still.....
I voted
Have they said yet if they are changing the voting system?
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #16
Referendum failed miserably and the turnout for it was worse than the election (I guess people just didn't know so didn't fill it in)
3% of the National Vote is not as easy as it seems, the Green Party has worked hard to get what they did - you would need to get those students to actually vote first of all and then many, as much as they agree with the issue will still vote for a 'big' party knowing that as a group they can do more. The official opposition can't pass laws easily under the current system, let alone independents - they would need a big change in the way the actual Legislature works too, otherwise it is pointless for anything but numbers. I guess it doesn't matter anyway since like other provinces, it got a resounding NO vote.
3% of the National Vote is not as easy as it seems, the Green Party has worked hard to get what they did - you would need to get those students to actually vote first of all and then many, as much as they agree with the issue will still vote for a 'big' party knowing that as a group they can do more. The official opposition can't pass laws easily under the current system, let alone independents - they would need a big change in the way the actual Legislature works too, otherwise it is pointless for anything but numbers. I guess it doesn't matter anyway since like other provinces, it got a resounding NO vote.
