Canadian Politics

[The Gaffer]

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

All right then: first, gay marriage in france, and probably abortion rights, thirdly the way he dealt with the Burning Paris issue. It's not my country, but those are reasons to consider someone liberal, eh? Not very conservative is he? unless you're pinning that term to something that has to do with enviromental conservation, right?
But I suppose in the UK you guys are quite far left, and he looks conservative to you.

OK, I can see how that might seem liberal from a certain perspective (far right, over the horizon and into Here Be Dragons territory ).

Nurv is right, though, in that politics in the UK has gone very much down the US road in recent years (i.e. having two centre-right parties who swap power every so often, thus ensuring that nothing ever changes and governments don't unnecessarily impede the shafting of the populace by rampant corporations).

Another thing to bear in mind is the political-cultural context. In Europe, abortion tends to be a moral issue not a political one, and therefore being pro- or anti-abortion doesn't mark yourself out on the political spectrum to the same extent as it does in the US.

Gay rights is similar (there are many openly gay politicians on left and right) plus there are clauses in European legislation which require member states to offer equal rights to all people regardless of gender, race or sexual orientation.

Having said that, as far as I know Chirac opposes gay marriage
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3775847.stm
(from 2004 so could be out of date).

Chirac is a conservative both in the context of French politics (where his official opposition is the Socialist party) and in terms of policies. He is a free market liberaliser, and pro-European integration, which plonks him firmly in the centre right IMO.

[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]

Originally Posted by hectorberlioz

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...

Heh.

Will find and resurrect.

[Nurvingiel]

Somebody bumped the UK Politics thread. Nice.

I retitled this one because after the election was over we started talking about politics.


I'm bumping this with some BC news/politics.


Ferry accident:

A BC ferry "The Queen of the North" sunk just off the coast of BC, near a small town called Hartley Bay. Two passengers are still, as far as I know, missing. The other hundred or so were rescued quickly by residents of Hartley Bay who jumped in their personal boats as soon as they saw the ferry was sinking.

The ferry was about five hours into the 15 hour overnight ferry trip from Prince Rupert (north-west coast, south of the Alaska panhandle) to Port Hardy (Vancouver Island).

The accident occured at night, and the ferry was (obviously) way off course, and stuck some rocks. The ferry was from the 1970s and was the type that can only stay afloat (or lever, I forget what the ferry expert said exactly) when one compartment is flooded. Newer ferries can take on water in 3 compartments (I think).

Who is at fault here has not yet been deteremined. Personally I think someone is so fired.


Problems:

This was the worst ferry accident we've ever had - two people might be dead, and a ferry is lost. As far as I know, this was the only ferry from Prince Rupert. Maybe small coastal towns are right now without a ferry. Highway 97 (the coastal highway that goes to Whistler among other places) stops in Pemberton or maybe Smithers. It doesn't really go very far north.


Other ferry incidents:

We've had one incident in 2005 when the transmission failed in a ferry and it crashed into docks (not ferry docks, but the one for people's personal craft) at Horshoe Bay, where there's also a ferry terminal. The location of the terminal was questioned, but everyone agrees that the brilliant navigating of the ferry's captain resulted in there not being any injuries.

Prior to that, there was an incident where a ferry collided with a personal boat, but I can pretty much guarantee you that was the small boat's fault - smaller craft yield to larger boats because they can turn much, much more rapidly. Anyone who doesn't know that has no business on the water.

There may have been one other ferry incident before that.


The politics:

Ferries have always been political in BC. The fast ferry scandal really solidified that.

(This was, in brief, where the BC government hired someone to build 2 (I think) "fast" ferries in order to carry more people on the busiest ferry routes. The project went WAY over budget, and while the ferries could go fast, they could not operate at their top speed because the wake was too large and would have damaged docks and homes which are all along the islands, the coast, and on Vancouver Island, which border major ferry routes. In the end, the ferries were sold at a severe loss, and everyone involved looked immensely stupid.)

edit:

BC Ferry route map

Hartley Bay website (it's a great site!)

Give Hartley Bay some love!

So... where is Hartley Bay?




(area shown, more or less)

[Spock]

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

DONE!

[Nurvingiel]

Thank you Spock! *hearts you*

Now we just need Mooters to have an opinion about BC and/or Canadian politics.

[trolls' bane]

*bump*

[Nurvingiel]

A little explanation... TB and I were chatting when he said, "Canada is the only country Americans are taught absolutely NOTHING about. Like, some sort of big secret."
I responded, "What really? That's sad. Allow me to edumacate you. Our capital is Ottawa..."

And it went on from there. So we had the bright idea to bump this thread, but I was hoping he'd restate his question for the purpose of clarity.

Anyway.

Basic facts about Canada:

Capital: Ottawa
Head of State: Queen Elizabeth II
Head of Government: Prime Minister, currently Stephen Harper
Official Languages: English and French

There are ten provinces and three territories. Map.
(The three territories are the ones in the north.)

Feel free to ask other basic questions, Trolls' Bane and others.

Or advanced questions. Or anything. I don't want this thread to die (again), but if it does, then I won't beat a dead beaver with my hockey stick.

[Nurvingiel]

So. There aren't that many Canadians on this board, and those that are just can't bring themselves to talk about politics. Maybe because politics here just aren't as exciting as in the USA, but we're going to have a federal election on October 14, so let's get cracking.

There CBC has a lot of interesting coverage in the issues and candidates, all found here.

I, as usual, am experiencing the Great Canadian Election Conundrum, which is this. Do I vote for the party I like the best, or do I vote for the party most likely to defeat the party I like the least? In other words, how do I make my vote count the most toward what matters to me?

Yes, this complex scenario really does plague many Canadians. If it didn't make sense, here's how it's going to work for me. I would like to vote for the Green Party, because they're the only people with a strong environmental platform. The Liberals aren't bad, but they did sign the Kyoto accord and then forgot to do anything about it. Their leader, Stephan Dion, is also traveling for his campaign in the usual way, by flying around in a jet. Elizabeth May, the Green Party leader, is taking the train across Canada, the greenest way to travel. She walks to talk. Obviously there's more to both parties than how they run their campaigns, but this illustrates my point. I want to vote Green.

But... the Greens will never defeat the Conservatives, who I don't like at all. All of their cabinet but one are totally inexperienced, and a few of them have proven to be quite incompetant. I don't trust Stephen Harper and I don't agree with a lot of their policies. They're too socially conservative and not fiscally conservative enough. Though recently, the Liberals (who are usually centrist) have been talking about spending quite a lot of money. Regardless, I'd still rather see the Liberals in power than the Conservatives.

The Liberals are the only party that currently stand a chance of beating the Conservatives. The NDP are only popular in Atlantic Canada and Newfoundland, winning seats here and there elsewhere in the country. The Greens support is spread across the entire country, meaning they don't win seats. (They currently have one seat, an Independent who recently joined the party.) The Bloc are only popular in Québec, and don't even have candidates outside that province. In short, the Liberals are my only hope, though I want to vote for the Greens on principle. I love Elizabeth May. She has made the Greens a lot more accessible.

Party information is the same as in the first post in this thread.

But this thread isn't just about my opinions. I'm interested to know not only what other Canadians think, but what people from other countries think. Which leader would you rather decide our foreign affairs? Who do you think would be the best for trade?

[Jonathan]

How eager would the Liberals and the Green Party be to collaborate? Could the Greens support a Liberal minority government? And could the Liberals perhaps accept to form a coalition cabinet with the Greens?

If the two parties can cooperate, it'll be enough if they together can get >50% of the seats to beat the Conservatives and form a government. (Right? I don't know how Canadian parliamentarism works).

If this Liberal-Green constellation is a possibility, I should guess what's important from your point of view is that the Liberals and the Greens get >50% of the seats. Then they could cooperate and form a government of some sort. So a vote for either of them would be a blow against the Conservatives. But then the more votes the Greens get, the more leverage they will have in that collaboration. Thus, you should vote for the Greens, not the Liberals.


Am I way off in my reasoning?

[Nurvingiel]

You're not off at all Jonathan. The Liberals are quite likely to co-operate. There's speculation that if the Liberals win, they'll make Elizabeth May the Minister of Environment. The problem is the Greens are unlikely to win any seats at all unfortunately, so a coalition wouldn't help much in that regard.

For the opposition parties to band together to defeat the Conservatives, the NDP and the Liberals would have to work together. They've spent too much time taking shots at each other to work well together. Their opposition to the Conservatives so far has been embarrassing at best - both parties.

If the Liberals and the Bloc cut a deal it might work, but I can't see that happening either.

[Jonathan]

Thanks for the insight.
I see why it's a tough decision for you then, whether to go Green or Liberal. I'm curious what your final choice will be so please, do tell after election day

[GrayMouser]

Well, look at it historically- the NDP has always been striving to overcome the Liberals and split the electorate on a more straight left/right basis, but the Libs have traditionally been very adept at staking out the middle.

In the past, every time the NDP kept the Liberal vote down enough to force a coalition minority government, the inevitable break-up ended with the NDP losing support in the subsequent election.

With the Liberals still burdened with the taint of corruption, and having a weak leader, the NDP feels there is no percentage into going in as a junior partner.

[GrayMouser]

Strangely enough, though Canadian I spend almost no time following Canadian politics, but hours every day immersed in the tiniest details of the American system- it's just so strange that it's a wonderful spectator sport- not sure I'd want to have to live in it, though.

[Nurvingiel]

For someone who doesn't pay attention to Canadian politics you sure have some good insights about it GreyMouser.

American politics is an amazing spectator sport. But I feel more connected to my own home-grown politicians. (Even though I actually feel totally disconnected from the government; I don't actually feel like they represent, or care about, me at all.)

Jonathan, I'm still deciding who I'm going to vote for; I'll tell you when I know. I'm probably going to vote for the Liberals. While I am impressed by the Green Party's platform, I can't find any policies on forestry.

I'm not sure if this means they got rid of the "ban clearcuts" business, which was part of the living platform project and not necessarily an official policy, or if they just don't have any policies about forestry. They always have in the past though, so I'm going to email our local candidate and ask him. (I like our candidate. He has a degree in Ancient History from my alma mater. I'm going to ask him what his focus was, because I like ancient history too.)

[Nurvingiel]

Well you guys, I voted in the first day of the advance polls (I won't be here on Oct. 14). That was actually Oct. 3 but I didn't post.

I decided to vote for the Liberals and I feel good about it. While I was very impressed with how far the Green party has come and think that the candidate for this riding and their leader are both awesome, I just wasn't impressed enough to risk a Conservative in this seat.

This riding is very close. The sad thing is if the Liberals had a strong lead here I would have been a lot more likely to vote for the Greens. In the last four years, the Green party has made huge strides. They used to have a bunch of ridiculous policies - those are all gone. In another four years, they might impress me enough to risk it all and vote for them.

They would have had $1.50 in funding if they had gotten my vote. Maybe I'll make a small donation to make up for it.

One last thing for this post. The Conservatives are currently running some anti-NDP ads (the NDP are doing very well in the polls) and they keep calling them the "Ottawa NDP".

They are called the Federal NDP. That is their name. This is an obvious ploy into manipulating western voters into thinking that the NDP is a party that's only relevant in eastern Canada. Well, the Conservative party might think that voters are a bunch of drooling morons but I showed them otherwise. With my ballot. Marked for their biggest rival.

Just another reason not to trust those manipulative, dishonest rackenspracken... anyway, I'm very happy with my vote and I hope the Liberal candidate wins! (This is one of the few Liberal ridings in the province. BC, sadly, is a Conservative stronghold.)

Thoughts?

[Jonathan]

The Green Party of Canada will surely grow into the role of an established party with broad policies. I guess many green parties in various countries have started out as basically one-policy parties (focusing on the environment but not much else). But with time, many big and powerful green parties have emerged in Europe, whose party programmes entail every major political issue.

[Coffeehouse]

I'm not too sure about that. Yes and no. While Green Parties all over Europe are getting stronger support than before with their political manifestos aligning with one of the hottest issues of the day, global warming, that does not mean it will translate into more votes. I think instead that as this issue grows in importance, so too will be the effort of larger parties into including it as one of their 'causes'. Rounds of applause to these Green Parties for putting it on the agenda, but they might not get rewarded for it in leaps of voter flocking as one might logically expect.

[Jonathan]

I heard the Conservatives won while the Liberals did really poorly.

[Nurvingiel]

That's right Jonathan, the results are in.

As the results for BC came in I thought, "Stéphane Dion (Liberal leader) is packing up his desk right now." The Liberals got slaughtered here. Lots of support for the Conservatives and NDP though.

It's not just because the Liberals did (very) badly in BC, they did poorly in this election. Dion just didn't have the chops. I'd still have a beer or two with him though, he seems like a really nice guy.

So, the Conservatives will form another minority government (they have less than half the seats, but they have the most), but they have more seats than they did last time. Stephen Harper called this a "clear mandate," I wouldn't go so far. Harper benefitted from the 'left' vote being split; something that traditionally benefitted the Liberal party, back when they didn't suck. I only like this phenomenon when it benefits parties with policies I like. Anyway, one of my big hopes for this election was that the Conservatives would not win a majority government. So I am relieved. I didn't really imagine that the Liberals were going to win. The Green Shift (their slate of environmental policies) wasn't timed well and they failed to sell it to Canadians. Fairly weak leadership from Dion sunk them.

My other hope was that the Green Party leader Elizabeth May would win her seat. Unfortunately, she lost to Conservative incumbent Peter MacKay, the fairly popular Minister of Defence. Their riding is Central Nova in Nova Scotia. I think running against Peter MacKay was a big mistake. She probably could have beat a less popular candidate and she really needed that seat. It was the next step for the Green Party to have their leader in the house. There was even talk that the Liberals might have made her the Minister of Environment, but none of that was official.

I mean, MacKay is not only a cabinet minister with a very important portfolio, he's also not an idiot. I'd even go so far as to say he's intelligent. There's a reason he was made Defence Minister instead of, say,

Still, May did extremely well. She got 32% of the vote! (MacKay won with 46%.)

So how did the other party leaders do? Stephen Harper won easily. So did Stéphane Dion[/url]. Gilles Duceppe won with half the votes. Jack Layton was probably nervous, but he still had 7,000 votes over the second place fellow.

The other party leaders were strategic. They currently live in ridings where people totally love them and/or their parties. But is Elizabeth May really wrong to run against Peter MacKay? She's actually from that riding, it's not wrong not to move.

Discuss.

Sigh. I guess it's another four years (or two and a half) of no interest in Canadian Politics.