Liberal Minority Government 2025 - ???

[Remius]

Or the instances of big corporations paying for signatures to get what they want or overturn legislation.

Too many risks for a system to be based on this.

 

[The Bread Guy]

New governments and politicians don't want to set a precedent because they know they'll be doing the exact same thing.

Oh yeah - something about giving yourself tools that you may not want your enemies to be able to use.

 

[Eaglelord17]

I think we need to reign in what our elected officials can actually do and instead institute more direct democracy.

Elected officials should simply be guardians that keep the lights on and the course steady. Any new law, legislation, rights adjustments or repealing of aforementioned, or spending over X amount requires a plebiscite or referendum to the citizenry.

Direct democracy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Participatory democracy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Deliberative democracy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

A variation on Swiss Democracy I think would be a very good thing for us. Gives control back to the people instead of unaccountable politicians. Been arguing this for years.

For those saying our population is too irresponsible, that would change. Responsibility breeds responsibility. It might be a hard couple years at first but eventually the majority will get on board.

Sure. Thankfully that isn’t our system either.

I would disagree with that statement. We get sometimes majority governments with less than 30% of the electorates support. Last Liberal majority had 27% of eligible voters support yet had 54% of the seats.

Our system tends to force parties to be more middle ground on many issues just due to how FPTP works but it is still minorities which govern.

 

[Halifax Tar]

A variation on Swiss Democracy I think would be a very good thing for us. Gives control back to the people instead of unaccountable politicians. Been arguing this for years.

For those saying our population is too irresponsible, that would change. Responsibility breeds responsibility. It might be a hard couple years at first but eventually the majority will get on board.

I would disagree with that statement. We get sometimes majority governments with less than 30% of the electorates support. Last Liberal majority had 27% of eligible voters support yet had 54% of the seats.

Our system tends to force parties to be more middle ground on many issues just due to how FPTP works but it is still minorities which govern.

It's interesting how many people have more faith in politicians than their fellow private citizens.

I wonder if they worry their death grip on the direction of the country is too much at risk with direct democracy ?

 

[Remius]

A variation on Swiss Democracy I think would be a very good thing for us. Gives control back to the people instead of unaccountable politicians. Been arguing this for years.

For those saying our population is too irresponsible, that would change. Responsibility breeds responsibility. It might be a hard couple years at first but eventually the majority will get on board.

I would disagree with that statement. We get sometimes majority governments with less than 30% of the electorates support. Last Liberal majority had 27% of eligible voters support yet had 54% of the seats.

That does not mean that the system is geared for that. It can happen but it is not systemic as opposed to what you propose.

Our system tends to force parties to be more middle ground on many issues just due to how FPTP works but it is still minorities which govern.

Pluralities govern.

Our system isn’t perfect. But the alternatives are worse.

 

[Czech_pivo]

A variation on Swiss Democracy I think would be a very good thing for us. Gives control back to the people instead of unaccountable politicians. Been arguing this for years.

For those saying our population is too irresponsible, that would change. Responsibility breeds responsibility. It might be a hard couple years at first but eventually the majority will get on board.

I would disagree with that statement. We get sometimes majority governments with less than 30% of the electorates support. Last Liberal majority had 27% of eligible voters support yet had 54% of the seats.

Our system tends to force parties to be more middle ground on many issues just due to how FPTP works but it is still minorities which govern.

I laugh every time I read something like - 'The Alberta Teachers Union voted overwhelmingly 93% in favour of a strike vote' - that never happens. What happens is that 43% of the eligible union members who bothered to show up for the strike action vote had 93% of them vote in favour of the strike. In reality 40 people out of 100 eligible voters said yes to the strike action - not a majority and hardly overwhelmingly.

 

[dapaterson]

The Alberta Teachers' Association published their vote results including number of votes cast.

Vote results and next steps | Alberta Teachers' Association

teachers.ab.ca

Groups like PSAC could learn a lesson from them.

 

[Remius]

It's interesting how many people have more faith in politicians than their fellow private citizens.

You confuse faith with systems vs faith with politicians. And no I don’t have much faith in a lot of private citizens.

I wonder if they worry their death grip on the direction of the country is too much at risk with direct democracy ?

Or it could be they know how unwieldy it is.

 

[Halifax Tar]

I laugh every time I read something like - 'The Alberta Teachers Union voted overwhelmingly 93% in favour of a strike vote' - that never happens. What happens is that 43% of the eligible union members who bothered to show up for the strike action vote had 93% of them vote in favour of the strike. In reality 40 people out of 100 eligible voters said yes to the strike action - not a majority and hardly overwhelmingly.

93% of the XXX votes cast would be a more appropriate wording, I agree.

But biases and spin is rife in modern society. People will manipulate anything to confirm their own biases.

 

[Lumber]

It's interesting how many people have more faith in politicians than their fellow private citizens.

I wonder if they worry their death grip on the direction of the country is too much at risk with direct democracy ?

Politicians are attached to a system with check and balances and spotlights.

A person is smart, but people, when they form a mob, are dumb, panicky, and dangerous.

 

[Haggis]

The tyranny of the minority can be just as bad/destructive as the majority.

Sure. Thankfully that isn’t our system either.

On some issues, it is. In Canada, gun control is a perfect example. The agenda of a certain political party on that issue has been seized by a small group of overzealous lobby groups.

The same could be said for the green energy zealots. Facts be damned, it's our way or the highway!!

 

[Remius]

Thankfully our system is robust enough that any changes to direct democracy leading to populist outputs are mostly minimized.

 

[Halifax Tar]

Politicians are attached to a system with check and balances and spotlights.

Well that's finished then. Because politicians always follow the rules.

A person is smart, but people, when they form a mob, are dumb, panicky, and dangerous.

Like political parties?

 

[Remius]

On some issues, it is. In Canada, gun control is a perfect example. The agenda of a certain political party on that issue has been seized by a small group of overzealous lobby groups. Facts be damned, it's our way or the highway!!

And tell me how you think it would go if we had a national referendum on semi automatic rifles and pistols? Or guns overall.

Not sure you would like that outcome.

 

[Haggis]

Like political parties?

No, political parties are goal oriented and their goal is to stay in power.

 

[Czech_pivo]

The Alberta Teachers' Association published their vote results including number of votes cast.

Vote results and next steps | Alberta Teachers' Association

teachers.ab.ca

Groups like PSAC could learn a lesson from them.

Well hat's off to them because that's not how it plays out in Ontario.

 

[Czech_pivo]

The Alberta Teachers' Association published their vote results including number of votes cast.

Vote results and next steps | Alberta Teachers' Association

teachers.ab.ca

Groups like PSAC could learn a lesson from them.

Actually those numbers look to be misleading as well.

Teachers overwhelmingly reject latest deal, move forward with Oct. 6 strike

More than 89 per cent of teachers voted against the tentative deal

ca.news.yahoo.com

This article calls out that there are 51,000 teachers eligible to vote......

 

[mariomike]

Is my understanding wrong that the "35 year cap" is only related to pensionable service.

Right.

For permanent Full-time Employees ( FTE ).

Part timers, seasonal, contract etc. working less than full-time , and others, may have ( optional ) OMERS Eligible Service .

Their Credited Service would be calculated as proportional of what a full-time employee in the same position would earn.

Ie: They may have been working in one capacity or another, but the 35-year cap was based on Credited Service.

I believe that if someone if capable of doing their assigned tasks at the overall same level as those around them, they should be allowed to continue doing so for as long as they are able and want to.

Funny thing, senior management told us about the 2021 change at a pensioner luncheon.

To ourselves, we muttered , "Easy for them to say. They aren't doing the heavy lifting."

Someone also mentioned if some of the wives ever found out about the 35-year cap being eliminated, they would never let you retire.

Because the longer you stay on, after 35 years of Credited Service, the larger their Survivor Benefit.

I believe in Japan it is known as "Karoshi".

 

[lenaitch]

It almost like a 'Tall Poppy' syndrome - is it done by the Union or the Employer or both working together. Like they don't want a person working another 5yrs and having a better overall pension than the vast majority of the others that retire after 35yrs instead of 40yrs. I believe that if someone if capable of doing their assigned tasks at the overall same level as those around them, they should be allowed to continue doing so for as long as they are able and want to.

It has to be both parties. Even if pension are a negotiable item, both parties have to agree because both parties financially contribute.

'Pulling ones weight' or 'earning their keep' is always an employment matter (I've know slugs that had five years on), but it can become more of an issue with age depending on the job. Most PS jobs don't have mandatory annual physicals or medicals so it can become a matter of peer pressure or self realization that they can't keep up. Management might try to convince a person that it's time to leave but is likely going to be very reluctant to initiate a performance action against a very senior employee.

In the example I gave, the member was a regular platoon member and by all accounts was no slouch when it comes to the usual array of back-up, bar fights, etc. He would have been in his early 70s and I find that to be not typical (I'm in my 70s and no way could handle rotating 12-hour shifts). In my experience, some members who choose not to retire are simply afraid to; they've made no plans either personal or financial. Then, of course, are the ones who have too many ex's circling the tent.

 

[lenaitch]

I think we need to reign in what our elected officials can actually do and instead institute more direct democracy.

Elected officials should simply be guardians that keep the lights on and the course steady. Any new law, legislation, rights adjustments or repealing of aforementioned, or spending over X amount requires a plebiscite or referendum to the citizenry.

Direct democracy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Participatory democracy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Deliberative democracy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I think such a system would devolve to a small handful of laws being passed every year accompanied by an increasingly small voter turn-out. It would also be very expensive if we consider the cost of an election. People forget how many laws and government passes per session; many of them rather mundane. That's not even considering regulations.

Canada is about 5500km wide and 4600km tall, covering six time zones. Reducing every issue down to a disgestible simple question, I can't imagine people in Manitoba having any insight (or really care) about a Bill to spend $XMn on lobster fishers in Nova Scotia. The US has a lot of 'referendum' questions on their ballots. Maybe some are good, but California is the reason we have warning labels declaring that just about everything on the planet is a carcinogen.

Absent any pro or con marketing language, how the hell do I know if spending $10Bn on an oil pipeline is a good idea? A lot of people probably wouldn't read past the $10Bn part and say 'no' just out of principle. Do you think spending about $120Bn on submarines can be reduced to a simple plebiscite question?