The Next Conservative Leader

[Jed]

I'm neither loud nor persistent, but I like the idea of a strong, deep and centralized government.

You must be in the minority of a minority I guess.  [

 

[Edward Campbell]

...
I often wonder that so many of them (prominent CPC members) can be so ham-fisted and thick-tongued in the public sphere; I can only conclude that they are so deeply inside small bubbles that they really do not understand that some of what they express is deeply offensive even to people who want to support the CPC.

        Bingo!

I suspect that most people want to focus on family, friends, communities, and - perhaps - province.  The people who want a federal government with broad and deep powers and responsibilities are not even a large minority; they are merely loud and persistent.

Actually what I want, and perhaps I'm not a "typical" or "mainstream" Conservative, and I am certainly no kind of social-conservative, at all, in fact I self describe as a[size=12pt] social-libertarian ~ which means that I find even a Liberal government too intrusive ~ but what I want is[/size] "a federal government with narrow but deep powers and responsibilities."

 

[The Bread Guy]

... the few that are always yelling or just being plain nasty have the effect of completely ruining it for me.

:nod:

 

[Lumber]

So did Trudeau Sr.  I'm not sure it's worked out all that well for Canada ever since.  Besides, strong, deep and centralized governments aren't historically known to govern with a light touch.  Au contraire.

I would add the word compartmentalized; I really believe in our constitutional separation of powers. However, I believe there is some room for improvement and expansion to better determine what should be a provincial prerogative and what should be federal. It should be more clear-cut, and each level of government should have absolute control over their area. The courts can settle the overlaps as they do, but I like the idea of a Federal government who just get's shit done.

 

[Kirkhill]

I would add the word compartmentalized; I really believe in our constitutional separation of powers. However, I believe there is some room for improvement and expansion to better determine what should be a provincial prerogative and what should be federal. It should be more clear-cut, and each level of government should have absolute control over their area. The courts can settle the overlaps as they do, but I like the idea of a Federal government who just get's shit done.

Lumber - how much difference between jurisdictions will you allow?

Is it permissible for Peterborough to ban grape jelly?  Or Lethbridge to allow open carry of firearms? What Peterborough does doesn't affect Lethbridge, and vice versa.  And I go to Peterborough I should just follow the local laws.

Just to be clear - my own opinion is for the highest degree of what the EU and the Catholic Church describe as "subsidiarity" - something more honoured in the breach.  I believe that power must be granted from the bottom up.  Authority is only the authority that I accept, even when it is imposed.

Once upon a time Jean Chretien was fulminating about equalization payments because Ralph Klein was perturbed about paying while Chretien was cutting.  Chretien said - paraphrasing - he wouldn't accept having Ralph decide on writing Jean a check.  He expected to be able to either command Ralph to write the check, or from another perspective, he would allow Ralph to keep whatever money he thought Ralph required.

My sense of things is that Jean should have been getting the money that Ralph sent to him on my behalf.  If he can't make the case for the money he doesn't get it.  That, in fact is the role, at the federal level, of parliament.  If the government can't make the case for the money to the representatives of the people, it doesn't get it.

The government has no rights except those that are granted it by the electorate and, because Canada is a confederation, its component provinces.

 

[Underway]

Actually what I want, and perhaps I'm not a "typical" or "mainstream" Conservative, and I am certainly no kind of social-conservative, at all, in fact I self describe as a social-libertarian ~ which means that I find even a Liberal government too intrusive ~ but what I want is "a federal government with narrow but deep powers and responsibilities."

Are you are saying is that the GoC should retrench and only worry about the things it's really responsible for in the Constitution? 
Like the postal service, the census, the military, criminal law, navigation and shipping, fishing, currency, banking, weights and measures, bankruptcy, copyrights, patents, First Nations, naturalization, foreign affairs and international trade (actually I think that's the whole list). 

Or are you thinking more specifically?

 

[Edward Campbell]

It's important to understand that many, many, indeed almost all of the federal encroachments into areas of constitutionally mandated provincial responsibility were made with either the full agreement of the provinces or, in some cases, at the request of the provinces.

I, too, would like to see clearly defined areas of responsibility with taxing powers and rates adjusted accordingly.

(And I appreciate that I am not answering the question ...  :nod: )

 

[suffolkowner]

Are you are saying is that the GoC should retrench and only worry about the things it's really responsible for in the Constitution? 
Like the postal service, the census, the military, criminal law, navigation and shipping, fishing, currency, banking, weights and measures, bankruptcy, copyrights, patents, First Nations, naturalization, foreign affairs and international trade (actually I think that's the whole list). 

Or are you thinking more specifically?

So I can expect the province to stop pulling me off the highways and lakes for whatever transgression [

 

[a_majoor]

It's important to understand that many, many, indeed almost all of the federal encroachments into areas of constitutionally mandated provincial responsibility were made with either the full agreement of the provinces or, in some cases, at the request of the provinces.

I, too, would like to see clearly defined areas of responsibility with taxing powers and rates adjusted accordingly.

(And I appreciate that I am not answering the question ...  :nod: )

Indeed. I suspect that this sort of overreach has more negative consequences than most people imagine. Cities like London now routinely defer maintenance of roads and sewers while waiting for federal or provincial funds to magically arrive into the city coffers, generally ignoring their own mandates, or going the other way (again London) making grandiose plans like a decade long construction project to bring mass transit to London which are otherwise totally unaffordable (and in this particular case, also lacking in any real rational outside of the usual mantras of Progressives like densification and greenhouse gases).

Blurring of jurisdictional lines also results in blurring of accountability, which is probably one of the outcomes that politicians and bureaucrats welcome, being able to finger point when there are no or negative results from their actions or inactions.

And of course, regulatory and spending bloat cripples the economy as a whole (in addition to multiple overlapping programs between jurisdictional boundaries, there are plenty of overlapping programs within the various levels of government (for example, I often receive emails telling me I could be eligible for Federal small business funding from 800 different programs...).

Strip away the overlap and close down the redundant programs and departments not mandated and the savings would be in the billions to tens of billions of dollar range. Translate that into tax cuts and the average Canadian family of four, which now spends from 40-45% of their income on taxes and government fees might see that figure drop to 30-35% of their annual income. While still a lot, a reduction of that magnitude would act as a 10% raise in people's disposable incomes, which would be energizing to the economy as a whole.

 

[The Bread Guy]

... Cities like London now routinely defer maintenance of roads and sewers while waiting for federal or provincial funds to magically arrive into the city coffers, generally ignoring their own mandates, or going the other way (again London) making grandiose plans ... which are otherwise totally unaffordable ...

London is not alone in this.  Another reason maintenance has been offset in the past in some places has been to keep the municipal tax rate down.

 

[Loachman]

The government has no rights except those that are granted it by the electorate

Governments have no rights whatsoever, only powers.

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

Has anyone found any blogs or sites that summarize the policies of each of the candidates?

 

[Swingline1984]

Has anyone found any blogs or sites that summarize the policies of each of the candidates?

Nope, but here's a page that links to each of their websites https://www.conservative.ca/leadership/en/candidates#MaximeBernier

 

[jollyjacktar]

I was watching a YouTube video earlier today which has O'Leary in the lead as best suited to take out the hair, amongst potential voters (not party members) polled by Nanos and another outlet.  The talking heads were surprised by the results.  I'm in the O'Leary camp for sure.

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

I was watching a YouTube video earlier today which has O'Leary in the lead as best suited to take out the hair, amongst potential voters (not party members) polled by Nanos and another outlet.  The talking heads were surprised by the results.  I'm in the O'Leary camp for sure.

His is the only name most citizens would be able to recognize from the candidate list,  but he's genuinely unlikable and would get buried in a general election.

 

[jollyjacktar]

Maybe so, but I would like to see what happened if he got the leadership.  I want the PM to be competent not the Prom King.  We already have a pretty boy at the helm, and his steering skills suck. 

 

[Kirkhill]

I'll still go with the guy who won the Manning Centre straw poll

@MaximeBernier 32.4%
@andrewscheer 19.6%

@kevinolearytv & @MichaelChongMP tied 10.1%

@ErinOTooleMP 7.8%
@lraitt 6.1%

@KellieLeitch 5.6%

 

[Cdn Blackshirt]

Maybe so, but I would like to see what happened if he got the leadership.  I want the PM to be competent not the Prom King.  We already have a pretty boy at the helm, and his steering skills suck.

That's not really the choice though

In reality the choice is if you want:
1.  To nominate someone who you deem to be competent who has no hope of winning and guarantees Trudeau a 2nd term so you have a great Leader of the Opposition?
2.  A potentially less competent candidate that is likable enough to become PM, and then you hope they have bench strength behind them to steer the ship?

 

[jollyjacktar]

That's not really the choice though

In reality the choice is if you want:
1.  To nominate someone who you deem to be competent who has no hope of winning and guarantees Trudeau a 2nd term so you have a great Leader of the Opposition?
2.  A potentially less competent candidate that is likable enough to become PM, and then you hope they have bench strength behind them to steer the ship?

I am mired in quicksand with regards to this.  I don't like the hair and want to see him gone.  The usual suspects of leadership candidates don't inspire me enough to want to see them in the driver's seat either ( I am tired of the same old same old).  The outsider has turned plenty of folks off by his on screen persona as a reality star as requested by said shows that featured him.  Therefore he is deemed unpalatable, but I see him as the most competent to take care of the economy now and in the future for Canadians.  I'm afraid I am in purgatory, politically speaking.

 

[Journeyman]

1.  ... be competent who has no hope of winning ...
2.  ....less competent candidate that is likable enough.....

Maybe I'm just not seeing this as sufficiently black & white (or further right & centrist), but which names would you put beside those two options?  :dunno: