Trust in our Institutions

[dimsum]

Meanwhile, survey says …

Foreign Interference: Two-thirds, including majority of CPC voters say all leaders should read NSICOP report - foreign interference NSICOP Trudeau

The survey shows foreign interference NSICOP Trudeau is a top concern — two-thirds want all federal leaders to read the classified report, and 70% say the implicated names should be public.

angusreid.org

That includes 6/10 Team Blue supporters responding …
View attachment 86123

Interesting. I wouldn’t have thought so many CPC supporters would say that.

Canadians are dumb. They'd give PP and his policies a majority government every time if he ran as the Liberal leader.

His policies wouldn’t make him part of the Liberal Party, let alone the leader.

We’re not like the US (yet), where a cactus would be voted in if they’re representing the right (to them) party.

 

[Kirkhill]

View attachment 86127

Little green men wear turbans and leathers.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Little green men wear turbans and leathers.

Multicultural fusion at its best!

 

[Remius]

Ar

Interesting. I wouldn’t have thought so many CPC supporters would say that.

Not all supportive of the CPC are so polarized that they can’t see beyond their team colour.

His policies wouldn’t make him part of the Liberal Party, let alone the leader.

lol. Absolutely.

We’re not like the US (yet), where a cactus would be voted in if they’re representing the right (to them) party.

Not yet. But there are some that will always vote one way regardless of who or what they propose. The funny thing is too they will defend and criticize the same policies depending on who proposes them.

 

[dimsum]

Not all supportive of the CPC are so polarized that they can’t see beyond their team colour.

Oh absolutely. But 6/10 is majority, so that should be some sort of signal to the CPC leadership that their supporters want it to happen.

 

[Furniture]

Not all supportive of the CPC are so polarized that they can’t see beyond their team cocolour.

I wasn't aware Tom Mulcair was "so polarized" as a CPC supporter he couldn't see past his team colour...

It is possible for people to think PP is making a smart call, and not be blind partisans.

 

[dimsum]

I wasn't aware Tom Mulcair was "so polarized" as a CPC supporter he couldn't see past his team colour...

It is possible for people to think PP is making a smart call, and not be blind partisans.

That comment was in response to my comment about 6 of 10 CPC supporters wanting all party leaders to get the security clearances and read the reports.

 

[Furniture]

That comment was in response to my comment about 6 of 10 CPC supporters wanting all party leaders to get the security clearances and read the reports.

I'm aware, and I pointed out that it's not necessarily about being "polarized" and more about javing different opinions regarding political strategy, without directly stating it.

 

[Remius]

I'm aware, and I pointed out that it's not necessarily about being "polarized" and more about javing different opinions regarding political strategy, without directly stating it.

Sure.

But the question in the survey wasn’t about their thoughts on political strategy or whether PP is making the right political call or not. It is probable that of the 6 out 10, many might also agree he’s playing a good political strategic game but that now might no longer be the time for that sort of thing.

 

[The Bread Guy]

The advantage PP has in being able to go weapons free politically has to be weighed against the risk of being seen to put political advantage ahead of ensuring transparent integrity of his caucus, internal processes & democracy - especially as the potentially next PM.

So far, the overall pluses seem to be outweighing the minuses, but time will tell.

 

[RangerRay]

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/terry-glavin-a-users-guide-to-trudeaus-illicit-affair-with-chinas-communists

Link to Financial Times article on United Front Work Department operations.

Inside China’s secret ‘magic weapon’ for worldwide influence

Xi is quietly ramping up a Communist party department to expand Beijing’s soft power

web.archive.org

 

[The Bread Guy]

QC Mounties kicking off awareness campaign, looking for anyone who's been affected ....

https://twitter.com/x/status/1810699140743004300

 

[RangerRay]

Couldn’t find a better thread for this. I thought we had one on parliamentary reform but I couldn’t find it.

From the author of Claws of the Panda.

Canada’s Prime Ministers: More like Monarchs than You Think | The Walrus

The key to fixing our democracy? Dismantle an electoral system that panders to the culture of celebrity

thewalrus.ca

I love the portrait.

 

[OldSolduer]

A great caricature

 

[The Bread Guy]

Interesting approach ....

Elections Canada floats suggestions to shield nomination contests from meddling

OTTAWA - Elections Canada is suggesting possible changes to protect the political nomination process from foreign meddling, including barring non-citizens from helping choose candidates, requiring parties to publish contest rules

www.thecanadianpressnews.ca

From the article ....


As mentioned before, how willing will the party machines be to see this happen? We'll see ...

 

[FSTO]

Interesting approach ....

Elections Canada floats suggestions to shield nomination contests from meddling

OTTAWA - Elections Canada is suggesting possible changes to protect the political nomination process from foreign meddling, including barring non-citizens from helping choose candidates, requiring parties to publish contest rules

www.thecanadianpressnews.ca

From the article ....
View attachment 86695
View attachment 86696
As mentioned before, how willing will the party machines be to see this happen? We'll see ...

They won’t but who is willing to take this to the Supreme Court to force it upon the parties.

 

[brihard]

They won’t but who is willing to take this to the Supreme Court to force it upon the parties.

Uh… Why do you think the SCC would have any authority to force such a notion on the parties? Court’s don’t just take any arbitrary grievance. There has to be a justiciable legal dispute. If there’s no law obligating the parties to adjust their internal mechanisms, there’s no role for the courts should they choose not to.

 

[FSTO]

Uh… Why do you think the SCC would have any authority to force such a notion on the parties? Court’s don’t just take any arbitrary grievance. There has to be a justiciable legal dispute. If there’s no law obligating the parties to adjust their internal mechanisms, there’s no role for the courts should they choose not to.

I’m no lawyer.

That being said:
Political parties are private clubs and therefore they can do what they please within their club. But, these clubs, unlike the loyal order of the Buffalo Hunt are tasked with operating our governments among all sorts of other very serious aspects of domestic and international policy (declaring war for example). So IMO these clubs should be under the exact same rules as the election act, and their nomination meetings should be under the control of elections Canada. Because it has been clearly demonstrated that these clubs cannot be trusted to police themselves.

 

[brihard]

I’m no lawyer.

That being said:
Political parties are private clubs and therefore they can do what they please within their club. But, these clubs, unlike the loyal order of the Buffalo Hunt are tasked with operating our governments among all sorts of other very serious aspects of domestic and international policy (declaring war for example). So IMO these clubs should be under the exact same rules as the election act, and their nomination meetings should be under the control of elections Canada. Because it has been clearly demonstrated that these clubs cannot be trusted to police themselves.

Ok, sure… But they aren’t.

If the Canada Elections Act is amended to regulate internal party mechanisms, there you go. But if the law isn’t changed to do that, there’s nothing to bind them. It’s either in law or it’s not.

Don’t get me wrong- I strongly agree that the party nominations and leadership campaigns present a high risk to our democratic integrity. I don’t pretend to know what the precise fixes are. But our courts have no arbitrary authority to impose rules that don’t presently exist in either statute or common law.

 

[FSTO]

Ok, sure… But they aren’t.

If the Canada Elections Act is amended to regulate internal party mechanisms, there you go. But if the law isn’t changed to do that, there’s nothing to bind them. It’s either in law or it’s not.

Don’t get me wrong- I strongly agree that the party nominations and leadership campaigns present a high risk to our democratic integrity. I don’t pretend to know what the precise fixes are. But our courts have no arbitrary authority to impose rules that don’t presently exist in either statute or common law.

Like the current PM saying “This is the last first past the post election”, the political parties seem to always defer what is best for them vice what is best for the institution. So we’ll never get reform, unless the backbenchers of all parties get a come to Jesus moment and impose the power that they have collectively to force this issue.
But I might as well wish for skittle farting unicorns to come to my birthday party, I’m getting the same result.