[Newsbot]

<strong>Title: </strong> <a href="/link.php?id=21156" target="_blank">The election (date) is fixed</a> (click to view)

<strong>Category:</strong> <a href="/news/topic/1-political" target="_blank">Political</a>
<strong>Posted By: </strong> <a href="/modules.php?name=Your_Account&op=userinfo&username=ridenrain" target="_blank">ridenrain</a>
<strong>Date: </strong> 2007-05-01 19:23:16
<strong>Canadian</strong>

[MGX]

oh shit!

[ridenrain]

What's the problem with that? This has worked in BC and works great at stopping the sudden windfall spending that always proceeds an election.

[fatbasturd]

Yes it is a great idea....Just like RR said no more last minute vote buying.

[hurley_108]

ridenrain ridenrain:

What's the problem with that? This has worked in BC and works great at stopping the sudden windfall spending that always proceeds an election.

How, exactly? Does the act forbid spending annoncements within a certain period of the election? If not, the government is still free to spend lots of money, it's just that everyone knows an election is looming rather than just the PMO / cabinet.

[fatbasturd]

hurley_108 hurley_108:

ridenrain ridenrain:

What's the problem with that? This has worked in BC and works great at stopping the sudden windfall spending that always proceeds an election.

How, exactly? Does the act forbid spending annoncements within a certain period of the election? If not, the government is still free to spend lots of money, it's just that everyone knows an election is looming rather than just the PMO / cabinet.

Exactly....then they will just show the voters which section of the voting pool is important to them and which is not.....I'ts really hard to please all the people all of the time.

[hurley_108]

fatbasturd fatbasturd:

hurley_108 hurley_108:

ridenrain ridenrain:

What's the problem with that? This has worked in BC and works great at stopping the sudden windfall spending that always proceeds an election.

How, exactly? Does the act forbid spending annoncements within a certain period of the election? If not, the government is still free to spend lots of money, it's just that everyone knows an election is looming rather than just the PMO / cabinet.

Exactly....then they will just show the voters which section of the voting pool is important to them and which is not.....I'ts really hard to please all the people all of the time.

Yea, but that's true with or without fixed election dates. I donno. I just see this as the Conservatives getting their revenge for the 2000 election. I don't really have any problem with it, I just don't see the value.

[fatbasturd]

Just makes the current goverment take a stand on the issues that they feel are important prior to an election. It's not an advantage to an party, it just gives the voters a clearer look at what direction the current goverment wants to take....instead of a last minute handout to a shit pile of special interest groups to build some party hype....in short it is all good in my books.

[uwish]

don't see the value? It stops the PM for calling an election after only 2.8 years when "times are good" for the party. We have seen previous governments do; that way I think it removes "some" of the PMO's ability to fix elections.

I think its fantastic and about time.

[hurley_108]

uwish uwish:

don't see the value? It stops the PM for calling an election after only 2.8 years when "times are good" for the party. We have seen previous governments do; that way I think it removes "some" of the PMO's ability to fix elections.

I think its fantastic and about time.

Didn't stop them from imploding under the pressure of the sponsorship scandal. Just delayed the inevitable. If it was really that powerful to be able to call an election whenever you saw fit, then power would never change hands. Obviously that's not the case.

For me, the biggest problem with federal politics is the current FPTP electoral system. It completely perverts the democratic wishes of the population for a real boost in power, making majorities where they shouldn't exist, enabling parties to govern unchecked for four [or 2.8] years when they have no mandate to.

Edit: Silly BBCode, had to change my brackets...

[Delwin]

I can see why the Cons are so supportive of this bill, it takes some strategic advantage away from the party in power. It's good planning on their part.

[hurley_108]

Delwin Delwin:

I can see why the Cons are so supportive of this bill, it takes some strategic advantage away from the party in power. It's good planning on their part.

For when they're turfed back to opposition in the next election?

[MGX]

ridenrain ridenrain:

What's the problem with that? This has worked in BC and works great at stopping the sudden windfall spending that always proceeds an election.

Don't mix provincial with federal politics.

[Clogeroo]

Having a set date isn't a bad idea or to have elections at a certain time and takes away the power of the PM to just ask the Governor General to call an election whenever he feels like one. Although I don’t believe this is a constitutional amendment so the government can ask the GG for permission to dissolve parliament still anytime the government really wishes. In some ways it is a measure of good faith and if the government decided not to follow the guideline of this bill then they will be ridiculed for it. Also the Governor General could actually stand up more and stop a PM from not following the principals and intent of this legislation. This could bring up a similar situation likening of the King-Byng affair.

$1:

Don't mix provincial with federal politics.

Why not? It is relatively the same parliamentary system.

[Delwin]

hurley_108 hurley_108:

Delwin Delwin:

I can see why the Cons are so supportive of this bill, it takes some strategic advantage away from the party in power. It's good planning on their part.

For when they're turfed back to opposition in the next election?

Exactly, it's like padding the doghouse with a pillow before you go out drinking. It's good prep work.