Canadian politics thread

[supafamous]

Originally Posted by JD¹³

I know it's been done in the past, but its disingenuous regardless. Political leadership should be chosen by the people, not appointed by political parties. The major UK parties have it right.

That's not what the UK parties are doing though - you clearly didn't read what I shared.

The Conservative Party constitution says that the leader of the party "shall be drawn from those elected to Parliament". Clause VII of the Labour Rule Book also says its leader "shall be elected from among Commons members of the PLP [Parliamentary Labour Party]."

IOW, the leader is elected by the party membership from amongst the representatives that have been elected.

Originally Posted by JD¹³

While this is true in theory it's not reality and you know it. With the partisan games all parties play no MP is truly independent unless running as such. If you're voting for Party X you know you're voting for their individual Prime Minister, that's why they campaign as such. The ballot looks different but in practice it's the same as the US, you're choosing the PM with your vote even if they're not specifically listed.

It's not just theory if that's actually how the parliamentary system works. What you're saying is that people's perceptions of how they are voting are different than the reality. Not that the reality doesn't match the theory.

Originally Posted by JD¹³

Given the staggering corruption and complete loss of mandate from Canadian citizens the Liberal Party should not be swearing-in someone off the street to be PM. With tensions as high as they are with the new US leadership having some unelected stand-in for three months would be exceptionally weak. Couldn't be a worse time for these partisan games, and we the people are going to suffer as a result. As usual.

As long as the gov't stands it has a mandate. I will say that "mandates" are generally bullshit though - parties rarely win elections by majority yet they get a majority of seats. Trump won by a tiny margin yet will rule with an iron fist.

Gov'ts don't actually have "mandates". They hold power until they no longer can hold power - that is they can't act on their agenda any longer. That's it.

This tariff war won't require parliament to be in session - the power to fight this lies largely in the hands of the PM's office. It would certainly help if the PM was a powerful PM but it's not required - that Trudeau was able to bring all but 1 idiot Premier to the table shows he can still tackle this particular issue (even if he might not be able to handle other things).

[JD¹³]

Originally Posted by Manic!

In the UK they are chosen by the party.

I know reading comprehension isn't your strong suit. The point being made is that in order for those UK members to be eligible for the leadership of their party, and then be Prime Minister, they have to be part of the House of Commons.

Originally Posted by supafamous

That's not what the UK parties are doing though - you clearly didn't read what I shared.

Yes I did, the key is that the leadership candidates are at least sitting members and are elected to office to begin with.

Originally Posted by supafamous

IOW, the leader is elected by the party membership from amongst the representatives that have been elected.

I agree that that's the way it should be. That's the crux of what I'm saying.

I'm not faulting the Liberals for having a leadership race, it needs to happen. But the timing is the worst imaginable and that's the fault of Trudeau's ego and Singh's stupidity. Trudeau should have been replaced a year ago either by his party or through non-confidence. You can say what you want about the semantics of the word mandate but the reality is the vast majority of Canadians want the Liberal Party out, they want Trudeau out, and they want a general election. Partisan games by the Liberals and NDP have now put the country in a bad position in practice and even worse in optics. Their "Team Canada" call-to-arms now is incredibly hypocritical. They didn't give a shit about what Canadians wanted as recently as a few weeks ago before the HOC had their holiday break.

[Traum]

The un-elected PM who isn't even an MP is really nothing more than a strawman argument. The reality is -- the moment Parliament resumes, both the Cons and the NDP would be filing and passing a non-confidence motion to topple the gov. I haven't bothered looking up the expected dates, but I bet it would be 2 - 3 weeks tops.

IMO the bigger question is -- which riding is Carney gonna run in that will give him the best chance of getting elected? The last 2 by-elections were both supposed to be in Liberal strongholds, but the Libs still lost in both cases.

Originally Posted by JD¹³

Until Mark Carney is elected as an MP couldn't give a shit what he has to say. At this point he's just a businessman/bureaucrat spouting his opinion, no different than that other mouthpiece O'Leary. If Carney is voted leader of the Liberals to be the face of the party through the election, fine then he can speak during the campaign. But he absolutely SHOULD NOT replace Trudeau as PM before the election even if he replaces him as party leader. Having an unelected, non-MP as the Prime Minister is a complete subversion of our democracy and should not be allowed to happen.
[/url]