[fvc-wat-disc] Food for thought from provincial

[Kevin Smith]

Hi folks:

OK, I'll crunch the numbers and request a cheque.  Who am I making it
out to, and where am I sending it?

Re: the threshold, it surprises me that people are so afraid that a
party with 3% of public support (hundreds of thousands) would get
representation in the legislature.  Isn't that what democracy is all
about?  We aren't going to agree with everyone, but their views should
be listened to and considered on their merits.  If we're afraid to do
that, we don't have much of a democracy.

Kevin.

On 10/16/07, Shannon Adshade <sadshade at lutherwood.ca> wrote:
> Hello All, I believe a research partnership with LSPIRG;analyzing
> post-referendum voting patterns would be an excellent and very useful
> way to spend our surplus funds.Some thoughts about the MMP campaign that
> I wanted to get your opinions on!!I believe future electoral reform
> campaigns/referendums must work hard at ensuring the younger voting
> population;which generally supports our views; comes out to vote.Also,
> although during OCA presentations and consultations I thought the 3%
> threshold for list member representation was appropriate;I now believe
> this is too low and should be raised to official party status in any
> future votes.The rationale behind this is because our opposition can
> successfully argue that fringe parties or groups could realistically
> obtain these results and thus have representation.I really enjoyed
> meeting and working with everyone on our campaign! I really learned a
> lot from the experience and hope we get the opportunity to get involved
> in a similar situation in the not too distant future. I think we should
> have an FVC-WR post-referendum  executive meeting in the near future.
> Shannon Adshade FVC-WR Executive Member
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: fvc-wat-disc-bounces at listserv.thinkers.org
> [mailto:fvc-wat-disc-bounces at listserv.thinkers.org] On Behalf Of Brian
> Tanguay
> Sent: October 16, 2007 12:38 PM
> To: kevedsmith at gmail.com; FVC Waterloo Region Discussion
> Subject: Re: [fvc-wat-disc] Food for thought from provincial
>
> I think if provincial knew that we were planning a research partnership
> with LSPIRG that they would be even more supportive.
>
> So it looks to me like we should move ahead on this, if the rest of the
> executive is willing.
>
> Cheers,
> Brian
>
> >>> kevedsmith at gmail.com 10/16/2007 11:30 AM >>>
> Hi folks:
>
> Asked Bronwen, our CFO about using the donations for research.  Here
> is her response, which is further food for thought.
>
> Kevin.
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Bronwen <bbruch3 at cogeco.ca>
> Date: Oct 15, 2007 7:10 PM
> Subject: Re: Another surplus -- can we spend it now?
> To: Kevin Smith <kevedsmith at gmail.com>
>
>
> What were you planning on doing locally?
>
> Centrally, we are considering using our surplus for post referendum
> polling.
> We would have to raise more funds, but some members have shown interest
> in
> contributing to that venture. However, before we put the money into it,
> we
> are finding out if the people that did post referendum polling after
> the
> B.C. referendum are doing the same for Ontario.
>
> But to answer your question, that is an appropriate way to use your
> surplus
> funds if you wish.  Or if we end up going with a poll, another choice
> for
> you is to put your surplus into the pot.  However, it looks like you
> are
> looking for local referendum research, which I doubt our poll will
> deal
> with.  It will probably look at regions though.
>
>
> Bronwen
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kevin Smith" <kevedsmith at gmail.com>
> To: "Bronwen" <bbruch3 at cogeco.ca>
> Sent: Monday, October 15, 2007 12:43 PM
> Subject: Re: Another surplus -- can we spend it now?
>
>
> > Hi Bronwen:
> >
> > There's been some discussion about spending the surplus on doing
> some
> > post-mortem research on the referendum results locally.
> >
> > Would that be an OK use for the campaign money?
> >
> > Kevin.
> >
> > On 10/11/07, Kevin Smith <kevedsmith at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Hi Bronwen:
> > >
> > > The Cambridge folks ended up spending $440 on their mobile signs
> > > rather than $550, because the one sign didn't get placed.  They
> were
> > > wondering about putting an ad in the paper to thank people for
> > > supporting the referendum.
> > >
> > > Can they still spend this money at this point?
> > >
> > > BTW, how did you make out with spending our surplus?
> > >
> > > Kevin.
> > >
> _______________________________________________
> fvc-wat-disc mailing list
> fvc-wat-disc at listserv.thinkers.org
> http://listserv.thinkers.org/mailman/listinfo/fvc-wat-disc
> _______________________________________________
> fvc-wat-disc mailing list
> fvc-wat-disc at listserv.thinkers.org
> http://listserv.thinkers.org/mailman/listinfo/fvc-wat-disc
> _______________________________________________
> fvc-wat-disc mailing list
> fvc-wat-disc at listserv.thinkers.org
> http://listserv.thinkers.org/mailman/listinfo/fvc-wat-disc
>