[fvc-wat-disc] What happened with ERRE (Re: fvc-wat-disc Digest, Vol 93, Issue 7)

Sat Dec 3 12:59:15 EST 2016

I don't see why Trudeau and Monsef have to do anything. The Libs on ERRE
carried out their *unofficial but actual* mandate: to kill electoral
reform.  Why will anything further happen?

Eleanor

On 3 Dec 2016 12:00, <fvc-wat-disc-request at listserv.thinkers.org> wrote:

Send fvc-wat-disc mailing list submissions to
        fvc-wat-disc at listserv.thinkers.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
        http://listserv.thinkers.org/mailman/listinfo/fvc-wat-disc_
listserv.thinkers.org

or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
        fvc-wat-disc-request at listserv.thinkers.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
        fvc-wat-disc-owner at listserv.thinkers.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of fvc-wat-disc digest..."

Today's Topics:

   1. Re: So, what happened today with ERRE ? (Sharon Sommerville)

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sharon Sommerville <sharonsommerville at gmail.com>
To: FVC Waterloo Region Discussion <fvc-wat-disc at listserv.thinkers.org>
Cc:
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 2016 18:49:26 -0500
Subject: Re: [fvc-wat-disc] So, what happened today with ERRE ?
That was really well said Anita.

And, now it is all about leadership.  Does Trudeau have the strength that
his father had when his father pushed through abolishing capital
punishment?  Something that Justin Trudeau said just after he won the
election, "People have always underestimated me."  It really is up to him.
This is one place that we should focus our message, the need for
foresightful leadership to do what is right and set the country up for the
next hundred years.  That last phrase, "Set the country up for the next 100
years" is a quote from Tim Louis, Liberal candidate for
Kitchener-Conestoga.  Tim indicated that Trudeau said this to him during
the 2015 election & Tim found it very inspiring. Also from Trudeau, "Better
is always possible".

Sharon

On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 12:52 PM, Anita Nickerson <anitann88 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Here's my assessment that I put on facebook last night:
>
> I understand why Maryam Monsef was frustrated today.
>
> It doesn't excuse her behaviour. And yes, she lied. Technically, the
> committee fulfilled their mandate. They presented alternatives to FPTP in a
> paper that describes them thoroughly.
>
> They even did what else Monsef requested - produced a majority report.
>
> The problem is that there are already textbooks and textbooks written
> about the options for Canada aside from FPTP. This expertise is not lacking
> and this conversation is not new.
>
> What Monsef was really looking for, and no, it wasn't in the mandate, was
> to find out what the Liberals were actually willing to do. What kind of
> system they could get behind, based on what evidence and values. That
> recommendation would have given her a springboard. Something to point to
> and stand behind.
>
> Instead she got a phony majority report - a majority that was manufactured
> by an awful deal between the Cons, Greens and NDP for a referendum that
> only the Cons want. Because otherwise, there would have been five reports,
> a "failure" and no way to move forward (even if a referendum moves us
> backward).
>
> The problem is that the majority was so obviously manufactured and it left
> out the governing party. Who then made sure everybody knew it in their
> supplemental report.
>
> A majority want PR - oh, except the Liberals don't want it, because they
> didn't hear consensus, it's "radical", and they recommend breaking the
> promise.
>
> A majority want a referendum - oh, except the NDP and Greens don't want
> one, they just said that so there would be a majority report and the whole
> thing wasn't dead.
>
> I am not impressed with Monsef's performance today - blaming the committee
> because she is angry was the wrong thing to do, mocking them was the wrong
> thing to do - what embarrassing behaviour.
>
> But I do understand one of the reasons why she is frustrated because it's
> the exact same reason I am frustrated: The Liberals on ERRE may have worked
> hard but in the end they endorsed nothing, are willing to do nothing, and
> just recommended the gov't kill the promise Monsef has been charged with
> finding a way to fulfill.
>
> Essentially, they just made her job harder.
>
> She's finding out what people who have been involved in this for decades
> have always known: That MPs will never willingly recommend themselves into
> an electoral system which may put them out a job by a simple act of
> legislation, no matter how much evidence you put in front of them and no
> matter how passionate you are.
>
> It would be really nice if they would. This last committee was a really
> sincere effort to get there. We all tried hard.
>
> Now Monsef and Trudeau will have to lead. It's not going to be much fun
> for them. If they follow through without a referendum they're going to get
> screamed at not just by the Conservatives (who cares) but by most of their
> Liberal colleagues who mildly to viciously oppose what they want to do.
>
> But first-past-the-post is not much fun for us. And this change is long
> overdue.
>
> If they can tolerate the short term pain from the current group of MPs and
> implement PR, one day Canadians will look back on this and know which
> individuals had the courage and fortitude to get us there.
>
>
> On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 10:05 AM, Donald Fraser <donaldafraser at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I was puzzled  ...  NOW I'm thoroughly confused
>>
>> the minister chastises the committee under her own jurisdiction ...
>>
>> her government got elected partly on a promise to consult on everything,
>> a new style of governing  ... that's what a committee is for ... it
>> consulted and reported its findings and recommendations
>>
>> I can understand the Party's reasons for not wanting PR now; that
>> is,disagreeing with the result
>>
>> BUT what you say publicly is a big thank you and we'll take the
>> recommendations under consideration
>>
>> Berating the committee in Parliament just announces that
>>
>> (a) we didn't really want to consult
>> (b) we wanted our sham consultation to agree with us
>> (c) it didn't ... damn those little !@#$%^&* committee members!
>>
>> On 2 December 2016 at 08:03, Jon Bathmaker <jon.bathmaker at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> S'truth Jenn.
>>>
>>> This is precisely why Big Tent parties are problematic.  Which of course
>>> leads to internal contradictions such as one faction of the Libs being big
>>> on the climate and native rights, both of which have to be sacrificed if
>>> you want to support the Alberta Oil/pipeline Bidniz.  You vote for them and
>>> then the 99 internal groups in the "big tent" fight it out for whose
>>> position gets implemented.
>>>
>>> OTOH, if we put up a ton of pressure/demonstrations/actions then the
>>> climate/native faction will have a lot of ammo to fire at the tar
>>> sands/Alberta faction.  And we can just sit back and watch the knives come
>>> out.  :-)
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> Jon
>>> *The Climate is no longer just a Crisis  . . .  it's a FREAKING
>>> EMERGENCY*
>>>
>>>
>>> On 12/1/2016 11:27 PM, Jennifer Ross wrote:
>>>
>>> You couldn't plan anything to make your own party look this bad if you
>>> tried.
>>>
>>> Platform promises are just a means of engagement?  A public, written
>>> mandate letter that DOESN'T say what you, the author, says it says?  The
>>> only ones not on board are the ones that campaigned to get elected on it?
>>> A party that prides itself on evidence-based decision making (also, that
>>> was a campaign promise but they mean nothing now) making fun of MATH?  How
>>> shall they ever defend Climate Change is a thing if math is off the table?
>>> Or unmuzzling scientists?  Kind of hard to be both unmuzzled and unable to
>>> use math in your scientific arguments.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 9:47 PM, Eleanor Grant <eleanor7000 at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> What a day!
>>>>
>>>> The 333-page report from ERRE came out around noon Dec 1:
>>>> https://t.co/3dXxV2FMLi
>>>>
>>>> The key pages are:
>>>> - 95, where PR is clearly recommended (tho in kind of obscure
>>>> terminology),
>>>> - 319 (in which govt response is urged), and
>>>> - 321 to the end: the "Supplemental Reports" by Lib members of ERRE and
>>>> NDP & Green members.
>>>>
>>>> It feels (to me anyway) like a team of horses pulling in opposite
>>>> directions. The Liberal mbrs' report denies that a consensus on PR was
>>>> reached, that Cdns were engaged, and that there is enough time to put a new
>>>> system in place and familiarize the population with the issues by 2019.
>>>>
>>>> All afternoon, in the House and in media scrums, Minister Monsef
>>>> repeated the same misrepresentations, in the very same words - plus
>>>> insulting the committee and claiming they hadn't carried out their mandate.
>>>> (Their mandate never had been to call for a specific voting system.)
>>>>
>>>> So a day of elation mixed with shock that the governing party would
>>>> twist themselves into such pretzels to deny the obvious and doable
>>>> recommendation of the committee.
>>>>
>>>> Anyone else get the feeling that this was planned all along, from the
>>>> day they agreed to add members to ERRE to make it proportional?  Cdns have
>>>> been taken for a big ride.
>>>>
>>>> Eleanor
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> This is the fvc-wat-disc mailing list
>>>> Post a message: fvc-wat-disc at listserv.thinkers.org
>>>> Unsubscribe: http://listserv.thinkers.org/m
>>>> ailman/listinfo/fvc-wat-disc_listserv.thinkers.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> No other Western democratic country concentrates as much political power in
>>> the hands of one person as Canada does with her Prime Minister.
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> This is the fvc-wat-disc mailing list
>>> Post a message: fvc-wat-disc at listserv.thinkers.org
>>> Unsubscribe: http://listserv.thinkers.org/mailman/listinfo/fvc-wat-disc_listserv.thinkers.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> This is the fvc-wat-disc mailing list
>>> Post a message: fvc-wat-disc at listserv.thinkers.org
>>> Unsubscribe: http://listserv.thinkers.org/m
>>> ailman/listinfo/fvc-wat-disc_listserv.thinkers.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> This is the fvc-wat-disc mailing list
>> Post a message: fvc-wat-disc at listserv.thinkers.org
>> Unsubscribe: http://listserv.thinkers.org/mailman/listinfo/fvc-wat-disc_l
>> istserv.thinkers.org
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> This is the fvc-wat-disc mailing list
> Post a message: fvc-wat-disc at listserv.thinkers.org
> Unsubscribe: http://listserv.thinkers.org/mailman/listinfo/fvc-wat-disc_l
> istserv.thinkers.org
>
>

_______________________________________________
This is the fvc-wat-disc mailing list
Post a message: fvc-wat-disc at listserv.thinkers.org
Unsubscribe: http://listserv.thinkers.org/mailman/listinfo/fvc-wat-disc_
listserv.thinkers.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.thinkers.org/pipermail/fvc-wat-disc_listserv.thinkers.org/attachments/20161203/c21aaf54/attachment-0001.htm>