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

Sat Dec 3 13:06:54 EST 2016

I meant to add to the above: When the Libs end up in Opposition in 2019,
they'll *wish* they had supported PR!

If only they could be made to see that now.  PR is actually in the
Liberals' best interest too.

Eleanor

Eleanor

On 3 Dec 2016 12:59, "Eleanor Grant" <eleanor7000 at gmail.com> wrote:

> 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_l
> istserv.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/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
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.thinkers.org/pipermail/fvc-wat-disc_listserv.thinkers.org/attachments/20161203/952c9f7c/attachment-0002.htm>