[fvc-wat-disc] article in today's Globe and Mail Focus section

[Evan Rosamond]

Yes, I read it but it left me confused. What's this guy's point? So I 
read it again, and I don't think there is a point. The connection 
between a voting system (FPTP) and any particular political outcome is 
never established in this badly-composed argument. E.g. would WLM King 
still have been PM if PR had been in place? What it says about other 
voting systems is very little and mostly wrong. If the title is supposed 
to be the topic, the whole piece is off topic.

You know how some Americans want to fight the civil war over again? It 
seems to me that MacDonald wants to fight the rebellion of 1837 over 
again. He'd be on the Family Compact side, good stable government 
without any riffraff.

It would be much more instructive to summarize the history looking at 
the make-up of parliament (true majority, false majority, minority, 
wrong-way minority). We know that with PR false majorities will normally 
be reduced to minorities and wrong-way outcomes should disappear. I 
would argue that Harper's false majority (2011) was worse than either of 
his minorities (2006, 2008) and that Pierre Trudeau's minority (1972) 
was his best, and his last and worst (1980) was another false majority. 
In my view the gold standard for government effectiveness was Pearson's 
2 terms (1963-1968), both minorities.

Q&A: No, I don't think MacDonald's makes sense. Yes, you are missing 
whatever it was that might have explained his thesis but which he didn't 
include.

Take some salt with that as I don't have an expert political mind as far 
as I know.

Please don't ask me to write a critique or refutation. Life's too short.

Evan

On 2/11/2017 6:57 PM, Cathy Scott wrote:
>
> Did anyone else read the article, ‘ Why a Failed Bid for Electoral 
> Reform is a Win for Canada’ written by William A. MacDonald?
>
> I’d like to hear the understanding of this article by a more expert 
> political mind than mine.
>
> I find it rather mind-boggling.  It seems to me that the author is 
>  crediting the FPTP electoral system with  any beneficial development 
> in Canadian politics over the  past century or so.
>
> Does this article make sense and am I missing something?
>
> Cathy
>
> *From:*fvc-wat-disc 
> [mailto:fvc-wat-disc-bounces at listserv.thinkers.org] *On Behalf Of 
> *Donald Fraser
> *Sent:* Friday, February 10, 2017 9:47 AM
> *To:* FVC Waterloo Region Discussion
> *Subject:* [fvc-wat-disc] Justin's Iqaluit argument re Fringe Parties 
> gaining power to influence policy
>
> Before I send this, I just need to confirm that the remark was made in 
> Iqaluit ... does anybody know for sure? The article was run on CBC 
> National this morning
>
> ========================
>
> Friday, February 10, 2017
>
> Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau.
>
> Hello Justin,
>
>  Your argument yesterday in Iqaluit criticizing Proportional 
> Representation (PR) for allowing fringe parties to determine policy is 
> an old one and easily refuted as I’m sure you must know.
>
>  Most practicing PR countries use an “Election Threshold” (ET), which 
> is a minimum required percentage of the national vote that a party 
> must receive before it can have representation in Parliament. The 
> effect of ET is to deny representation to fringe parties whose purpose 
> is to destabilize normal government procedures. In the case of Germany 
> and New Zealand, for example, both of which use Mixed Member PR (MMPR 
> … the best system for Canada) if a party gains local directly elected 
> seats, they are retained regardless but those MPs are not permitted to 
> decide a critical vote on an important issue unless the party has 
> achieved ET.
>
>  Your use of this “straw man” argument is amateurish. Why not just 
> admit that your Party enjoys its majority and anticipates more of them 
> under FPTP?  This admission is at least honest if not admirable. 
> However FPTP leaves Canada vulnerable to a Harper-clone-Trumpist 
> majority, the possibility of which looms as a result of the candidates 
> we observe competing for the Conservative leadership.
>
> Yours Truly,
>
> Donald A Fraser,
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20170214/7e9ff719/attachment-0002.htm>