[fvc-wat-disc] A Reply from Raj Saini

[Jennifer Ross]

Yes, but that's Nationally.  I'm talking about Raj specifically.

On Sat, Jul 22, 2017 at 3:27 PM, Anita Nickerson <anitann88 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Jenn, 39.5% voted Liberal. That's obviously a CONSENSUS that voters want
> Justin Trudeau to make all the decisions based on his personal opinion,
> correct?
>
> But when 88% of participants to ERRE, including pretty much every ER
> expert in Canada as well as many from around the world agree that PR is the
> way to go, that's called NO CONSENSUS.
>
> Anita
>
> On Sat, Jul 22, 2017 at 1:37 PM, Jennifer Ross <2jennross at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> The part that annoys me to no end is he heard from us, he heard from the
>> poll we did, he heard from the Minister's consultation--we know perfectly
>> well we were far and away the most voices.  But he heard from three or four
>> other people--I could probably name them all--and that negates all of us.
>>
>> At least according to this letter, where he points out he heard from
>> people on both sides of the issue.  Of course he did, but not EQUALLY.
>>
>> On Sat, Jul 22, 2017 at 1:23 PM, Anita Nickerson <anitann88 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I was amazed at how he could take all the previous excuses from past
>>> form letters, add Trudeau's ranked ballot preference revelation into that
>>> (hey, we'll stuff that into the "no consensus" theme and throw in what
>>> Trudeau said about nobody else would compromise) that so now it's kinda
>>> like a 5 layer #$%@ sandwich.
>>>
>>> Because the excuse letter is now so long, it looks thoughtful.
>>>
>>> There's absolutely nothing new in here and nothing personal. I get
>>> people sending me form letters from other MPs.
>>>
>>> It's too bad Raj was personally frustrated. Other MPs were
>>> "disappointed."
>>>
>>> But there was nothing they could do, you see - except fail to provide or
>>> encourage any leadership and send us these thoughtful form letters instead.
>>>
>>> Anita
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jul 22, 2017 at 9:40 AM, arthurd23 arthurd23 <arthurd23 at bell.net
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> Unfortunately, it's the same crap.
>>>>
>>>> Simply put, Trudeau wants no interference with his majority and no PR.
>>>>
>>>> Lack of consensus on either change or a specific system and lack of
>>>> compromise from the opposition are convenient if false excuses.
>>>>
>>>> It relates nicely to Elizabeth May's wonderful phrase "policy-based
>>>> evidence".
>>>>
>>>> It's unfortunate so many Canadians are either complacent, uninterested,
>>>> uninformed, unfair, intolerant, or a mix of these.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------- Original Message ----------
>>>> From: Donald Fraser <donaldafraser at gmail.com>
>>>> Date: July 21, 2017 at 3:02 PM
>>>>
>>>> I finally got a reply from Raj re my letter to Liberal MPs to concur
>>>> with the ER Report. It is worth reading since it contains considerably more
>>>> than most of the other more-or-less form replies. There is a clear
>>>> admission that ranked ballot was Justin's preference. We already suspected
>>>> this, but here is a clear admission.
>>>>
>>>> ==========================
>>>>
>>>> Hello ,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am writing to you concerning a coming motion in Parliament to
>>>> “concur” with the Report of the Electoral Reform (ER) Committee.
>>>> Traditionally such a vote has always been a free vote.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Voting to concur will allow the subject of ER to regain Parliamentary
>>>> attention. 88% of the contributors to the ER process recommended
>>>> Proportional Representation (PR) as Canada’s new means of choosing its MPs.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am asking you to vote your conscience and recommend that the report
>>>> be accepted.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Just two short years ago the Liberal Party was in third place
>>>> demonstrating that our fickle First Past the Post (FPTP) system is unstable
>>>> and subject to emotional mood swings of the electorate. This causes many
>>>> problems such as the Policy Pendulum, strategic voting, discouraged and
>>>> disenfranchised voters, lack of long term planning etc.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> With the growing danger of Trumpism spreading to Canada as evidenced in
>>>> the platforms of several Conservative leadership candidates, we need to
>>>> protect our country by introducing coalition government which is an almost
>>>> guaranteed outcome of PR.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yours Truly,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Donald A Fraser
>>>>
>>>> 184 Forsyth Drive,
>>>>
>>>> Waterloo, Ontario,
>>>>
>>>> N2L-1A2,
>>>>
>>>> donaldafraser at gmail.com
>>>>
>>>> 519-576-9210
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ====================================================================
>>>>
>>>> Dear Mr. Fraser,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for writing to me to share these thoughts on electoral reform.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I’ve had the privilege of hearing from countless members of our
>>>> community regarding this issue, as well as having the opportunity to
>>>> discuss electoral reform with my colleagues, academics, and other
>>>> stakeholders. I’ve heard an incredibly diverse range of opinions with
>>>> respect to the best way forward for our electoral system, and these
>>>> conversations have continued well past when our Government announced this
>>>> winter that we would not be proceeding with changing our electoral system
>>>> at this time.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> These conversations have been enlightening, they have demonstrated both
>>>> the shared commitment to civic engagement and incredible diversity in
>>>> values and opinions held by members of our community. At times these
>>>> conversations have also been, I will admit, frustrating. Frustrating
>>>> because I know that our Government made a promise to Canadians to reform
>>>> the electoral system, because of the lack of clear consensus with respect
>>>> to the best way forward, and because I came to realize, at the end of the
>>>> day, that I, and our Government, would have to break a promise we made to
>>>> Canadians. Breaking this promise – this commitment to changing our
>>>> electoral system – has not been an easy decision. However, without the
>>>> emergence of a clear preference for any specific alternative electoral
>>>> system, I see wisdom in the Government’s decision to focus on other
>>>> priorities in protecting and strengthening our democratic institutions.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> There were too many barriers to electoral reform. There was no openness
>>>> to compromise in the other parties, the possibility of a referendum is one
>>>> which would have been both incredibly divisive and difficult to implement
>>>> without consensus on a clear question, and while many people supported some
>>>> form of electoral reform, with some in our community speaking of some
>>>> varieties of proportional representation, there was no consensus on what
>>>> sort of model we would implement. Both ensuring that our electoral system
>>>> had a provision for local representation, avoiding divisive politics, and
>>>> avoiding fragmentation amongst political parties which would be counter to
>>>> the fundamentally Canadian approach of ensuring that our political
>>>> institutions and parties encompass Canada’s diversity within them,
>>>> were priorities for me with respect to this file. Not all proportional
>>>> systems contain measures which would respect these priorities, and while
>>>> our Prime Minister had a solution to this – his preference to give
>>>> Canadians a ranked ballot, so they could reduce the aspect of strategic
>>>> voting – others did not agree with this approach either.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I know that there are strong cases both for and against making
>>>> significant changes to our democratic institutions, and our Government
>>>> recognizes both sides of the argument. However, there is simply no
>>>> consensus in Canada at this time. Canada’s democratic institutions are
>>>> still some of the strongest in the world, and in times of increasing global
>>>> political volatility, I understand why our Government placed such
>>>> importance on ensuring that any major changes to the nature of our
>>>> democratic institutions would only be made if they clearly had the broad
>>>> support of Canadians. Governments must be accountable for the platforms
>>>> that they run. But, it is essential that as circumstances change,
>>>> opposition is clarified, policy is examined, and public consultations
>>>> report back, governments must also be flexible.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The thoughts and feedback of community members played a vital role in
>>>> my decision making process as I decided how to best respond to the issue of
>>>> electoral reform, and I wanted to write to you to let you know that your
>>>> words were in my thoughts as I made my decision regarding how to vote in
>>>> May. I wanted to thank you for your democratic engagement, and to let you
>>>> know that I feel privileged to have had the opportunity to hear your
>>>> thoughts regarding the shape of our democracy. I know that you have
>>>> expressed your disappointment with our Government’s decision, and my
>>>> decision, regarding electoral reform. And I appreciate you continuing to
>>>> write, to engage with me on this issue. I hope that you will continue to
>>>> write to me about other issues that matter to you, so that the civic
>>>> engagement which has defined our community’s discussion surrounding
>>>> electoral reform will continue characterize our community’s level of
>>>> civilized debate, discussion, and civic engagement.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I also wanted to let you know that our Government is working to move
>>>> forward with democratic reform in other ways. For instance, Bill C-33 aims
>>>> to increase voter participation by breaking down barriers to voting while
>>>> enhancing the abilities of Canada’s election watchdog. Soon, we will
>>>> be introducing legislation to make political fundraising more open and
>>>> transparent. The Communications Security Establishment has already begun an
>>>> analysis of risks to Canada’s electoral activities from hackers, and
>>>> will be releasing this assessment publically, and our Government is taking
>>>> steps to protect the integrity of Canada’s democracy by defending the
>>>> Canadian electoral process from hacking and cyber-attacks. Meanwhile, the
>>>> Minister has said that she will also be reviewing changes to the proper
>>>> limits on the amount that political parties, and third parties, can spend
>>>> between and during elections, and to bringing forward options to create a
>>>> new independent commission to organize leaders’ debates during elections.
>>>> These initiatives form the next steps of the Government’s plan to
>>>> strengthen and protect the transparency and accessibility of Canada’s
>>>> democratic process, and I believe that these commitments echo the spirit of
>>>> our commitment to Canadians – a commitment to make our democracy better.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Once again, thank you for taking the time to write.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sincerely,
>>>>
>>>> Raj Saini
>>>>
>>>> Member of Parliament for Kitchener Centre
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Constituency Office: (519) 741-2001
>>>>
>>>> Parliamentary Office: (613) 995-8913
>>>>
>>>> E-mail: Raj.Saini at parl.gc.ca
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *From:* Donald Fraser [mailto:donaldafraser at gmail.com
>>>> <donaldafraser at gmail.com>]
>>>> *Sent:* 11 May 2017 10:55 AM
>>>> *To:* Saini, Raj - M.P.
>>>> *Subject:* Motion to Concur with Election Reform Committee Report
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ==========================================================
>>>>
>>>> Hello, Raj,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for your thoughtful and complete reply. Few took so much time
>>>> to fully explain the government's position; especially admitting Justin's
>>>> preferred choice of ranked ballot. We suspected that that was his choice,
>>>> but this confirms it. I wrote to Justin to dispute the position that fringe
>>>> parties would gain power, explaining that most PR countries have a
>>>> threshold of 5% of the vote before a party can vote on legislative issues.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yours Truly,
>>>>
>>>> Don,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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/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_l
>> istserv.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.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.thinkers.org/pipermail/fvc-wat-disc_listserv.thinkers.org/attachments/20170722/a3762a68/attachment-0002.htm>