Poilievre möchte CBC News
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poilievre-rule-changes-longest-ballot-1.7590948?__vfz=medium%3Dsharebar
Poilievre möchte CBC News
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poilievre-rule-changes-longest-ballot-1.7590948?__vfz=medium%3Dsharebar
17 Kommentare
I’ll keep posting their statement they emailed out because there seems to be a fair bit of confusion of the LBCs stance on all this (full disclosure I helped collect thousands of nomination signatures in Winnipeg South Centre when they did it there and had a blast)
„Ever since we started the LBC years ago we have been calling for politicians like Mr. Poilievre to step aside and recuse themselves from deciding election rules. The reason is simple: when it comes to election law, politicians just have too much skin in the game to be calling the shots. There is a clear and inappropriate conflict of interest. After all, what Prime Minister would reform the system which brought them to power?“
„Poilievre’s proposal for a new 1,000 signature requirement would have a profound and negative impact on Canadian democracy. In most of Canada it would turn every election into a two party race, and in safe ridings, like Battle-River Crowfoot, we would likely see no election at all, races would simply be won by acclamation.“
„This ill conceived and self-serving electoral reform proposal by the leader of the opposition is downright dangerous, and reinforces our conviction that politicians are not well suited to decide the rules of their own elections. Our democracy should be designed to serve voters, not the short term political interests of those in power. So long as we are legally permitted to do so we will continue to use long ballots as a platform to call on politicians of all stripes to do the right and ethical thing: recuse yourselves and pass responsibility for deciding election rules to a permanent, independent, and non-partisan body, such as a citizens‘ assembly.“
> “This is not democracy in action. It is a deliberate attempt to manipulate the rules, confuse voters and undermine confidence in our elections,” Poilievre wrote of the protests in his letter.
I mean, allowing more people to run is very democratic. PP needs his supporters to read the names and select him. Is it that much of a problem for his voters?
Calling that a “scam” seems dishonest. It’s not a scam, it’s an inconvenience which is AFAIK perfectly legitimate and legal.
[removed]
How about real election reform where those wanting to „represent“ a riding then they should have to live there full time for 5 years before they can run in that area. No parachuting into an easy area just so you can get elected.
I’ll repeat here what I’ve said elsewhere:
Hilariously, there were amendments to the Canada Elections Act presented in the last parliament that would’ve curbed the ability of the Longest Ballot Committee to function by restricting Official Agents of candidates to only being able to represent a single candidate, but the Conservative Party filibustered the bill at committee so it wouldn’t be adopted. So this is literally a complaint to fix something that he blocked the fix for.
Although I find the „Longest Ballot Committee“ protest to be somewhat misguided (I agree with the message about FPP, I don’t think the activity matches the message), a politician running for election has no business determining what the rules of that election should be.
This dude is gifted a byelection, in a Conservative stronghold outside of his home province, so he can try to get a seat after losing in his own riding, and he has the gall to complain about locals on the ballot?
I’m hoping for Bonnie to win, but assuming he does, he’s more than welcome to introduce a bill, whining to the gov’t to introduce legislation is a choice.
If it was for any other opposition candidates he wouldn’t say a word and probably support it.
I think he should reevaluate his position and allow someone else to be there.
As much as I find the tactics of the movement annoying Id be even more concerned that the government having more control over the election process.
If he gets a lower percentage of votes than the last guy he’ll just blame the ballot and stick around. Which effectively is saying he thinks his constituents can’t even read a simple list. It isn’t like the LBC people are seeking out as many Poilievre’s as they can find in Canada to get on this ballot.
So using enormous vehicles to block traffic while blasting horns 24 hours a day for three fucking weeks is ok but the longest ballot protest has to be dealt with…sternly
> In his letter, Poilievre says the government should change the number of signatures a candidate is required to have on a nomination form — from the current 100 to 0.5 per cent of a riding’s population.
Ridings are on average, 100k people, so that would require 500 signatures. Previous comments of his have suggested he wanted there to bee 1000 signatures, which seemed like too much, but that may have been a ploy to make 500 seem reasonable.
The number itself is arbitrary, but should be kept low enough to not be too much of a burden for someone to become a candidate, while also ensuring that anyone signing up doesn’t just do it on a whim. 100 signatures is what we have now, and that seems like the amount a single person should be able to reasonably gather in the 15 days after the writ drops that they have to get their paperwork in to Elections Canada. I could see 200 signatures being reasonable in that period as well, 500 seems a bit much for an individual.
I’m talking about an individual, because I believe that becoming a candidate is something someone should be able to do more or less by themself on their own time.
> He also said electors should only be allowed to sign one nomination form
That I don’t agree with. I can totally see it being plausible that I feel that more than one person has the potential to be a good MP in the one riding.
> that official agents should only represent one candidate.
That’s a change I can agree with.
> Cowan said election rules — specifically the requirement that a candidate have 100 signatures on their nomination form — favour organized political parties.
It’s a threshold parties can easily cross, but I feel that there should be something more than filling out a form required to prove you have the potential to be an MP. Getting 100 signatures in 15 days, so 7 a day, from people who agree you have the potential to be an MP, shouldn’t be that hard for anyone who’s serious about that role.
> Although he doesn’t live in the riding, he is pitching himself as a better option than Poilievre.
OK, that’s just funny, two parachute candidates competing to say who’s going to better represent the riding.
And yes, I appreciate the irony of that comment, after having voted for a parachute candidate in my riding.
„Poilievre wants law to stop ‚longest ballot scam‘ introduced this fall“
It’s called the Canada Elections Act, Pierre. We want it changed too.
Let me redo this comment respectfully
Pierre lost his riding. Whines that he lost his riding because of the Longest Ballot campaign, when he suffered the same issue as Singh. He wasn’t there and didn’t ever do anything for his riding. Now he’s trying to grift in rural Alberta and many of them there aren’t happy about it.
I’m not a lawyer but I would tend to think saying that a person can only be the official agent for one candidate and requiring that people only sign one nomination paper would violate the rights of association.
Not sure though if there are any constitutional lawyers in the crowd.
Also the whole suggestion is back asswards.
You want more signatures and you want to make sure each signature is unique to each candidate.
That is reeealllyy gonna slow down the process.
Also we pride ourselves on accessibility to democracy and saying you need more signatures and they have to be unique and you have to pay more money and and and and really doesn’t make it seem like you care about anyone but the big parties.
OH and where was PP when this happened in 2024 or other times? Why didn’t he care then? Only when it affects him? Yup that checks out.
Also how stupid do people think the electorate is or maybe how stupid is our electorate that a ballot with hundreds of names cauSes a problem?
It isn’t like you are choosing your candidate at the ballot box, are you? Then maybe you should stay home.