Der längste Protest in Alberta Bundeswahlen ist der „Missbrauch des Prozesses“, sagt der ehemalige Chief Wahlbeamte
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-longest-ballot-battle-river-crowfoot-by-election-electoral-officer/
Der längste Protest in Alberta Bundeswahlen ist der „Missbrauch des Prozesses“, sagt der ehemalige Chief Wahlbeamte
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-longest-ballot-battle-river-crowfoot-by-election-electoral-officer/
9 Kommentare
From the Article:
“I think it’s an abuse of process,” Mr. Kingsley said, referring to the protest. “People have grievances, but in our democracy, we have ways of expressing them.” Mr. Kingsley was chief electoral officer from 1990 to 2007.
If the committee organizers wanted to make a statement, he said they could have gathered 250 signatures to form a political party with a candidate and a platform focused on the protest’s demands. He added they could also support an existing party that aligns with their goals.
Committee organizer Tomas Szuchewycz said he planned to protest even if changes are implemented.
Mr. Szuchewycz said in a statement that the “only abuse of process is politicians being in charge of their own election rules.” The group says election laws should be decided by an independent body, such as a citizens’ assembly.
“I don’t see any value in making a party or supporting any existing party, because – as we’ve seen countless times – a party that wins under first-past-the-post, keeps first-past-the-post no matter what they promise,” he said.
It’s only an ‘abuse of process’ for these whiners because it is inconvenient for the establishment political parties. It is a legitimate in my eyes and should be allowed to continue lest we unduly limit people’s right to run for office, even as a protest
The Longest Ballot Committee is insufferable. They know there isn’t popular support for their issue, so they just decide to muck up elections by flooding the ballots and increasing the costs of running the election in the first place. Looking forward to legislative changes to make what they’re doing more difficult while they whine about it.
Also – even if they got what they wanted, a lot of PR systems function on party lists. It effectively makes independent elected officials impossible. They’re not interested in practical solutions; they simply want a pipedream where no political parties exist.
The changes need to be small and specifically address the issue but not make it extremely hard for independents and smaller parties from participating. The 0.5% idea from PP is insane and way too much. But the unique agent makes sense.
I’m kind-of sick of seeing the same kind of article complaining about the same kind of thing endlessly, knowing fully that we will stop talking about it after the election’s over. Everyone knows this only helps major candidates and pushes out smaller ones. Everyone knows it’s technically legal. Maybe we should impose a strict „You must have lived in your riding as your primary address for 10 years“ law for this kind of thing, but this conversation gets drowned out by the white noise that, ironically, is the thing they’re complaining about.
Yes, it is an abuse of the process – thats the point my dude.
I’m not a LBC fan but the fact they’re doing this on purpose goes over Kingsley’s head gives truth to their concerns around the entire system being useless.
Aren’t protests in general an abuse of process? The whole point is to make things unpleasant for some group, and that is rarely possible by following the spirit of a law.
[removed]
I’m probably one of the biggest advocates for electoral reform you could find but this stuff does absolutely nothing to advance the conversation.