Slashdot Mirror
Reactions Split On What Canada's Liberal Majority Means For Tech Policy Future (freezenet.ca)
Dangerous_Minds writes: Few could have predicted the Liberal majority win in Canada's recent election. Now that the Canadian government is in a state of transition, some have speculated what the new government will bring to the table when it comes to a policy on technology. Michael Geist is speculating that the people in the new Liberal government may bring about a positive policy change, concluding "All of this points to real change and the chance for a fresh start on Canadian digital policy in the years ahead." Meanwhile, Freezenet has a very different take. Drew Wilson points out that the last time the Liberal government was in power, the party was very combative on digital rights because they were trying to bring in Lawful Access and the Canadian DMCA before Stephen Harper took power. In one very infamous exchange, Sam Bulte lashed out at people like Michael Geist by calling him and his supporters "pro-user zealots". With digital rights not even on the radar during the election outside of Bill C-51 towards the beginning and the Liberals long history on these files, Wilson paints a very bleak future given that the Liberal party now has a majority government and can push through policies unopposed whether controversial or not.
It will mean nothing at all.
I'm a good cook. I'm a fantastic eater. - Steven Brust
Now that the SJWs have taken over Canada, they're going to force everyone to undergo sex reassignment therapy. It's a proven fact that I read on 8chan.
You are welcome on my lawn.
Their citizens actually believe it makes a difference whether a "liberal" or "conservative" is in power.
Heck, here in America "Liberal" is a cuss-word that even Democrats run away from. That's part of why they suck as a political party - they can't/won't even defend Liberal values.
Well, it can. About the only time I was proud of my country was when Schroeder said no to Iraq war. A conservative government would have followed Dubya without even thinking twice about it.
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
While true, only Liberals or Conservatives/PC have had enough seats to claim the PM title, smaller parties have held significant power at times. Whenever you get a minority government the ruling party must make deals with someone to get legislation passed and it's at those time the smaller parties can get some things done.
The problem is in a majority government the ruling party doesn't have to listen or negotiate with anyone, in many cases even their own members so the PM can pretty much do whatever they want. While not a legislative issue, Trudeau's already shown his willingness to rule from on high by effectively removing Canada from the multinational anti-ISIS campaign against the wishes of his own party members and the majority of Canadians. Our handful of jets weren't doing much but at least they gave us a voice at the table and showed some willingness to help.
There are simply no checks or balances in a majority government.
If we at least had a useful Senate then there might be some hope but seeing as they are all just appointed and would rather not rock the boat while getting their nice paychecks, what the PM wants the PM pretty much gets.
Of course that's just my opinion...... you could be wrong!
Well, it can. About the only time I was proud of my country was when Schroeder said no to Iraq war. A conservative government would have followed Dubya without even thinking twice about it.
Absolutely! Americans who have only the Republican/Democrat "choice" to contemplate can too easily dismiss the difference made by the party in power. Joschka Fischer and the SPD/Grüne coalition conducted a foreign policy significantly different from that of the CDU.
Wir sind geboren, um frei zu sein - Rio Reiser
We don't get to vote for the boss. The boss is the person who fills the lobbyist's pockets and tells them under what conditions to fork over said money. The boss is the person who arranges that little junket Thailand, or the Bahamas, or Las Vegas. The boss is that person who makes sure that congress-critter McTurd's second cousin Tedwina gets an absolutely amazing price on that succulent little bit of property. The boss is that guy who sees to it that post-congress, there's a $$k/event speaking tour waiting the wings. The boss is the guy with that awesome stock tip.
And sure as hell, the boss is not us.
But yes, new boss, same as old boss. Because no change in boss. At all. Has nothing to do with elections.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
The Liberals have also promised this will be the last election under our current first-past-the-post system. Depending on the result of that, there may be a lot more MPs elected who arent from the two parties, and it may be the last majority government in Canada.
Oh they definitely thought about it. Some Steven Harper quotes:
Having this new government is like waking up from a terrible nightmare.
Well in the case of Canada and my opinion at least we don't really have much of an option. We have about 5-6 parties but 1 only runs candidates in Quebec, a couple don't run candidates in enough ridings to have a chance of being an opposition let alone form a government. Of the 3 left, really only 2 have had a good chance of winning in the last 20 or so years. So effectively 2 party if not actually.
I thing a better solution, which would be in effect the same thing as campaign finance reform: eliminate the party system entirely. Ban party whips, common signage, block voting etc. Every candidate has the stand or fall on their own positions. We'd still have committees to write laws, but those committees would be formed by some combination of qualification and lot (no more education minister with no post secondary for example) but everything would be a free vote.
I say it is effectively campaign finance reform because a single politican wouldn't have the machine to suck in the money from lobbyist. The lobbyists wouldn't have any guarantee who they need to bribe before the election because they'd have no idea who would end up being the strong negotiator at debates.That is one thing Canada has going for it though, we don't have long campaigns and advertising is a faction what it is per capita in the US.
We have what is effectively a 2 party system too and both parties are equally willing to rubber stamp anything the big media companies want (like the recent bill allowing media companies to force ISPs to block pirate websites)
The previous Liberal governments that preceded the one we just kicked out, worked out very well. It's very nice to have them back. They balanced our federal budget back in the 90's and used surpluses to fund debt repayment and personal income tax cuts for the middle class mixed with corporate tax cuts. Within a few years the Harper Conservatives turned a 8 billion dollar surplus into a record 56 billion dollar deficit. They gave tax credits and cuts to corporations and the wealthy, and wondered why their trickle down economics didn't work. It was always somebody's fault. Sometimes it was the Americans fault, sometimes Chinas that our economy didn't grow for 10 years.
They were also investigated by the RCMP for Adscam which went all the way to the PMO's office and his assistants, and the funneling of federal tax dollars into Quebec, where the said people in Quebec then donated those federal tax dollars right back into the Liberal party coffers. Sorry man, they're corrupt as fuck and they're not any different than the Provincial Liberals in Ontario, who are involved in 4 different police investigations ranging from destruction of data to engineering an election result in Northern Ontario.
Om, nomnomnom...
Being investigated and being found guilty of something are two completely different things. The Liberals booted everyone involved in Adscam and prosecuted them. They did not give hush money to senators, or prorogue parliament to avoid answering questions about it, or pass laws retroactively absolving people for it like the harper cons did.
The liberals didn't prosecute anyone that was the RCMP. They even gave diplomatic posts to individuals who were involved in Adscam in order to get them out of the country. The liberals stonewalled as hard as they could until popular opinion in the country was at such a pitch they couldn't stonewall anymore. Sadly, I'm old enough to remember that.
Oh and the liberals sure did give hush money to senators. One of them even spent the last 20 years of his time in the senate, sitting in mexico. And sadly, they also passed laws to retroactively absolve people. You think that the Cons set precedent on this? Pierre Trudeau did the retroactive pardoning first.
Om, nomnomnom...