Canadian Politics

[ironphoenix]

In (faint?) hopes of getting a bit of discussion...

What's up with the Canadian non-Conservatives? Is there any hope of the parties putting their differences aside enough to work together in any significant way, or will they spend next election taking potshots at and stealing votes from each other? If they were to work together, how could they do so?

Comments

[metawidget]

I have to hope that the Cons will be beaten back to their base and lose to whichever non-Con party winds up ahead. Otherwise, the best way for them to work together would probably be for the NDP to win and pull off a Single Transferable Vote or preferential voting system — the Cons are likely the third or fourth (or later) choice for both their voters, so it amounts to collaboration without anyone having to admit it :)

[ironphoenix.livejournal.com]

What is required to implement STV? It strikes me that this may get into constitutional matters, but I don't know. (If you don't already know, I may start digging.) I recall a provincial referendum on electoral reform which didn't make the cut. I worry that with the vote-spitting, the NDP, Greens, and Liberals will fail to oust the Conservatives, and I really doubt any of them will get a majority. Do you think that a coalition (likely Liberal/NDP) will be willing to work together and bring in STV or other electoral reform?

What about any possibility of the parties working together before the election, possibly by strategically withdrawing candidates to reduce vote-splitting?

[peristaltor.livejournal.com]

The Conservatives have most of the economic cards, as long as there is a strong market for the Alberta tar goo. Which leaves any party left free to say that the very real boon to the economy those sand pits represents should be marginalized.

Which leaves very little in the way of discussion, sadly.

As to more liberal elements in general, let's face it; the more liberal we are, the more likely we are to accept dissenting views. Which means all political gatherings turn into circular firing squads. By contrast, a conservative is more interested in "what's right" politically rather than "what's right" absolutely. This gives them the freedom to ignore their conscious on some issues in the interest in keeping control over other issues.

Then again, I get most of my Canadian political information from Rick Mercer and Jesse Brown, so disregard if need be. ;-)

[ironphoenix.livejournal.com]

The Canadian right-wing used to be more principled. I disagreed heartily with the Reform Party's policies, but I at least could respect their sincerity. The Progressive Conservatives were a respectable center-right party that I would even have been willing to vote for. The merger of the two, which was built on a broken promise, has resulted in a party uniting the worst parts of both.

You likely won't hear the Liberals shouting too loudly about halting Tar Sands exploitation, although there are carefully measured words about responsible development.

The remarkable thing on the Canadian left has been how bitterly acrimonious the relationships have been between and even within the Parties since the collapse of the proposed coalition.

[dagibbs.livejournal.com]

The tar sands are, actually, probably uneconomical to run right now, with the current price of oil. So, that opens discussion back up a lot.

[ironphoenix.livejournal.com]

Not what I've heard from other sources... I think the person I heard from put the break-even point somewhere under $20/barrel.

[dagibbs.livejournal.com]

Hm... yeah, looks complicated.

The lowest estimate I've seen is $25/barrel, ranging up to $100/barrel. With current oil prices just over $50/barrel, that suggests that new development will likely be put on hold, but that work to increase efficiency at current extraction sites/processes may be done, and even that some existing extraction processes may be also put on hold. Of course, how much of the cost-of-extraction is amortized capital costs will affect those decisions... and may affect those figures, too. If the $25/barrel is operating costs -- but the higher estimates are operating costs + amortized capital costs, it suggests continued operations, since it isn't worth shutting down, but also not worth spending on new development.

[ironphoenix.livejournal.com]

It is complicated, yes. They may be stockpiling in anticipation of a future price rise. Also, there is a significant cost to shutting down, and there may be political repercussions.

[dagibbs.livejournal.com]

But, I do think that it is no longer the case that there is a "strong market for the Alberta tar goo". It is, at $50/barrel, a marginal or weak market.

[dagibbs.livejournal.com]

Sadly, probably not much hope.

If they could work together -- strategically choosing certain ridings in which to not compete with each other by not running a candidate against the Cons would be one way that might just work.

[ironphoenix.livejournal.com]

That would be my thought too, probably in a tit-for-tat exchange of "you have Fred pull out of X riding and we'll have Jennifer pull out of Y riding."

[dagibbs.livejournal.com]

Either a pull-out, or a not even stand.

[jackspryte.livejournal.com]

You've asked exactly what I've thought a hundred times. I'll never understand it.

[nuria-asha.livejournal.com]

My new approach to politics is to just vote for the environmentalist party and scrap the "main contenders". Even if that makes my "vote not count" for now, if enough people take this approach over time, it'll make a difference. I feel better about it, in any event. Always feels good to put my dollars and votes where my heart is.