The Implications of an Extended Election

The federal election is in three days. The election was called over 2 months ago by the Conservatives and is the longest in modern Canadian history (what constitutes "modern", I'm not sure), and the signs of the long campaign are showing. One of the reasons the Conservatives called it so early (whether or not they'd admit it) is that they have a whole lot more money than their opponents. An extended campaign will drain the Liberal and NDP well before the vote, unless they run budget campaigns. I'm not sure how the fundraising has gone since the election was called, but I've noticed the effects... and they're right in front of everyone's face. Well, everyone who's watching the Blue Jays' playoff games.

Take Game 5 of the ALDS on Wednesday night. Every inning, like clockwork, there was a commercial for the Conservatives and a commercial for the Liberals. The NDP was nowhere to be found. The obvious conclusion is that the NDP are out of money. Did that cause their drop in the polls? Did their drop in the polls affect their fundraising? Are those two things unrelated? I don't know, but I found it to be an interesting observation.

I will now return to muting all commercial breaks. Unless they actually made this commercial...

No Election Is A Waste

I just got back from casting my ballot in this, the 41st Canadian General Election. After starting out very boring (for lack of a better word), the campaign got really crazy really quickly. Now, I'm certainly not a fan of Jack Layton (this video/article shows why I'll never vote for a party led by him, petty as it may be), but I hold out great hope by the poll numbers the NDP has gotten in Quebec, especially since it seems to be mostly at the expense of the Bloq Quebecois. The sooner they're out of the federal election scene, the better.

One of the argument that was thrown around early on was the idea that this election was unnecessary and a waste, usually (and understandably) by Conservative supporters. My counter-argument is that no election is a waste, especially this one. This was the longest serving minority parliament in Canadian history, which seems to suggest that our political parties are adjusting to the new reality of minorities. If an election wasn't called now, it would be in a few month or a year at most. So, the expense of an election would just be spent then. Of course, over time, more money will be spent than if elections were held every 3 to 5 years. But it would maybe be one or 2 elections extra over 20 years and in the grand scheme of federal budgets, would be a drop in the bucket.

I love elections, but mostly election night. Despite if who I want to win actually does, seeing the numbers roll in and the seat counters at the bottom of the screen is just some sort of nerd crack to me.

Enjoy election day everybody.

I Love Elections, But...

I'm having a hard time getting excited for this recently announced federal election. Even though despite what the Conservatives say, I don't think this is an unnecessary election... I don't consider any election unnecessary. However, with the polls where they are, it's hard to imagine an outcome that looks significantly different from what we already have. Listening to all the leaders and their parties' representatives just emphasizes how little they take voters seriously. Their talking points are irrelevant if not outright fabrications of their opponents' stance on issues. The media, being lazy and hungry for stirring any sort of controversy, just blindly run with whatever unimportant angle the parties feed them.

Locally, the Liberals have nominated the two candidates who lost last election, who both first came into office during the Liberals' hey-day in the 90's. These lazy nominations of uninspiring candidates turn me off nearly completely from voting for them. It always seems to be the same old politics and nothing ever changes.

Following Steven Harper (@pmharper) and Michael Ignatieff (@M_Ignatieff) on Twitter is simultaneously hilarious and frustrating at how out of touch and partisan these two are.

Hey Harper, where's Senate reform?

Vote 2010

It was municipal election night in Ontario tonight. About half of the people/answers I put a mark beside turned out to be winners. I was really surprised by the outcome of the fluoride vote... a narrow victory for the "no" side. I don't personally mind that our water won't be fluoridated, but I just found the "no" campaign was mostly based on fear and ignorance. I hear it called a "poison" and the phrase "evidence suggests there might be adverse health effects" when any major (reputable) medical association I could find said that there's nothing wrong with it. Then there was the "we're not sure, so better safe than sorry", which is one of the worst arguements that anyone can use for anything... being not sure (uninformed) is pretty sorry.

I have this nagging suspicion that there's a swelling of an underground "Tea Party"-like movement happening in Canada. It seemed that every candidate had in their platform that taxes should never be raised more than inflation. Not that that is a bad idea, but the way it was always thrown around made it seems very disingenuous. Is there any jurisdiction in Canada that ties taxes directly to inflation? I'm not sure... at least I've never heard of one.

And the point of tax increases brings me to the subject of LRT (light rail). It seems after approving the project, asking the other levels of government to pitch in financially and getting the funding, almost all the regional councillors are now calling for a reconsideration of the project because they think the Region's financial portion is too much. What I ask is did they think that we wouldn't be on the hook for some of this project locally? Did they think that the other governments would reject the funding, allowing the locals to be able to say that they tried... but then the Feds and Queens Park called their bluff? Do they think there's no cost to not having this project built and running in say, 30 years time? How many widened roads will we need that we don't have space and money for? Do we want to shape our cities to be an all-driving-all-the-time adventure?

All that and I think it's humorous that Toronto elected Rob Ford. That'll be fun to watch (but it also fits with my underground Tea Party theory).

$200 Less Because I Don't Wear A Ring On My Left Hand

I got a letter in the mail from Dalton McGuinty himself today. In it, it explains how the changes to the Ontario tax system will create 591,000 jobs and all sorts of other great things. To help us transition into this new and improved system that makes everything better, Dalton is giving away money to everyone. Seems to me, if it was so great, we should be paying him! Oh, wait... Anyway, ragging on the HST isn't the point of this post. The point is about the amount that we get under this Tax Transition Benefit.

According to the official site, a single person will get $300, while a couple (regardless of children) and single parents will get $1000. Excuse me? So, you're telling me that because two people signed a piece of paper and now live together, they get $200 more each? Maybe the rationale is that seeing how I love being single so much, I don't need as much money. Yeah... that's it. Thanks for kicking me while I'm down, McGuinty.

Plus, I think it's funny that a letter from the Ontario government is return-addressed to Summerside, PEI.

A Lesson In Every Vote Counting

I just read that the recount in Kitchener-Waterloo has just finished and the Conservative Peter Braid's victory over incumbent Liberal Andrew Telegdi has been confirmed. After the recount, the margin of victory was just 17 votes. That kind of blows my mind, thinking about how the outcome could have gone 2 very different ways depending on the moods of a handful of people on election day.

Election Today! Vote!

Hey guys, just a reminder to get out and vote today.

I'm so very much looking forward to tonight. One of my favourite things is to watch election results roll in. I'll have my TV on with picture-in-picture and my laptop feeding me results beside me. Awesome!

I thought I had made up my mind on who I was voting for a few weeks ago, but switched late last week. From the looks of the polls, it seems there was great volatility in voter preferences over the last few weeks of the campaign (but not as much as in the stock market), so it'll be a very interesting result. Here are some predictions I've found around the net:

electionprediction.org has the results at 125 Conservative, 94 Liberal, 51 Bloc, 36 NDP, and 2 Independent.
Similarly, democraticspace.com has it at 126 C, 92 L, 52 B, 36 N, 2 I.
However, Ekos has their prediction at 136 C, 84 L, 51 B, 35 N, 2 I.

My gut feeling has the Conservatives in the mid 130's range, which agrees with Ekos. We'll see. I can't wait.

Election Time Looms!

Well, it seems we're going to have an election next month. While I don't really see a need for one at the present time and think the results will be very similar to the last election, the election/polls/stats junkie in me is super excited!

I love elections!

Did you hear the news that the Green Party got it's first official MP last week? It was some independent from Vancouver who was booted from the Liberal Party deciding to join with the Greens. Personally, I'm kind of disappointed for the Greens. I think this party hopper will take the impact away from the Party when they legitimately get their first elected MP (which will happen eventually, whether or not it's this election).

I Feared This Would Happen

So, even though I was not in favour of MMP in the referendum (unlike most of my friends), I was actually hoping for a much closer result than the one we got... perhaps in the order of 50-50. The reason being that I think a bit of reform is necessary, but not MMP in the form it was proposed. However, I feared that if MMP was soundly defeated like it was, it would be viewed as "the people have spoken, they like FPTP". That was why I didn't like the referendum question... you're either for FPTP or for MMP... nothing else. So, now that McGuinty has basically said that the issue is closed, what now? Will there be another shot at electoral reform?

Here's my proposal... increase the number of ridings in Ontario (perhaps to the 130 level that was proposed by MMP, or even up to 150) and introduce Instant Runoff Voting. My thinking is this... a smaller sample size will be more likely to produce results that are different from the provincial trend, and IRV might encourage people to vote for smaller parties as their #1 vote. Of course, the drawback to this is that you won't get the exact proportional representation that MMP would have produced, but because of it's similarity to our current system, it might be easier to implement. What do you think? I'm interested to hear if the MMP supporters would think this doesn't go far enough, or if the FPTP supporters think this is too much of a change.

Take A Stand, Old Lady. Take A Stand

So, I go down to vote this afternoon and there's only one other person at the polling station besides me there to vote. I had to wait until she was checked in and voted. While I was getting checked in, she comes back with her ballots and proudly declares to the polling station workers there, "I didn't use the second one!", giving off the impression that she was making a stand by not voting in the referendum. Of course, it was more likely that she never bothered to inform herself on the referendum and she looked at the ballot thinking, "what the hell is this?" That got me thinking how difficult it must be to inform yourself on the candidates, but be unaware of the referendum. It would be pretty impossible not to know about the referendum if you paid any attention to the election. Which, of course, brings me to the conclusion that people probably didn't inform themselves about the actual election and probably voted for the same party they've voted for for decades.

Now that's democracy inaction.

Decisions, Decisions

Well, the polls are open. All I have to do is head on down to the first floor of my building to cast my ballot. How convenient! The only problem... I still don't know who to cast my ballot for.

Election Day Tomorrow

Just doing my public service duty by informing my loyal readers (most of which are already aware) that tomorrow is election day here in Ontario. As an added bonus, it's also referendum day. The election of a new legislature is a yawn-fest in my opinion, with there being no real pressing issue facing the electorate. For this reason, I predict (as many others are) a return to power for the Liberals... not that I'll necessarily be voting for them.

However, this referendum is intriguing to me. The question being posed is whether we want to dump the current electoral system (first past the post) for a new system (mixed member proportional). The biggest flaws of the first past the post system is that it is difficult for smaller parties to gain seats and that a majority government can be won without a majority of popular vote, basically making the legislature not proportional to the popular vote in terms of party seats. Mixed member proportional will have the number of seats per party representative of the popular vote by introducing "list" members of provincial parliament. This is, in my opinion, MMPs biggest drawback. It will create two classes of MPPs, one who was elected in a riding and one who was appointed by a party. It's the party list MPPs that concern me. They will not be responsible for a constituency (although, the argument is that they represent the riding of "Ontario", which is a cop-out) and have the real possibility that they'll just turn into cushy jobs for big party supporters. Another drawback to the MMP system is that we will probably never get a majority government again. While I don't dislike minority governments, I would prefer that they not be in all the time. Tomorrow, I'll be voting "No".

I don't like this referendum, and I'll tell you why. I think that our system could use an update. First past the post does create an unbalanced number or party seats. I'd like a change... just not MMP. And this is the inherent problem with the question being asked tomorrow. If I vote for first past the post, it'll be saying I like that system... If I vote for mixed member proportional, it'll be saying, I think this is the system we need. Neither of those answers reflect my opinion. However, this is what I believe: Electoral reform is coming... whether it's this election or the next or another... it's coming. I'm voting for FPTP in the hopes that a better system will be proposed next time around. If MMP wins, it'll be a long time before another system is proposed. "What other systems?", you may ask. Well, I like the system that BC voted on recently, a variation of Single Transferable Vote , but it still has elements I don't like, as in multi member ridings. Another system, which is closer to our current FPTP, is Instant Runoff Voting, where one would rank all the candidates, and 50% of the vote would be required to become elected, and if 50% isn't reached, the lowest vote getter is dropped from the ballot. The drawback here is that the effect on the proportion of seats is muted, at best.

I suppose the bottom line is that no system is perfect, and it'll come down to personal preference for each voter. In any case, if you've skipped my unnecessarily long post to the end here, just get out and vote.

------------------------------------------------

As a side note: I read an article in the London Free Press this weekend (which I can't find online) where a series of questions was asked to the chairs of both the MMP and FPTP campaign. One question was what was the biggest problem with this referendum campaign. The MMP guy said the lack of information/education about MMP... which I think is understandable. But he went on to say that since the Citizen's Assembly on Electoral Reform voted 94-8 in favour of MMP, the popular vote should be in the same proportion (ie. 92% in favour of MMP). If it was less, he said, then the only explanation is that people didn't know about it. Since I couldn't find the article online to recheck it, I suppose there's a chance that I misread it... But if memory serves me correct, what arrogance! I suppose it couldn't possibly be because people don't like it? Anyway, that just stuck in my head.

Who Are These Guys Again?

Don't forget to vote today, dorks.

And vote for whoever likes roundabouts. Because I know about how it's such a hot button issue.

hehehe... dorks.

Census Records 92 Years Later

I got an interesting e-mail from my friend Laurie, who works for the County of Lambton as an historian, about the census coming up next month. Apparently, census records are kept confidential for 92 year, then are made public record for uses like historical research and geneology. This year, you'll be required to give consent for the release of your information in 2098. The following is a message sent to increase awareness about the issue.

The next National Census of Canada is scheduled to take place on Tuesday, 16 May 2006. For the first time in the 340 years Censuses have been conducted in the territory that was destined to become Canada, respondents will be asked to provide consent for the release of information they provide, 92 years after collection. Until now, no such consent was required. The question that will appear on the Census questionnaire is as follows:

The following question is for all persons who usually live here including those less than 15 years old.

If you are answering on behalf of other people, please consult each person.

53. The Statistics Act guarantees the confidentiality of your census information. Only if you mark "YES" to this question will your personal information be made public, 92 years after the 2006 Census. If you mark "NO" or leave the answer blank, your personal information will never be made publicly available.

Does this person agree to make his/her 2006 Census information available for public release in 2098 (92 years after the census)?

_ Yes _ No

Inclusion of this 'informed consent' provision in Censuses to be conducted from 2006 was the price forced upon genealogists and historians seeking to regain public access to Historic Census records to which existing legislation already stated we were entitled. We had been advised that unless this provision was accepted the government would not present the Bill (S-18) to end our seven-year campaign to regain public access Historic Census records in accordance with provisions of the Access to Information and Privacy Acts.

In my post of 18 March 2006 I copied my letter to the Chief Statistician of Canada and his response advising what steps would be taken by StatCan and LAC to encourage a positive response to the 'informed consent' question on the upcoming Census. The fact is that we cannot depend entirely on these government sources to spread the word regarding the need for EVERYONE to answer YES to this question. It is time now to start spreading the word ourselves about this question.

Our goal is a 100 percent YES response to the 'informed consent' clause on the upcoming Census. Realistically speaking it is likely a goal that we cannot achieve. However, with some effort we can hopefully achieve something close to it. The question that arises is 'how'?

Start now by advising friends, relatives and neighbours to answer YES to the 'informed consent' question. Ask them to help pass the word along by likewise advising their friends, relatives and neighbours. Advise them that if this question is not answered YES, or is left unanswered, their descendants will be unable to find information on them in Census records in 2098 (92 years in the future). For all intents and purposes, so far as the Census is concerned, they will not have existed. If significant numbers of respondents answer negatively, or do not answer this question at all, it will destroy the completeness of the records, and thus their value to genealogical or historical researchers will be forever destroyed.

Genealogical and historical societies can publicize the need to respond YES in their various publications. They can advise their membership at their regular meetings. One might think that all genealogists are aware of the value of Census in developing their family trees. You might think that after a seven year campaign to regain public access to Historic Census records they would be aware that starting with the 2006 Census on 16 May, they must respond positively to an 'informed consent' question to earn their place in the history of the future. Sadly, from correspondence I receive, it is obvious that many of those who use Census in their research today are not aware of this. It is therefore up to us to advise them.

Genealogists and historians can be expected to be more aware of the need to answer YES to the 'informed consent' question than are the general public. In fact, the general public's knowledge of the issue is probably non-existent. They must be made aware. This can be done by word-of-mouth, by writing letters to editors of newspapers and by calling radio talk shows.

There are many ways to educate the public, and I mention here only a few.

The important thing is that we all do our part to 'spread the word'. If you think of other ways to get the news out please respond to me directly.

On Census Day 16 May 2006, make sure you answer YES to allow your information to be made available to your descendants in 2098. Make sure everyone you know does as well.

Enjoy the Census!

Gordon A. Watts gordon_watts@telus.net
Co-chair, Canada Census Committee
Port Coquitlam, British Columbia
Read my column, 'Gordon Watts Reports' at
http://globalgenealogy.com/globalgazette/authors/authgw.htm

Permission to forward without notice is granted.

Yeah, so I'm not gonna tell you what to do... you have to do what you want to do. I just figured that I'd spread some information.

All Good Things...

"The Good Times Are Over!" (23kb .mp3)

So, it's the day after the election. The conservatives won a minority, however it's not a strong minority. The NDP, while winning more seats than last time, did not win enough to have a balance of power within the minority goverment. However, having said that, I don't expect another election very soon. As bringing the government down would have to include the Liberals, we will be election free for a while. With Paul Martin planning on stepping down from the leadership of the Liberals, a race for his position will be on. A new leader won't be chosen for a few more months, and then, I would assume that the Liberals would want to have their leader in his (or her?) position for a while before facing an election. I think this minority will last for 3 years.

However, I must now express my sadness with the defeat of Roger Gallaway in Sarnia-Lambton. With the Gallaway's being family friends of our, and my mom working in his constituency office, I certainly enjoyed some good times with regards to federal services, etc over the last 12 years. For example, I have my official House of Commons daily planner on my desk right now as well as House of Commons magazine holders holding old copies of National Geographic and ITE Journal. I suppose what I'm most grateful for the co-op term I spent in Ottawa in 2000 when I had my job for the then Regional Municipality of Ottawa-Carlton. Not that he got me that job, because I got that myself through the University of Waterloo co-op program, but I did get to rent out the spare bedroom in his downtown apartment. An apartment that was the third floor of one of those nice heritage homes... it was sweet. Not to mention, since it was going unused, I got to park my car at his parliament hill office, instead of paying through the nose for downtown parking. That was also the term where I got to attend the Liberal Christmas party, during which I got to pee beside Paul Martin.

Yeah, I had it sweet. I know that. But another side effect of all this was that I actually got involved and interested in politics during the last 12 years. All in all, I'm pretty thankful, and wish my mom, Roger, and everyone else who worked in the constiuency office and in Ottawa a happy retirement or good luck in what they do next.

Sure, I'm a little disappointed. But all good things must come to an end.

Stupid Democracy

Well, that's the last time I ever endorse candidates... my endorsements apparently work like poison.

Election Endorsement

So, as it's customary for major national publication to endore a party or candidate, and seeing how Matt's Blog Is Stupid is a major national publication, I humbly submit my endorsement for Election 20X6.

Vote for Roger Gallaway in Sarnia-Lambton! Why, you ask? Simple. It'll keep my mom in a job in the Constituency office, and that always gives me quick and easy access to government services. C'mon, I know you want to.

But what if you don't live in Sarnia-Lambton? What if you live in, say, London-Fanshawe? Well, in that case you should vote for Dan Mailer, whose dating my cousin. Because I could alway stand to know more people in high places.

Anyway, so the polls suggest a Conservative victory, which means that Paul Martin will be on his way out of 24 Sussex Drive. That's a shame really, if for no other reason than he's the only leader of a party who I've peed beside in a public washroom. That's a good story, I should tell you sometime. But, no, I didn't take a peek... get your mind out of the gutter, gosh!

There's a couple good websites I've found that try to predict the outcome of the election riding by riding. My favourite is The Election Prediction Project, which has been around since the Ontario provincial election of 1999, and has quite a good record of success. The other is democraticSPACE.com, which uses some complicated mathematical formula to predict each riding. This one claims to have good record (only off by no more than 4 seats in total for any given party), but doesn't show the riding by riding result of the last election, so who knows how close it is on a riding level, but it should be pretty good on a national level. Personally, I'd like to see a minority goverment where the combination of the governing party and any one other party can get a majority vote (ie. the combination of the Conservative vote and NDP vote can pass a bill).

An endorsement for my own riding (Kitchener-Waterloo), you ask? Well, alright... vote for Edwin Laryea... but don't tell anyone I told you that.

Go vote, if you can! If you can't, I still love ya.

Election 20X6

I had real grandiose plans this election to be on the cutting edge of politcal commentary, making note and exposing the asinine and condescending quotes that the politicians spew out on a regular basis. It didn't quite turn out that way. I found out that actually paying attention to stuff like that really depresses you. Another thing working against me is that I find that I'm not really rooting for someone in this election. It's like watching a hockey game between Anaheim and Nashville... you like hockey, so you can appreciate the game, but you're just not into it like when the Leafs (or whatever your favourite team is) play. But I digress...

So, it looks like we'll be having a Conservative minority if things keep going the way they're going. One positive to take away from that is that it looks like the Conservatives may actually score some seats in Quebec, which I feel having another viable federalist party in that province goes a long way for Federalism. And another thing... you gotta feel for Jack Layton and the NDP. No matter what they do, and no matter how many people say they agree with them the most, the Liberals are continuing to persuade the "soft" NDP vote to vote Liberal just to stop the Conservatives. Seriously people, vote for the party (or candidate) you want to win. It's only way you'll ever get what you want.

Two more weeks until my favourite TV night. That'll make it all worth it.

Election Quotes #1

The honour of being the first to be made fun of for something said on the campain goes to...

It's a tie between Prime Minister Paul Martin, leader of the Liberal Party and Jack Layton, leader of the NDP. Here's why... In response to Stephen Harper's pledge to have no parallel private health care they said:

Paul Martin - "I believe in a Canada that values and protects it's universally publically funded healthcare system, so that healthcare requires a health card, not a credit card."

Jack Layton - "We want our healthcare system to be one that where it's your healthcare card that gets you the healthcare, not your credit card." (Bonus points to Mr. Layton for holding up a health card and credit card as props, just incase we didn't know what he was talking about)

So, not only do they both use bad cliches, apparently they hire the same writers for them. So thank you to Paul Martin and Jack Layton by saying absolutely nothing, using the most words possible and therefore insulting my intelligence.

PS - Don't take me picking on the Liberals and NDP as giving the Conservatives an easy time. I plan to give them all a ride.

There's nothing on TV!

Stupid TV! There's nothing on! Seems that there's some country having an election of some sort. Pfft.