News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 11K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 43K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 6.6K     0 
Gronk! said:
globalnews.ca

Five more Alberta UCP legislature members facing recall, bringing total to 14 | Globalnews.ca

Almost a third of the 47 United Conservative members in the Alberta legislature are now under recall.
globalnews.ca globalnews.ca
Click to expand...
The recall effort comes across as an attempt to overturn the results of the last election, in which the UCP democratically won a majority. That's the way the system works in Canada: we abide by the results of democratic elections. This is not the Third World, where if certain groups don't agree with the results of an election they use whatever procedural tricks they can in order to engineer a different outcome.

It's genuinely amusing the number of people frantically trying to gather signatures to get UCP MLAs recalled, particularly in Calgary. Where was all this hard work and campaigning during the 2023 election, when a few seats flipped in Calgary as well as some in the Edmonton Ring would have resulted in a UCP defeat and an NDP victory?
 
I mean... the UCP democratically won a majority, and democratically enabled the recall legislation in the first place. They did (appropriately, imo) set the bar to trigger a recall very high, but they very much passed on the idea of restricting the availability of recall petitions to specific criteria (e.g. serious criminal convictions, as is the case in the U.K.). The UCP doesn't really have grounds to complain about voters using the tools available to hold them accountable, when they are the ones who provided them with said tools!
 
Markyeg said:
The UCP were fine with their recall legislation when it was being used against the former Calgary mayor, but now that the tables have turned and it’s being used against them they have a problem with it.
Click to expand...
I don't agree with recall legislation at all, at any level.

First of all, it's an attempt to change the results of an election. We have elections at both the provincial and the municipal level every four years. THAT'S the time we get to make a change. Attempting to recall city council members or MLAs who were democratically elected flies in the face of the principle in this country that we respect the will of the voters, as expressed in a free and fair election. It's not only hooligans storming the U.S. Capitol who have an undemocratic agenda of overturning the will of the electorate, it's also people using the recall system to fiddle with the results of a settled election here at home.

Want a do-over? You get one every four years.

The other big problem with recall legislation is that it can make political leaders gun-shy about tackling controversial issues or major structural change, for fear of sparking a mid-term recall drive that could cost them their seats.

The contract we have in Canadian society is that every four years, the public has a right to choose its governing leaders for the next term. The elections are free and fair and run by a neutral government agency (not overseen by the politicians themselves, as are many elections in the U.S.) And when the returns come in, the public agrees to abide by the result of that election, and not attempt to overturn it mid-term.
 
The UCP passed this legislation to placate members who were angry that they had to sit through four years being represented by an NDP MLA. Like many things the UCP has done under both of its leaders, they did not really think it through.
 
Gus Haynes said:
The UCP passed this legislation to placate members who were angry that they had to sit through four years being represented by an NDP MLA. Like many things the UCP has done under both of its leaders, they did not really think it through.
Click to expand...
IIRC there was recall legislation passed by Social Credit under Premier Aberhart. It was used against their own MLAs and ended up getting repealed.

I would eventually expect something similar to happen in this case.
 
TravellingChris said:
The recall effort comes across as an attempt to overturn the results of the last election, in which the UCP democratically won a majority. That's the way the system works in Canada: we abide by the results of democratic elections. This is not the Third World, where if certain groups don't agree with the results of an election they use whatever procedural tricks they can in order to engineer a different outcome.

It's genuinely amusing the number of people frantically trying to gather signatures to get UCP MLAs recalled, particularly in Calgary. Where was all this hard work and campaigning during the 2023 election, when a few seats flipped in Calgary as well as some in the Edmonton Ring would have resulted in a UCP defeat and an NDP victory?
Click to expand...
"This is not the Third World...."

Good point. So when the government decides to remove Charter rights from citizens, it's probably good to have a mechanism to remove said government via legal, democratic means.
 
TravellingChris said:
The recall effort comes across as an attempt to overturn the results of the last election, in which the UCP democratically won a majority. That's the way the system works in Canada: we abide by the results of democratic elections. This is not the Third World, where if certain groups don't agree with the results of an election they use whatever procedural tricks they can in order to engineer a different outcome.

It's genuinely amusing the number of people frantically trying to gather signatures to get UCP MLAs recalled, particularly in Calgary. Where was all this hard work and campaigning during the 2023 election, when a few seats flipped in Calgary as well as some in the Edmonton Ring would have resulted in a UCP defeat and an NDP victory?
Click to expand...
Yeah...the UCP championed the recall legislation. Blame them for the "the 3rd world" rhetoric.
 
ADob said:
Anyone have thoughts on Bill 11?
Click to expand...
Not a huge fan as I can see the doctors who are greedy working more in the private sector and eventually abandoning their practice to make as much $$$ as possible over working in the private sector.
 
In case anyone isn't familiar:

Bill 10: Provincial regulators can no longer mandate Canadian work experience. This change helps with Foreign Credential Recognition (FQR), obstacles with which result in us bringing doctors and engineers to Canada where they work as Uber drivers. Puts citizenship and health care numbers on drivers licenses.

Bill 11: Makes citizens renew their health care cards, and holders of expired cards may be charged for services. Some advocates are speculating that this is to block low-income and homeless residents from medical care. (I know the least about this one, I'm sure there are more notable changes)

Bill 13: Provincial regulators can no longer punish licensees for "off-duty conduct." Some people are concerned that this will further perpetuate hate speech.

Here's more.
 
TravellingChris said:
This is not the Third World, where if certain groups don't agree with the results of an election they use whatever procedural tricks they can in order to engineer a different outcome.
Click to expand...
TravellingChris said:
I don't agree with recall legislation at all, at any level.

First of all, it's an attempt to change the results of an election. We have elections at both the provincial and the municipal level every four years. THAT'S the time we get to make a change. Attempting to recall city council members or MLAs who were democratically elected flies in the face of the principle in this country that we respect the will of the voters, as expressed in a free and fair election. It's not only hooligans storming the U.S. Capitol who have an undemocratic agenda of overturning the will of the electorate, it's also people using the recall system to fiddle with the results of a settled election here at home.

Want a do-over? You get one every four years.

The other big problem with recall legislation is that it can make political leaders gun-shy about tackling controversial issues or major structural change, for fear of sparking a mid-term recall drive that could cost them their seats.

The contract we have in Canadian society is that every four years, the public has a right to choose its governing leaders for the next term. The elections are free and fair and run by a neutral government agency (not overseen by the politicians themselves, as are many elections in the U.S.) And when the returns come in, the public agrees to abide by the result of that election, and not attempt to overturn it mid-term.
Click to expand...

1 - the whole "third world" thing is incredibly arrogant, not to say borderline racist. This whole "we're better than they are" mentality should have no place in any discussions regarding democracy. If anything, in the past few years, examples of "third world" countries having more solid institutions and democratic processes than some "first world" are plenty, especially in Latin America. I say with absolute confidence that countries like Brazil and Chile are, today, far more democratic than the US or South Korea (and Alberta, to be very honest).

2 - The reasons for these recalls are not minor inconveniences and harmless laws that some people don't like. It is mainly about the indiscriminate use of their majority status to invoke the Notwithstanding Clause and force ANYHING they want, as much as it might not have popular support, and basically rule like a dictatorship. If Danielle Smith and the UCP can use the Notwithstanding Clause like this, whenever they want to pass something that THEY KNOW will be challenged in the courts (which, you guessed, is part of the democratic process too), where does it stop? They still have another year and a half in government, and the precedent being opened here is such that they can dismantle and fundamentally change things in the province in a way we might not be able to go back.

3 - The bar for a recall is very high, and should it be triggered it is a substantial sign of lost of confidence by the constituents in that representative. The same way a Prime Minister or a Premier might suffer a non-confidence vote, why can't an MP or MLA? Especially with our "first past the post" system, where most of the time the representative is elected with far less votes than a majority (which is abysmal and should not be a thing).
 
ChazYEG said:
1 - the whole "third world" thing is incredibly arrogant, not to say borderline racist. This whole "we're better than they are" mentality should have no place in any discussions regarding democracy. If anything, in the past few years, examples of "third world" countries having more solid institutions and democratic processes than some "first world" are plenty, especially in Latin America. I say with absolute confidence that countries like Brazil and Chile are, today, far more democratic than the US or South Korea (and Alberta, to be very honest).

2 - The reasons for these recalls are not minor inconveniences and harmless laws that some people don't like. It is mainly about the indiscriminate use of their majority status to invoke the Notwithstanding Clause and force ANYHING they want, as much as it might not have popular support, and basically rule like a dictatorship. If Danielle Smith and the UCP can use the Notwithstanding Clause like this, whenever they want to pass something that THEY KNOW will be challenged in the courts (which, you guessed, is part of the democratic process too), where does it stop? They still have another year and a half in government, and the precedent being opened here is such that they can dismantle and fundamentally change things in the province in a way we might not be able to go back.

3 - The bar for a recall is very high, and should it be triggered it is a substantial sign of lost of confidence by the constituents in that representative. The same way a Prime Minister or a Premier might suffer a non-confidence vote, why can't an MP or MLA? Especially with our "first past the post" system, where most of the time the representative is elected with far less votes than a majority (which is abysmal and should not be a thing).
Click to expand...
It's intellectually lazy to infer racism on a fellow member's part, simply because you don't agree with their argument--not to mention a violation of the forum rules. Be careful throwing that term around.

In many countries in the Third World, we are seeing governments abuse their power by throwing their political opponents in jail and/or fiddling with the results of democratic elections. It's happened in Brazil, with both Bolsonaro and Lula having been jailed at various times and Rousseff removed from power on a flimsy pretext. Other examples of political opponents being jailed or election results being meddled with include Venezuela (repeatedly), Peru, Zimbabwe, Myanmar, Thailand, Egypt and more.

The time to take action against Danielle Smith's government was in the 2023 election. Attempting to overturn the results of the 2023 election through the recall system now is anything but democratic. The ultimate goal of the recall drive, of course, is to remove enough UCP members and replacing them in byelections in order to remove the UCP from power. That's an attempt to overturn the results of a general election simply because certain people don't like the results.

Under the Canadian system, majority governments can pass legislation according to their policy goals, subject to constitutional guardrails. Again, if you don't agree with UCP policies the time to stop them was in the 2023 election. Perhaps the UCP's opponents should work harder next time.

The argument that the first past the post system "should not be a thing" is valid but that is an argument for changing the electoral system. It is not an excuse for attempting to overturn the results of an election in which Albertans expressed a clear choice.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top