Videodrome
Senior Member
I love the idea of electoral reform! Quebec had a bunch of four way vote splits in the election, leading to people winning with a small percentage of the vote.
Ontario had a referendum on electoral reform not that long ago. It fell flat on it's face.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/20...are_AndroidApp_Keep?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Keep
I bet they all attack Trudeau now once he takes office.
Which is one reason why many electoral reform advocates will do everything in their power to avoid a referendum, while electoral reform opponents (in particular, the Conservative Party) will demand one.
The Liberals have not committed to a referendum. In fact, their platform implies that there won't be a referendum ("Within 18 months of forming government, we will introduce legislation to enact electoral reform"). It wouldn't be illogical of them to take the position that there was an election, Trudeau was crystal clear in the campaign that a Liberal government would do away with FPTP, and that a majority of Canadians (at least 62.6%) voted for parties that clearly promised an end to FPTP. In other words, we've already consulted the people. Time to move on.
The volume of calls for a referendum may depend on the nature of electoral reform ultimately chosen. If it's something like MMP (long the choice of NDP platforms), the calls for a referendum may be louder, while if it's preferential voting the calls may be more muted. In all cases, the Conservatives will scream bloody murder.
The Liberals have not committed to a referendum.
It wouldn't be illogical of them to take the position that there was an election, Trudeau was crystal clear in the campaign that a Liberal government would do away with FPTP
It will be interesting to see the PQ make this same argument the next time they get a majority. After all, everyone knows they stand for separatism, so when they get a majority, it obviously means people support separation.
I am no constitutional expert, but could Quebec not just invoke the "notwithstanding" clause to overrule the Clarity Act?False equivocation considering that separation is governed by the Clarity Act, which clear states that 50+1 isn't necessarily sufficient under judgement by the HoC. Let's not equate the topic at hand as something that would for the weirdest reason, enable separatists in Quebec.
AoD
I am no constitutional expert, but could Quebec not just invoke the "notwithstanding" clause to overrule the Clarity Act?
It will be interesting to see the PQ make this same argument the next time they get a majority. After all, everyone knows they stand for separatism, so when they get a majority, it obviously means people support separation.