Canadian Politics

About a third of the votes are mail-in and, due to BC election laws, can’t be counted for two weeks. But it isn’t expected that the mail-in ballots will differ drastically from the in-person ones.

It looks like a very solid NDP victory (50 seats called for them, 25 for the Liberals, 3 for the Greens, 9 still up in the air). They’ve won most of the seats in Greater Vancouver, and even some in the Fraser Valley, along with most of Vancouver Island.

Results by region (as per CBC):

- Vancouver Island (14): 12 NDP, 2 Green

- Greater Vancouver (44): 32 NDP, 6 Liberal, 1 Green, 5 to be determined

- Fraser Valley (6): 2 Liberal, 1 NDP, 3 to be determined

- Okanagan & Kootenays (i.e. south interior: 10): 6 Liberal, 3 NDP, 1 to be determined

- Central & Northern BC (13): 11 Liberal, 2 NDP

Edited by Galadriel on Oct 25th 2020 at 1:33:48 PM

Yeah my district seems to be still NDP. I voted mail in for the NDP.

TIL BC actually has a Conservative party.

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.

The BC Liberals are the provincial right-wing party and have a lot of overlap (in voters and sometimes in candidates) with the federal Conservatives. They’re the party of big business and were hit hard by campaign finance reform that banned corporate and union donations - corporate donations used to make up 2/3 of their fundraising.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bc-election-2020-campaign-donation-limits-analysis-1.5765772

There’s also a BC Conservative Party, which got a little over 2% of the vote. They managed to come in second in the the two Peace River seats in northeast BC (it’s oil & gas country, you can’t get support there if you propose to do anything serious on climate change) and, amusingly, act as a spoiler in Chilliwack, splitting the right-wing vote with the BC Liberals and allowing the NDP to win the seat.

Edited by Galadriel on Oct 25th 2020 at 4:43:36 AM

I knew about the nature of the BC Liberals. But I had no idea there was a redundant minor party.

You'd think increasing polarization might cause the BC Libs to rebrand or something though.

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.

Me, I wonder why this unusual naming scheme still persists. Sounds super confusing from the outside.

"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman

Well, the NDP are to the left of the Liberals in terms of both the provincial and federal parties. It’s just that in BC, both parties are to the right of where they are federally. (And federally, there is a Conservative Party that’s one of the major parties.)

I think the BC Liberals are evoking “liberal” in the sense of classical economic liberalism (i.e. laissez-faire). They’re also more socially liberal than your average conservative party (though they do have some socially conservative candidates, which tripped them up during this election because those kinds of stances don’t go over well in most of the province).

BC’s had a complicated political history; the current NDP-vs-Liberal dynamic has only been in play from the 1990s onwards. (In the 1950s through 1980s, it was the NDP versus the right-wing Social Credit Party, and the Liberals were a minor party.)

Edited by Galadriel on Oct 25th 2020 at 5:23:06 AM

Yeah pretty much, does make it kind of confusing to explain to everywhere else, also understand when you are a kid (or was for me).

Senator Lynn Breyak contributed to Trump's Campaign, violating US laws.

You may remember her as the senator that keeps insisting that the whole cultural Genocide of the native population was actually really good coz it taught them about Jesus. She got kicked out of the Conservative Caucus and suspended from last parliamentary session. She's now back "in service" and getting paid government bucks again.

We really need to have an easier way to fire Senators.

Indeed. Not looking forward to another year of her being on the public payroll for being a racist and a supporter (sometimes illegally) of far-right figures.

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.

@Galadriel: What's driving the BC NDP rightward?

I despise hypocrisy, unless of course it is my own.

Cyrus Janssen is being investigated over filming inside the Vancouver courthouse, which is considered illegal and making some "claims" that Canada's doing Trump's work.

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/3107883/canada-court-investigates-pro-china-youtubers-video-about-meng

Edited by Ominae on Oct 30th 2020 at 10:46:27 AM

"Exit muna si Polgas. Ang kailangan dito ay si Dobermaxx!"

Would Canada extradite if the US looked to prosecute?

"And the Bunny nails it!" ~ Gabrael "If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we." ~ Cyran

So a freelance, pro-China, American propagandist blatantly violated Canadian law by filming in court. Sounds like an easy case to me. Honestly though, if he isn't a Resident or a Duel Citizen, we'd probably be better off kicking his ass out at least.

Honestly, I don't know where the Meng case goes. She's likely broken American laws, and Canada behaved lawfully when we arrested her, but the charges were levied to give Trump an edge in trade talks. And then the CCP took hostage and abused a pair of Canadians in response, because of the 3 countries involved only one cares about the rule of law and we're stuck in between two giants.

Edited by Rationalinsanity on Oct 31st 2020 at 4:41:58 PM

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.

@Ramidel: I don’t think the BC NDP has moved substantially rightward in recent years. It’s simply to the right of the federal NDP because, unlike the federal NDP, it has actually formed governments, which tends to demand more in the way of ideological compromise than is necessary for a third party.

The strength of the federal NDP is largely in their ability to push the federal Liberals leftward - both by competing for votes and by, in a minority parliament (like now), pushing the federal Liberals to implement specific progressive policies in exchange for support on key votes. (For example, this year, improvements to COVID benefits, and national sick pay.)

Edited by Galadriel on Oct 31st 2020 at 3:44:03 PM

Sorry the thread moved to fast, I meant would Canada extradite Breyak?

Edited by Silasw on Oct 31st 2020 at 1:47:04 PM

"And the Bunny nails it!" ~ Gabrael "If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we." ~ Cyran

Ohhhh. That makes way more sense.

Frankly, in a non-pandemic situation, I think (after the extradition process was exhausted), Canada would hand over Senator Beyak to the American feds with little fanfare. But given the current state of North America now, I can't see it being a priority.

If the DOJ asked for her, we'd probably hand her over. But considering that's its not a huge offense, I can't see the request even being made.

Senators have no inherent immunity AFAIK, and she's an independent who has burned all her bridges to anyone who isn't the far-right.

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.

Yeah I think senators have gone to jail for stuff domestically (like taking bribes, and embezzling and in one case taking advantage of an underage teenager).

Edited by phantom1 on Nov 1st 2020 at 9:38:43 AM

Ok, this post is going to cover two things.

---

First of all, there was a Halloween spree attack in Quebec City. Two people are dead, and 5 others were wounded, and the weapon used was a katana (or something resembling one). Terrorism is not being suspected at this time.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/quebec-city-police-stabbings-1.5785401

---

Secondly, The Notwithstanding Clause was brought up in the US politics thread, and to prevent a rule breaching off topic tangent, I moved it here.

tldr; Section 33 allows for some rights to be violated. Quebec didn't agree to it, but they use it the most.

The Notwithstanding Clause (officially Section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms) can be invoked by legislatures (federal or provincial, but only the latter have ever done so) to allow their laws to go into force even if they are found to violate some, but not all (mobility, language and democratic rights do not apply here) provisions of the Charter (freedom of expression, freedom from search and seizure, etc). Such invocations must be renewed every 5 years, and with a few notable exceptions the political blowback has prevented widespread use of it.

When the Trudeau (senior) government was trying to get the provinces to sign onto the constitution process (fully severing Canada's last legal dependence on the UK, and giving us a legally entrenched set of rights, etc), Section 33 was a compromise to bring the (mostly Western) provinces into the process. Trudeau himself hated the idea, but then Justice Minister Jean Chretien later said it was a necessary evil to get enough provinces to sign on, they simply wouldn't surrender that much power to Ottawa without a contingency.

The most prolific user, Quebec, never signed on to the Constitution at all. For the first five years of the Charter's existence, they used Section 33 for every bill they passed, as a protest that the feds couldn't tell them what to do. They've since used it to enforce language laws, and more recently go for European style secularism laws in public spaces.

Some of the uses can be seen as more positive or pragmatic (New Brunswick is considering using it to crack down on anti-vaccination issues, for example).

Alberta tried to use it to prevent same-sex marriage from becoming a thing, but then the courts ruled that marriage was a federal power anyway, so their law was pointless. Alberta also considered using it to prevent being forced to pay the victims of previous eugenics programs... but public uproar killed that idea.

Another nasty, non-Quebec case, was when Ontario Premier Doug Ford used it to get around the courts after he slashed the Toronto City Council's size by about half in the middle of a municipal election. There were fears that he'd use Section 33, or normalize its use by other right-wing Premiers, but that hasn't materialized yet.

Its nasty and prone to abuse, but you'd never get enough provinces to sign on to rewording or eliminating it.

Crucially, Section 33 cannot be invoked if a law is found to violate democratic rights.

As a final note, it should not be confused with Section 1 of the Charter, which allows for any of the following rights to be limited by laws if they can be justified by the standards of a free and democratic society. This comes up to the courts, and governments cannot override their decision.

I hope this helps ~Ramidel.

Edited by Rationalinsanity on Nov 1st 2020 at 4:23:41 PM

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.

Thanks for the explanation.

I despise hypocrisy, unless of course it is my own.

Finally. Something has happened for the indigenous:

"Exit muna si Polgas. Ang kailangan dito ay si Dobermaxx!"

Looks like Singh is denouncing Trump and calling for his defeat, while Trudeau and O'Toole (who don't have the luxury of further alienating a guy who could still be President until 2025) have committed to work with whoever wins.

I'm sure Trudeau would like to denounce Trump, and O'Toole knows that he is doing himself no political favors by having Trump as a boogieman he could be compared to, Prime Ministers (and potential Prime Ministers) cannot afford to make an enemy of the President.

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.

The worst Trudeau said was that he expected that Biden would be much easier to work with (and also added that there would still be issues to handle between the two countries) in a call with a Montreal radio station.

Edited by Resileafs on Nov 3rd 2020 at 4:32:09 AM

So I'm particularly pissed off with Mango Mussolini today. He and his enablers (see; almost the entire Republican party) claimed that a Canadian company (Dominion) deliberately stole the election with their voting machines.

This has caused our own fringe up here (who are more loyal to Trump than Canada, to be honest) to start raising accusations towards Elections Canada; that they favored the Liberals with voting machines.

The problem? Elections Canada only uses paper ballots, and counts them by hand. They had to Tweet this out to clamp down on rapidly developing disinformation ploys from the far-right media.

Dominion machines have been used in some provincial, municipal, and party leadership elections, but those aren't under Elections Canada's jurisdiction.

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/trump-points-to-elections-canada-tweet-to-bolster-baseless-claims-of-voter-fraud-1.5193012

Its not enough for them to undermine the foundation of their own democracy, they had to go after ours as well. I expect the PPC to go full in on this, and Conservative supporters (if not the party itself) will likely follow suit.

And then Trump used the EC Tweet to "confirm" that he's right about about the entire fraud case. Because of course he did.

Politics is the skilled use of blunt objects.