Alberta Politics & Government Thread 3.0

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by Slava

I think it's bad policy, and there are several reasons why. We elect governments and representatives for relatively short terms, and there are almost no circumstances where I think the voting public needs a "do-over." Having this option only pushes short-term thinking among politicians and exacerbates polarization.

Like I say, the fact that this is bad policy (in my opinion), only makes it more hilarious that the party that pushed this is facing the consequences.

In theory there is a time and place for some sort of recall mechanism but I can see things getting out of hand in the current environment. It starts now with the total recall campaign and in the future I could see a group going after Farkas. A few years from now, if the NDP are in power, another group could do a total recall of the NDP MLAs. This type of thing would not be good for the general public and it certainly would not be good for democracy as a whole.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

In theory there is a time and place for some sort of recall mechanism but I can see things getting out of hand in the current environment. It starts now with the total recall campaign and in the future I could see a group going after Farkas. A few years from now, if the NDP are in power, another group could do a total recall of the NDP MLAs. This type of thing would not be good for the general public and it certainly would not be good for democracy as a whole.

It just pushes us down the line of more apathy and people becoming increasingly disillusioned with politics.

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

In theory there is a time and place for some sort of recall mechanism but I can see things getting out of hand in the current environment. It starts now with the total recall campaign and in the future I could see a group going after Farkas. A few years from now, if the NDP are in power, another group could do a total recall of the NDP MLAs. This type of thing would not be good for the general public and it certainly would not be good for democracy as a whole.

Uh, if the NDP are in power they can just get rid of the stupid legislation. The UCP could, too.


We need maximum mockery here.

[TorqueDog]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

In theory there is a time and place for some sort of recall mechanism but I can see things getting out of hand in the current environment. It starts now with the total recall campaign and in the future I could see a group going after Farkas. A few years from now, if the NDP are in power, another group could do a total recall of the NDP MLAs. This type of thing would not be good for the general public and it certainly would not be good for democracy as a whole.

It was already tried (and failed) with Gondek. However, "if the NDP are in power, another group could do a total recall of the NDP MLAs" was the entire point of the recall legislation in the first place. The UCP thought -- what, with such rabid and brainlessly loyal voters -- that they could weaponize their base to remove any politician that wasn't sympathetic to their goals of corrupt self-enrichment for the crime of not being a malignant boil on the ass of Alberta sufficiently conservative enough.

Recall legislation was called stupid when it was proposed by the UCP, and everyone said it was unnecessary, and bad policy. The fact that their own legislation is being used against them is glorious, and I am here to watch Smith's proverbial house burn to the ground.

I suspect, as Fuzz notes, the NDP would just toss the damn legislation if they were in power. And of course, the UCP would piss and moan about taking away voters' rights.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

It was already tried (and failed) with Gondek. However, "if the NDP are in power, another group could do a total recall of the NDP MLAs" was the entire point of the recall legislation in the first place. The UCP thought -- what, with such rabid and brainlessly loyal voters -- that they could weaponize their base to remove any politician that wasn't sympathetic to their goals of corrupt self-enrichment for the crime of not being a malignant boil on the ass of Alberta sufficiently conservative enough.

Recall legislation was called stupid when it was proposed by the UCP, and everyone said it was unnecessary, and bad policy. The fact that their own legislation is being used against them is glorious, and I am here to watch Smith's proverbial house burn to the ground.

I suspect, as Fuzz notes, the NDP would just toss the damn legislation if they were in power. And of course, the UCP would piss and moan about taking away voters' rights.

Let's not forget that the NDP wanted to make it even easier to recall MLAs:

The Opposition will present amendments in the Legislature to lower the signature requirement to 25 per cent of eligible voters, and remove the unnecessary “recall vote” step entirely for MLAs.

Kenney’s phony bill also has no set date to come into force, meaning Canada’s most disliked premier could wait as long as he wanted before proclaiming it. Alberta’s NDP will propose that the bill come into effect on July 31, 2021.

“We will propose amendments to give Albertans the real power to remove MLAs who have broken the public trust,” Sweet said. “If UCP MLAs vote these down, then they are clearly terrified of being accountable to the Albertans they are supposed to serve.”

https://www.albertandpcaucus.ca/news...ony-recall-act

[TorqueDog]

IMHO, the real answer is in your very quote.

“We will propose amendments to give Albertans the real power to remove MLAs who have broken the public trust,” Sweet said. “If UCP MLAs vote these down, then they are clearly terrified of being accountable to the Albertans they are supposed to serve.”

That reads like the NDP was calling their bluff. The recall legislation was intended to be toothless as enacted by design. It set the bar sufficiently high such that recall was highly unlikely to ever be successful against the UCP MLAs who would most certainly prove themselves deserving of such recourse.

[WideReceiver]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

Recalls are ####ing dumb, regardless of who’s being targeted.

Almost as stupid as petitions about everything people disagree with.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by WideReceiver

Almost as stupid as petitions about everything people disagree with.

[peter12]

Cliff is correct. Recall legislation is ####ing stupid, and really just exists for something that losers can glomb onto.

[Looch City]

Well of course it's ####ing dumb and stupid. It's this very government that came up with it in the first place.

Dumb and stupid is their motto. So, let's show them how ####ing dumb and stupid they are.

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by Slava

I think it's bad policy, and there are several reasons why. We elect governments and representatives for relatively short terms, and there are almost no circumstances where I think the voting public needs a "do-over." Having this option only pushes short-term thinking among politicians and exacerbates polarization.

Like I say, the fact that this is bad policy (in my opinion), only makes it more hilarious that the party that pushed this is facing the consequences.

When a government decides to revoke the rights of citizens, especially over something as trivial as contract negotiations, that is a prime example of a government that needs to be open to recall. No reasonable person would say that is an acceptable action by a democratic government.

Governments need checks and balances. If they will not resign over minor scandals, if they will not obey ethics rules, or allow an impartial judicial inquiry in major scandals then what is left to prevent them from causing significant harm and damage to the people they are meant to represent?

This is not about a voting do-over, this is about stopping a government that has gotten out of control with their abuse of power, theft of our money, and destruction of our public services. They are doing things that were not in their election platform and are not things that the people of Alberta have asked for or in any way indicated that we want.
No one asked for AISH to be changed.
No one asked for an Alberta Police service.
No one wants an Alberta Pension Plan.
No one wants AHS broken up or privatized.
No one wanted Lougheed's coal policy rescinded or to gift money to coal companies.
No one wants public education dismantled and privatized.
No one wants citizen's rights to be revoked.
The list just keeps going and going and going.

Also, the threshold for recall is still very high. 60% of all voters from the last election need to sign. Look at Rajan Sawhney, she won her seat by one of the smallest margins last election. She had 11,921 votes and the runner-up had 11,778. To recall her the petition needs 14,893 signatures. That would imply that around a third of her supporters are now so disgusted by her representation of them that they would rather recall her now and have a byelection than wait for her term to end.

I do understand the concern that in the future the conservative Albertans may try to band together to bring down an NDP government over nothing-burger reasons but under these rules that would mean that a bunch of NDP supporters would need to flip their opinion over the government, which I doubt would happen unless the NDP was doing something seriously wrong. At which point you would have the same situation as the Gondek recall where they gather a small fraction of the required votes, waste their one opportunity to try to recall the politician and nothing happens.

[Locke]

Save us Father Brown!!

[Cappy]

Recall leg. is populist cockamamie

using the Recall leg. on those same populists? fun.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by Wolven

Also, the threshold for recall is still very high. 60% of all voters from the last election need to sign. Look at Rajan Sawhney, she won her seat by one of the smallest margins last election. She had 11,921 votes and the runner-up had 11,778. To recall her the petition needs 14,893 signatures. That would imply that around a third of her supporters are now so disgusted by her representation of them that they would rather recall her now and have a byelection than wait for her term to end.

I do understand the concern that in the future the conservative Albertans may try to band together to bring down an NDP government over nothing-burger reasons but under these rules that would mean that a bunch of NDP supporters would need to flip their opinion over the government, which I doubt would happen unless the NDP was doing something seriously wrong. At which point you would have the same situation as the Gondek recall where they gather a small fraction of the required votes, waste their one opportunity to try to recall the politician and nothing happens.

This part is not quite accurate because for the recall example of Sawhney it doesn't necessarily require 1/3 of her supporters to switch but rather the recall canvassers just need to find a sufficient amount of eligible voters to sign the campaign. There are around 36,000 eligible voters of which 12,000 or so did not vote last time and a bunch of those folks could be disgusted enough with what is going on.

[Wolven]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

This part is not quite accurate because for the recall example of Sawhney it doesn't necessarily require 1/3 of her supporters to switch but rather the recall canvassers just need to find a sufficient amount of eligible voters to sign the campaign. There are around 36,000 eligible voters of which 12,000 or so did not vote last time and a bunch of those folks could be disgusted enough with what is going on.

Absolutely. I should have rephrased it to say that you would have needed a significant chunk of voters to change their vote. It does not have to be Sawhney supporters changing their vote, the abstainers could change their vote to be against her instead of neutral.

In a perfect world, everyone would be voting which means there wouldn't be a group of sleeping voters that you could awaken in case of a recall and you would actually need voters that supported the MLA to switch. I sometimes wish we would follow Australia's example and make voting mandatory.

[aaronck]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1985458726560796707

[GranteedEV]

Originally Posted by aaronck

https://twitter.com/user/status/1985458726560796707

Par for the course. Fascists aren't going to give up power to democratic institutions, even ones of their own making.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

Let's not forget that the NDP wanted to make it even easier to recall MLAs:


https://www.albertandpcaucus.ca/news...ony-recall-act

They were just calling and raising. They don't support recall legislation generally, but if the UCP was going to do it and not just make noise, they were asking that it be real.

[Roughneck]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

In theory there is a time and place for some sort of recall mechanism but I can see things getting out of hand in the current environment. It starts now with the total recall campaign and in the future I could see a group going after Farkas. A few years from now, if the NDP are in power, another group could do a total recall of the NDP MLAs. This type of thing would not be good for the general public and it certainly would not be good for democracy as a whole.

The recall legislation is pretty toothless against the mayors of Calgary and Edmonton. They’re the two hardest positions to recall in the province because the number of voters is so high compared to any other politician.

Similarly, with only 14 wards but 26 provincial ridings, it will generally be a lot easier to recall an MLA than a councillor.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by aaronck

https://twitter.com/user/status/1985458726560796707

What a bunch of a$$holes