Path: utzoo!lsuc!sickkids!dptcdc!tmsoft!ead
From: ead@tmsoft.uucp (Elizabeth Doucette)
Newsgroups: can.general
Subject: Re: Canada: one or two cultures?
Message-ID: <1989Jul29.175723.28111@tmsoft.uucp>
Date: 29 Jul 89 17:57:23 GMT
References: <615662921.9256@myrias.uucp> <568@UALTAVM.BITNET> <1989Jul27.131633.14903@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> <1989Jul28.003559.25233@tmsoft.uucp> <814@bnr-fos.UUCP>
Reply-To: ead@tmsoft.UUCP (Elizabeth Doucette)
Followup-To: can.general
Distribution: can
Organization: EAD MoneyHealth Inc, Toronto, Canada
Lines: 63

(Because of my editor I've had to delete part of my "reference:" line.
 
In article <814@bnr-fos.UUCP> dgibbs@bnr-fos.UUCP (David Gibbs) writes:
>In article <1989Jul28.003559.25233@tmsoft.uucp> ead@tmsoft.UUCP
(Elizabeth Doucette) writes: 
>>In article <1989Jul27.131633.14903@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> jdd@db.toronto.edu
>>(John DiMarco) writes:
>>>ead@tmsoft.uucp (Elizabeth Doucette) writes:
>>>
>>>>                        Federally, each province doesn't get
>>>>an equal vote.  The same number of MP's should come from each
>>>>province.  Then you would see some changes. 
>>>
>>>Yep. Things would change, alright. For one, I'd move to PEI! :-)
>>>
>>>Quite frankly, if the same number of MP's came from each province, residents
>>>of less populous provinces (PEI, for example) would have much more clout
>>>than residents of more populous provinces. 
>>
>>No they wouldn't.  The residents would have the same clout.  The only
>>difference is that in one province there might be 0.5 million people
>>voting for 1 M.P. and in the other province there might be 50,000
>>people voting for 1 M.P.  The difference comes in the amount of work
>>that each M.P. would have to do, for example, if each M.P. were to try
>>to talk to each voter.
>> 
>
>>Elizabeth
>
>
>  The general principal in federal elections is one person one vote,  with
>the hope that all the votes will be about equal.  If we distribute the
>M.Ps equally by province we don't get that.  Lets use your figures of
>.5 Million per M.P. (say Ontario) and 50,000 (P.E.I?).  These probably
>won't be accurate, but should justify my point.  Let's say you and
>10,000 people get together to fight for a certain point.  In P.E.I,
>that is probably enough to elect an M.P. (only about half the eligible
>voters vote) so you would have just under 50% of the needed amount, or
>at worst, you would have 20% which gives you a big headstart.  You will
>put an M.P. in.  Now lets say you are in Ontario with your 10,000 people.
>What M.P. is going to notice you?  You comprise at best 2% of the vote.
>
> [...]
>-David

>(Remember Canada in supposed to be a nation of Canadian citizens,
> not a union of semi-independent provinces.)

Of course David is right.  When I wrote the above, I was thinking
about my suggestion re equal clout that a province would have.  As
I've mentioned in other postings, this was just a suggestion.  I was
talking about being fed up with Quebec's complaints because the
situation is a lot worse, and much more unfair in other provinces.  In
another posting I mentioned other suggestions and have asked for
Timothy and others to come up with other suggestions.

The problem is that the current system is not working.  Ontario and
Quebec are the richest provinces because of their population.  Because
of their population (and number of M.P.'s) the government buys their
votes with various bribes, (oops, industries!).  Yes, I'm being
sarcastic.  People only complain, they don't come up with solutions.

Elizabeth