Cullen Remains ‘Hopeful’ About Electoral Reform
Prince George, B.C. – Skeena-Bulkley Valley NDP MP Nathan Cullen remains “hopeful” that the federal government will follow through on its promise of election reform.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of course famously promised that the 2015 federal election would be the last under the first-past-the-post electoral system.
Consequently, last year he formed an all-party electoral reform committee – chaired by Cullen – to engage Canadians on the system they thought would be best.
Following months of consultation around the country it recommended a new proportional voting system and a national referendum to see whether Canadians would support the change.
But since that report was issued in early December, the previous minister of democratic institutions Maryam Monsef, was replaced by Karina Gould.
So, what now?
“I’ll see once I have a chat with the new minister,” says Cullen. “I sent a letter to her last week asking her to sit down with us and co-draft legislation. Which while not the typical way the government operates, this is not a typical issue because it affects every Canadian in our democracy.”
He says the issue was “handled so badly” by the previous minister, that he hopes the new one “will see some wisdom in collaborating with the opposition rather than stall and delay tactics.”
But is there enough time to get in done in time for the 2019 election?
“Well we have until May to draft the legislation so it’s obviously doable. Elections Canada said if we get the legislation by the spring that we’d be able to get something done by the next election,” says Cullen.
“It’s tight, but nothing happens in life without a deadline and certainly nothing in Ottawa happens without some pressure and now the pressure is on. We have a new minister on a steep learning curve but I remain hopeful that we can get it done.”
Cullen thinks that the new Minister will **see the wisdom of collaborating with the opposition**
The problem with that statement is that the official opposition is the Conservative Party and they are not in any hurry to sit down with the Liberals on the issue of electoral reform.
So, what he is really saying is the Liberals should work with the NDP on electoral reform, because he see’s electoral reform as the only way to move the NDP out of their **rump party** status.
I suggest that we carry on with the first past the post system that has served us well over the years, and move on to bigger and better things. Canada has much bigger problems, than trying to find a electoral system that serves the interests of the NDP party.
If the Liberals should lose the next election, and revert to third party status in the commons then they will once again take an interest in electoral reform, however at that time with a Conservative party in Government it is highly unlikely that electoral reform will see the light of day.
Trudeau’s promise of electoral reform reminds me of Jean Chretian’s promise to remove the GST if elected. How did that turn out??
I agree. The Liberals have already broken many promises, but electoral reform would be one I wouldn”t mind if they did.
Disagree, something is very wrong with our electoral system when a political party, that gets only 30% of the popular vote, becomes the government.
What do you say to the other 70% of voters who DID NOT vote for that political party forming government? There are fairer election systems out there, systems where every vote makes more of a difference. Who knows, with that kind of system in place more people might become involved in exercising their right to vote, IMO.
“handled badly”? Is he hurt as a chair of the Electoral Reform Committee that Monsef called him out on the Gallagher Index? You think people hate the way elections are run now, wait until they try and figure out the square root of the sum of the… All those town halls… And all the Liberal members of the Committee recommending electoral reform be scrapped… Trudeau already wants to abandon the exercise “public enthusiasm for electoral reform has waned” since the last election
“Co-draft legislation”. Guess it will remain status quo once everything does its gov’t ‘chain of command’ paper trail. Not an issue for another 4 years! LOL
why would the ruling government want to change the way elections are done considering they favor the ruling party as they sit?
Because that’s what the majority of us voted for . Think we the people getting mad can’t change things ? Because of us Christy says she will give up her $50,000 dollar a year grift money . These politician are borrowing their power from US . Not the other way around .
Not the case. The Liberals were elected with about 40% of the vote.
People voting NDP , BLOC , AND GREEN also voted for electoral reform . It was part of the election platform for all but one party , the Harper party . Now they want a referendum on electoral reform because they hate the idea of any kind of power in the hands of the electorate .
and now that Clark is aware the $50 Grand was wrong , do you think she will repay what she took? I don’t.
I don’t know of too many cases where the government has actually listened to what the voters wanted when elected. The listen to those who backed them with $$$$$$$$$$$$
Repay it? Why would she do that? It was from her party, not the government coffers.
Let me use an example of why Christy taking $50,000 per year from her Party is wrong. Imperial Metals, the owner of the Mount Polley Mine has made substantial donations to the BC Liberal Party, Imperial Metals money likely forms part of the $50,000 Christy is taking from her Party, in other words it looks very much like conflict of interest money, or bribe money, from Imperial Metals… why else would no charges be laid against that company more than 2 years after, what turned out to be, the biggest environmental disaster in Canadian history?
BH dont you hate being wrong?
Thank you slinky for providing me with yet another opportunity to reveal some interesting facts and truths about our Christy Clark Lib-Con government. Of course Paul Fraser, BC’s Conflict of Interest Commissioner, would find no conflict of interest in the case of Christy Clark’s $50,000 stipend, just as he has ruled no conflict of interest with Christy’s cash for access $10,000 per plate dinners.
According to the New York Times; “Personal enrichment from handouts of wealthy donors, some of whom have paid tens of thousands of dollars to meet with her (Christy Clark) at private fundraisers? No conflict of interest here, according to a pair of rulings last year by the province’s conflict-of-interest-commissioner- whose son works for Ms. Clark.”
“BC is the wild west,” said Duff Conacher, a founder of Democracy Watch, a Canadian civic organization that has petitioned the Supreme Court of British Columbia to void the commissioner’s decision. The group argues that there is a “reasonable apprehension of bias” because the commissioner’s son is a deputy minister in Ms. Clark’s cabinet.” So the ethics commissioner’s son is a deputy minister (no less) in Christy’s government, the political glad handing, and back scratching, in this unethical government seems to know no limits.
QUESTION: what would be the odds of this Christy Clark government being on the wrong side of the law regarding Democracy Watch’s petition to the BC Supreme Court to void the commissioner’s decision on Christy’s $50,000 stipend?
ANSWER: Pretty damn good odds of them losing, perhaps this is why Christy voluntarily gave up her $50,000 stipend the other day? Things that make a person go; hmmm…
Cullen had better hope his party never wins the election otherwise he’d have to do something other then bitch and complain about the governing party.
He’s the classic career politician. There’s a fat pension awaiting. Pretty good work if you can get it.
He reminds me a whole lot of a post turtle
Huh, three mudslinging comments in a row, not a record for this 250news site though.
Your living in a nest of pc’ers and they don’t like ideas of the electret.
how do you figure?
it aint mud slinging if it is true
BH hates mud slinging if it ain’t coming from her
Comments for this article are closed.