Author Topic: WE Scandal  (Read 1491 times)

0 Members and 0 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline eyeball

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 704
Re: WE Scandal
« Reply #120 on: January 26, 2021, 12:17:14 pm »
1. I have been only saying this for 20 years.
2. How about taking things OUT of the political arena of combat ?  Like human rights discussions, governance of crown corps, and Canadian identity issues ?  Make all party committees with massive citizen involvement and input.  Do real-time polling and foster discussions.
How do you take these out of the political arena when EVERYTHING is political including the arena? You can't, no more than you can take time away from space.
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Offline Gorgeous Graham

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5887
Re: WE Scandal
« Reply #121 on: January 26, 2021, 12:33:22 pm »
Is it just me or has COVID revealed to us how seemingly impotent the oppositional aspect of democratic governance is?

Maybe in the spirit of building back better we could refashion our governance too. Perhaps opposition parties that don't win control of the government could win a consolation prize, control of our institutions of accountability and oversight. If you run a clean government and the opposition didn't find anything out of order they'd have to work a little harder to offer something better. OTOH...
Well I think the opposition does part of their job just by asking questions, many of them that need to be asked.  However, in modern day politics nobody really answers them, from any party.  The answers they give aren't really about being accountable to Canadians (since they rarely contain answers), more like an eff-you to the opposition.

I guess the opposition is allowed to ask anything they want, and the government is allowed to answer any way they want.
I can tell how good of a person you are by how you treat the people you disagree with.

Offline eyeball

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 704
Re: WE Scandal
« Reply #122 on: January 26, 2021, 12:38:39 pm »
I guess the opposition is allowed to ask anything they want, and the government is allowed to answer any way they want.
What's in it for us?

**** all.
Agree Agree x 2 View List

Offline MH

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8394
Re: WE Scandal
« Reply #123 on: January 26, 2021, 01:05:05 pm »
How do you take these out of the political arena when EVERYTHING is political including the arena? You can't, no more than you can take time away from space.

Not so.  Remember when Canada Post was always a hot potato in parliament ?  Why isn't it anymore ?
Like Like x 1 View List

Offline eyeball

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 704
Re: WE Scandal
« Reply #124 on: January 26, 2021, 01:13:27 pm »
Not so.  Remember when Canada Post was always a hot potato in parliament ?  Why isn't it anymore ?
The influence of bigger potatoes with a greater capacity for disturbing the spacetime continuum.
Funny Funny x 1 View List

Offline MH

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8394
Re: WE Scandal
« Reply #125 on: January 26, 2021, 01:55:53 pm »
The influence of bigger potatoes with a greater capacity for disturbing the spacetime continuum.

 ???


Offline wilber

  • Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6907
Re: WE Scandal
« Reply #126 on: January 26, 2021, 04:43:20 pm »
Not so.  Remember when Canada Post was always a hot potato in parliament ?  Why isn't it anymore ?

Because it is a Crown Corp that actually makes a bit of money.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline MH

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8394
Re: WE Scandal
« Reply #127 on: January 26, 2021, 07:00:47 pm »
Because it is a Crown Corp that actually makes a bit of money.

Even when it didn't make so much it wasn't being brought up in Question Period like in the 70s

Offline wilber

  • Moderator
  • Full Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6907
Re: WE Scandal
« Reply #128 on: January 31, 2021, 09:53:08 am »
Even when it didn't make so much it wasn't being brought up in Question Period like in the 70s

Maybe because the internet, texts and private couriers have made the post office less essential in people’s every day lives.
"Never trust a man without a single redeeming vice" WSC

Offline MH

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8394
Re: WE Scandal
« Reply #129 on: January 31, 2021, 11:00:12 am »
Maybe because the internet, texts and private couriers have made the post office less essential in people’s every day lives.

No doubt.  But even if you count the difference from the 1970s to the 1980s I would say it's substantially less controversial.

Maybe part of public governance design is to treat public discourse as a limited resource, and ensure it gets directed to the right places.  This could mean determining who/what/where/when/why/how much dialogue should happen on:

-Urgent matters of national concern (1st priority)
-Matters of less urgency but national concern
-Services - medium urgency but pervasive discussion and ongoing public debate
-Question Period trigged inquiries

Offline eyeball

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 704
Re: WE Scandal
« Reply #130 on: January 31, 2021, 11:40:09 am »
Maybe part of public governance design is to treat public discourse as a limited resource, and ensure it gets directed to the right places.  This could mean determining who/what/where/when/why/how much dialogue should happen on:
"The sign said you got to have a membership card to get inside, uh!"

Who gets to determine that and how much public input goes into the determination? To me public governance is not the same as party governance. The latter is far more like a private club - that comes with private ornate wood panelled smoke filled rooms too or so I've been told.

As laid out in other threads, a public government would look more like an assembly of citizens randomly picked like jurors that are guided by a civil service of experts from all fields, including people skilled at facilitating public discourse. The country is the club and everyone's a member.

Offline MH

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8394
Re: WE Scandal
« Reply #131 on: February 02, 2021, 09:49:42 am »
1. Who gets to determine that and how much public input goes into the determination? To me public governance is not the same as party governance. The latter is far more like a private club - that comes with private ornate wood panelled smoke filled rooms too or so I've been told.

2. ...a public government would look more like an assembly of citizens randomly picked like jurors that are guided by a civil service of experts from all fields, including people skilled at facilitating public discourse.

3. The country is the club and everyone's a member.

1. Right.  It's 'public consultation' so the design has to be brought into the public sphere but with its own governance.  Try to remember that democracy itself has to be designed and there's a symbiotic relationship between the designer and the collaborators.  Of course, if you think it's all **** and burn-it-all-down then go to the back of the room... which means you are still allowed in btw.

2. Excellent.  This is true, but also would need to be a subset of volunteers as it requires interest and ambition.  Even then, you would have to account for a high percentage of non-response.  I know from working with volunteers.

3. It's easier than it sounds.  The chucklef*cks have done it for that segment of the public who believes Pizzagate.  The government just has to open the doors a bit.  Of course, once they do they know they will have less control so we have to demand it.  But "it" escapes the public imagination because those who would participate in "it" are busy defending the status quo.