The inevitable website. And petition.



  1. Inevitable maybe 18+ months ago – it’s been around for a long, long time. Didn’t sway the consortium recently.

  2. Word on the street is that they’re also going to start a petition to have Dion elected PM.

    I mean, there’ll be hundreds of thousands of signatures on it.

    If he’s not PM after that, we’ll know for sure that the system is “undemocratic”.

  3. I’m calling on my site for supportive bloggers to blog in green text to show their disapproval. MacLeans is welcome to join.

  4. I dunno. Wasn’t it originally a Bloc – Conservative coalition we were afreaid of?

  5. This sounds a little like situational ethics to me. The powers that be in the media come up with this ploy to keep the Green Party while stating the Green are not a major party. However this same media seems to like giving Elizabeth enough press when it fills in the news. I figure if one is getting a fair amount of coverage already then they should be aloud to play in all venues of the campaign.

    Just one mans opinion

  6. Green Party has no elected Members of Parliament, including the Liberal defector Mr. Wilson. As parliament has now prorogued, Wilson never became a sitting member of the Green Party. If Ms. May is permitted in the debates, who’s next? Which party? Rhinoceros Party? Marajuana Party? Party For the Secession of Toronto Island? We already have three parties on the left – at least two too many. Our multi-party system in itself is ridiculous enough without adding fringe parties to a TV debate. The issues covered by the Greens will be adequately covered by the four parties in any event. Ms. May is essentially a stink bidder who wants to bash others, more than assert Green policy. As for the votes they received in the last election – basically, they were the protest none-of-the-above votes. The Green Party absolutely should not be permitted a spot in the referenced TV debates.

  7. I don’t think policy should be the deciding factor for the networks or bloggers when considering the inclusion or exclusion of May from the debates.

    The networks should reflect the reality of politics in Canada, not the “most important” parties or whichever sampling provides the best left-right balance.

    (If enough people invested time, energy, and money in a party to the end that they get hundreds of thousands of votes across the country, it suggests there is a legitimate political vacuum being filled anyway.)

  8. Further to my comment above, apologies, Mr. Wilson is not a Liberal defector. He was a Liberal MP who became an Independent, and so, he was an Independent when Parliament proroqued.

  9. Ernie: So.. what.. when a by-election happens in the summer months, the MP elected doesn’t really count as a member of parliament? Can’t get mail from the parliamentary office, doesn’t start drawing a parliamentary pay-cheque?

    Pull the other one, it likely has bells on.

  10. I’ve always been confused by Lizzie May’s argument. After all, if she’s entitled to sit at the big table why shouldn’t Sandra Smith of the Marxist-Leninists or Miguel Figueroa of the Communists be there? Both those parties have been around longer than the Greens and, in the case of the Communists, have actually elected a member or two over the years (albeit including one who was later convicted of espionage). The Greens, be comparison, haven’t elected a member to any legislature (federal or provincial) in any part of Canada.

    Elect someone, somewhere…and then we’ll talk! After all, that’s the rule that the others have had to live by.

  11. It would make more sense if the debate was just between Harper and Dion, since only one of these will be the next Prime Minister. It would also make for better television and might attract a few viewers. God save us from standing rules and regulations on the subject.

    And anyway, who decides the questions and the debating rules? Why should Harper and Dion share the same time time and space as the minor parties?

  12. I am not surprised by the Conservative and NDP parties actions, but am mighty sick and tired of hearing about the networks “negotiating'” the debates. A negotiated debate does not serve my interests as a voter. Debates should be set up by the networks and leaders invited to attend. Any negotiations that ensue should be on the public record. If a leader wants to back out, so be it. If they can’t stand the fire…

  13. Davey: Length of presence does not equate to electoral support. If that were the case, the Conservatives as a party shouldn’t be in the debates yet, and the Reform party most definitely shouldn’t have been. And no, it isn’t the rule other’s have had to live by. The Bloc had no elected MPs in their first debate presence.

    Bill: Beware of making assumptions about the Canadian electorate. It wasn’t long ago that the PC’s were the governing party one day, and nearly eliminated from the House altogether the next.

    Paul: Sadly, the networks aren’t interested in serving your interest as a voter. They’re interested in serving the advertisers’ interest in getting viewers, and doing a full series of meaningful debates doesn’t fit that interest.

  14. The Bloc did elect Gilles Duceppe as an independent in 1990, and he went on to sit in the Bloc caucus — right? Wikipedia says the Bloc wasn’t yet registered with Elections Canada at the time of that by-election, but in fairness, they had an elected member sitting as a member of their caucus in Ottawa, who was basically elected on their platform. He didn’t just run as an independent; the circumstances made it the only we he could run for the Bloc at the time.

  15. They get subsidies? Why in hell are the Tories moaning and groaning about the CBC then?

    Watched CTV for any length of time lately? Never ending commercials – so many that I’ve been able to flip back and forth and watch 2 shows at once.

    With all those commercials and infomercials – why do we subsidize them? Partisan Duffy’s pay that much?

Sign in to comment.