Wednesday, November 7, 2007

Another Reason Jack Layton is Irrelevant

As you all know by now, Mr. Layton suddenly rolled out his election platform on Sunday. You know, the one with the referendum on the abolition of the Senate of Canada. That one.

Well, during Smilin' Jack's earth-shaking announcement, he states: The referendum would not be costly, Layton said, because it could be held in conjunction with the next federal election.

More proof the man has no clue about the economics of government.

Ontario just had a referendum on another ridiculous change to the way we form governments in this country. The cost of that referendum in one little ole province? $8.48 Million. That's Eight point Four Eight Million Dollars (CDN)!. Now, I'm not going to try and play mathematician, but that would be somewhere around what, 34-36 Million Dollars for the whole country to participate in a referendum...simultaneously with the election I might add.

Apparently Jack feels $33 million is "NOT COSTLY".


Jay said...

Way to defend the undemocratic, unnecessary, $75-million/year red chamber, James.

James Curran said...

Way to miss the point there Jay. The point is Jack has no clue on what is costly and not costly. 34-36 million is costly.

Actually the Senate may run at $100 million a year Jay. So what? Imagine if it wasn't there to slap the kids in the House when they're out of control.

What's Jack's point? That he won't see NDP Senators. He should stick to trying to get more MPs...not losing more.

A referendum would be unsuccessful and futile and "costly".

kinch said...

Actually the Liberals tried to appoint an NDP Senator, and Jack Layton and the NDP refused. So I'm pretty sure this isn't Jack mad that the NDP doesn't have any Senators.

James Curran said...

BTW, the cost of the '95 Quebec referendum was $70 million before adding the cost of the actual campaigns themselves.

James Curran said...

Kinch, are you referring to Dr. Lillian Dyck.

Scott Tribe said...

Actually, it was ridiculous to hold the Ontario referendum at the same time of the election because of how ignored it was by the public and the media, who were paying more attention to the election - or rather, the school funding issue in the election.

There was nothing wrong with the proposal - and there is nothing wrong with wanting electoral reform. This type that Layton is proposing isnt the right type however. The House is where he and others should be concentrating. Perhaps Dion and some Liberals will clue in and figure that out.

Peter Loewen said...

I really dislike arguments against elections and politicians which point to how expensive they are. They are necessary and are to be welcomed. Any argument to the contrary is, well, cheap.

James Curran said...

Um. It was Jack that said "it wouldn't be costly". I just happen to be telling you it "would".

I didn't bring the subject up. And, this is not an election. It's another useless referendum with a price tag that makes no sense.

AND, Harper doesn't want to abolish the Senate. 16 spots come up for grabs in the neext two years. Mostly Liberal I might add.