Iggy: not an issue of Federal Provincial. It's about provincial access from Federals. Must have accees to EI.
Dom: talks about access to EI. Patchwork across the country. There's an imbalance.
Lestewka: How can you put the party, caucus and campaign teams all together?
Dom: starts with trust. Caucus doesn't talk to the campaign team. Bad. We need an up-face campaign in each riding
Iggy: running to get ready for next election "right now". Election readiness team and caucus should be in one room together. Leader needs to know what the job description is.
Question on youth voting. Can 16 year olds vote?
Iggy: where was I at 16? Where was I. Answer: he wasn't ready. He was barely ready at 18. Wider issue is youth involvement. Gotta get into the universities and colleges. Got speak to people outside of the party. The family is shrinking. Gotta reach out. The youth trickle down Most important job for leader is succession planning. Who's gonna come after us next time? Who?
DOM: Mark Holland and others supported a bill to that effect. Can't even get 18 year olds to vote. If 16 year olds decide to vote in a referndum, it's a slippery slope. Might backfire in a province like Quebec. He goes to every grade 12 class in his riding. He fears we will have entire generations that won't vote. Give them a principled Liberal party that gives them social justice, environment issues etc.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
Sorry having odd browser problems, posting before I've finished...
Don't 14-17 year olds get a vote in THIS leadership race?
Is it just me or does it seems odd for BOTH candidates to be running down the capabilities of people that actually get a say in this race?
UNLESS I've misinterpreted their positions from what you wrote or you misquoted, if I were 14-17 I would be insulted by these comments.
So who cares if Iggy wasn't ready at 16? That's no basis on which to turn down the proposal.
Sixteen-year-olds should be allowed to vote, period.
Won't state the obvious arguments which support this. Anyone who has considered the issue seriously knows them already.
The Libs should stop with the "we know best" attitude. Not allowing younger people to vote falls right in line with that.
I agree with both....16 year olds should not be allowed to vote. It's ridiculous to think you should be allowed to vote at an age when you're not even legally allowed to sign contracts on your own.
There are more pressing issues than this radical distraction.
Ti-Guy: 14-17 year DO vote and they ARE voting in THIS leadership race and can attend as delegates. Is that ridiculous? Ignatieff and LeBlanc can oppose vote 16 on whatever grounds and that's fine and the least they should be able to square why they believe 16 year olds should be able to vote in this leadership race but not a general election?
I just thought it odd that they were just portraying 16 year ikd as "not up to the job" of voting when they actually need their votes to win this thing.
In my view it's actually a more complicated nuanced to decision to decide between leaders within a party than to decide between wholly different parties in a general eleciton.
I don't think 16 year olds should have the vote. Changes to driving licenses over the years has basically agreed that without immense regulations and preparation, most 16 year olds aren't ready to drive.
Perhaps 16 should be an age where people are introduced to some political programs in school - non-partisan involvement, like thru Elections Canada. They would benefit from working side by side with adults, seniors etc. It would provide them with a different view of how important a functioning democracy is, and what makes it go.
Oh and thanks for doing this. It's terrific!
Post a Comment