I had the privilege to interview Elizabeth May today. I am part of the Guelph Mercury Editorial Board and was lucky enough to meet with her, Guelph’s current candidate Mike Nagy and someone from the national team.
She was in Guelph today to kick-off her campaign to allow her to be a part of the televised debates that will occur for the next Federal election.
She had some valid points as to why she should be allowed:
- They are a party that is running a candidate in every riding in Canada. Well, except one but I’ll talk about that later.
- They are a Federally funded party receiving about $1.82 per vote for them. Last time they had about 600,000 people vote for them.
- There were other points but I forget right now…but they seemed valid to me.
I am a huge believer in democracy. Now I don’t want this blog to turn into a political one, but I have to tell you about what was discussed so here I go…
I have a big problem with the fact that the BLOC only runs in Quebec, is a separatist party and they get to be on the debates.
The thing I like about the U.S elections is that any Tom, Dick or Harry or Sally can run. They all get a place on the debates and the ones that don’t cut it get booted out! I know it’s completely different than up here in the great white North, but I hope you get the point.
I asked her the following 2 questions:
- Are you ticked that Stephane Dion stole your Carbon Tax platform?
- If the idea of a Carbon Tax can do 2 things at once: ONE: Help reduce pollution and TWO: Give tax breaks to ordinary folks like me, if this is such a great idea, then why did the Liberals not bring this forward in the 12 years they were in government?
Her answers may be in the Guelph Mercury tomorrow so I will allow the article to come out first before I write more on this.
So just to say one thing about the “running candidates in every riding except one…” Well, Elizabeth and Stephane made a deal that they would not run an opposing candidate in each others ridings. Elizabeth was very adamant that the Green Party is about democracy. She talked about it probably half of the hour long interview. Yet she is taking away the right of one riding to vote for the Green Party completely. She did say that it’s been a “tradition” for leaders to do this but it still makes me upset as a voter.
Any comments from you great visitors is welcome!
Cam
Mike Wisniewski said,
May 27, 2008 @ 4:56 pm
As a libertarian, I’ve never had a “party” candidate to vote for, so each election is a soul-searching exercise every time.
My point being, at least the Greens are endorsing a candidate in Dion’s riding, so Green voters have someone to consider.
The Libertarian Party has never said to me vote for candidate “X” and make my life easy for once.
Also, the spirit in which the deal was made is one of bipartisanship, something we need more of in politics.
My last question, I’m on the board, why didn’t I know she was coming to the Merc?
garden said,
May 27, 2008 @ 7:07 pm
Mike W makes some good points. I particularly value the bipartisanship right now, when Canadians politics seems so incredibly partisan to the detriment of the country. The thing I appreciate most about the Greens is the fact they are trying to be a more positive political force, concentrating more on issues that personal attacks. This was apparent during the last by-elections.
Partisan Non-partisan said,
May 28, 2008 @ 5:40 pm
Greens, non-partisan. Not so much, I’d say.
Compare Elizabeth May’s public comments on Jack Layton with those she makes about Stephane Dion.
She has repeatedly criticised the former while giving the latter a pass for the failure of the government he was a part of for 8 years. Ms. May knows as well as you or I that through the period of Chretien-Martin governments, particularly since Jack became leader, the NDP was a consistent critic of Liberal inaction on the environment while putting out workable plans on the issue.
But for some reason she doesn’t mention that now-a-days? Must be the non-partisanship.
Mike Wisniewski said,
May 29, 2008 @ 1:06 pm
I never said “non-partisan”, I said “bi-partisan” which, I hope we can all agree, is better than “hyper-partisan” which would be my word to describe most politics.
In the interest of full disclosure, I’m not particularly fond of the NDP so that probably sways my comments a bit