Krump : Make Alberta Grate Again

National Observer : Donald Trump symbolism seeps into Jason Kenney leadership launch

A little background from The Walrus : Jason Kenney wants Stephen Harper’s job. But is he too extreme for the Tories?

CBC : Jason Kenney says he has Stephen Harper's support in uniting Alberta's right

CBC : Stephen Harper endorses Jason Kenney

"This province is the beating heart of the Canadian conservative movement," Harper said"

with this killer slogan too : Unite Alberta : "A big tent, not a pup tent"   *snerk*

.

4th Electoral Reform Committee - Mayrand

Testimony of Elections Canada CEO Marc Mayrand July 7  
on "Viable alternative voting systems to replace First Past the Post and examination of mandatory and online voting" 

Shorter : A one-off referendum would cost $300M, Mayrand not worried about getting election system changes and/or possible referendum done in time for 2019 election if May 2017 deadline, as promised, is his starter date. 
Mayrand, it should be mentioned, is retiring in December so it won't be him dealing with it.

Alternating CPC & Lib MP questions: Referendum, online voting, referendum, online voting, referendum.
The dominance of the referendum question from the CPCs continues as expected, but the emphasis on online voting from the Libs is a surprise, given Mayrand has already said it won't be an option for the 2019 election.

Longer, much much much longer :-) ...

As CEO, Mayrand's role is to administer Canada Elections Act and Referendum Act and implement readjustment of federal elections boundaries.
Next report on suggested legislated changes to be submitted to PROC in September.
"Very short timeline" to get changes in place for next election in 2019.
He will not be addressing pros and cons of various voting systems.
Government has committed to have legislation in place in May 2017 "which I am comfortable with"
Mayrand reiterated his remarks to PROC from April. Full statement here :

1)Some systems may require redistribution of electoral boundaries. Current legal framework does not allow for redistribution except after the decennial census - current boundaries are supposed to be in place till 2023 - and also does not allow for multi-member seats. A change in voting system requiring redistribution will require enabling legislation. Last redistribution exercise took 26 months.

2) Redistribution may make it difficult to get results published on election night.  Canadians expect quick results so electronic tabulation may be required at all polling places to continue this tradition.

3) Redistribution may impact political financing. 

4) Public education on new system and election officers will need prepping.

Online voting and mandatory voting.
Internet voting would remove barriers but Canadians must trust integrity and secrecy of the vote. Online voting will not be an option in 2019. 
23 countries have national mandatory voting. Sanctions or incentives? 

Two rounds of five minutes each for MPs to ask questions :

Lib John Aldag : Your role in public education?
Mayrand : Should start one year in advance of election. His current mandate under Fair Elections Act passed by Cons in 2014 restricts his public education role to only those under 18 years of age. 

So, Libs, how about it? Think you might roll back Fair Elections Act to let the CEO of Elections Canada explain the new system - whatever it is - to Canadians for a year before the 2019 election?

CPC Scott Reid : Can we get new legislation through both the House and the Senate by May 2017? At what point after that does new system become impossible to implement? What is the "drop dead rate"?
Mayrand : At least two years.
Reid : Still six months to prepare referendum? When does 6 months start?
Mayrand : Yes, six months. Starts when we can tell it's going to happen. Have started looking into referendum change.

NDP Boulerice : 26 months? Why don't people vote?
Mayrand : Yes. 40% are busy/not in riding, 45% not interested in politics, 8% cite administrative barriers.
Boulerice : Have any countries moved from another system to FPtP?
Mayrand : Not as far as I know.

Elizabeth May : Fair Elections Act/Bill C-23 restricts your actions. Could you provide committee with a list of what you'll need for a new system? And explain delayed election results.
Mayrand : In Australia, preferential ballots takes time to compute election results 
May : How much would a one-off referendum cost?
Mayrand : Estimate is $300M
May : Would regrouping existing ridings into one be a simpler exercise?
Mayrand : Will require public consultation but won't cut down the time required much.

Lib Ruby Sahota : How can we make voting more accessible?
Mayrand : Online voting - 3.5M electors have some form of disability. Will recommend party reimbursement for making voting more accessible.
Sahota : If banking and million dollar deals are done online, why not voting?

CPC Gerard Deltell : Could preferential voting system as recommended by Stephane Dion be made understandable to Canadians in 26 months?  ... wait for it ... wait for it ... What steps does a referendum entail?
Mayrand : Entails drafting the question, examining materials since 1992 [last referendum], training manuals for 255,000 election workers, adapting current systems, contracts. 
DelTell : Won't that take more than 6 months?
Mayrand : 6 months minimum.

Lib Sherry Romanado : Tech for improving voting. Humans make mistakes counting ballots. Online voting - could do it like tax returns but with option of polling stations..
Mayrand : Online voting will not likely replace paper ballots.  25% of voters prefer not to vote on polling day and that number is increasing.
Romanado : Why not leave that up to Canadians? I can order pizza online. On the day of the vote, it may be raining, I might be busy. Online voting gives me an option.
Mayrand : Security is an issue. Confidentiality. Secrecy. Reliability. Integrity. Risk of online services is to provider. Also we lack a universal authentification system in Canada.

NDP Chris Christopherson : Mandatory and online voting discussion distracts from discussing electoral reform. Send to PROC.

CPC Blake Richards : Referendum

Lib Matt deCourcey: Mandatory and online voting part of this committee's mandate. Possibility of augmenting EC role re the bringing in the young.
Mayrand : We could register students before they are 18 for when they turn of age. Civic education means more likely to vote.

CPC Scott Reid : Government is trying to run out the clock so there will not be time for both a REFERENDUM and time to implement a new system. Minister Maryam Monsef refuses to either endorse or refuse a REFERENDUM while refusing to do what is necessary to allow a REFERENDUM. How to stop the REFERENDUM deadline from going by silently in the 6 months plus 26 months scenario?

NDP David Christopherson: Legally a referendum cannot be held at the same time as an election. 
Mayrand : Correct.
Christopherson : Must be stand-alone. You need marching orders by May 2017 to meet deadline, so if referendum was May 1st, that puts us around Dec 2016 this year to give you time enough. So committee must give you a total package by Dec 16 to trigger a referendum that still gives you time of 27 months to implement reform.
Mayrand: Can hold referendum under current legislation. Expecting your report in December. 

Bloc Theriault : [I never know what the hell he's on about .... oh, wait ... ] REFERENDUM and we should take our time to do this right.

May : Re online voting, there's a social cohesion benefit to actually gathering to vote.

May reads twitter question from David McLaughlin, former chief of staff to Jim Flaherty: If the Referendum Act was changed to allow a referendum to be held alongside a federal election, how much would it cost then? 

Mayrand : Only “marginally” more expensive.

May reads another Twitter question : Can all referendum ads be subject to fact-checking or fines? 

Mayrand : Not his responsibility - public policy matter.

May : If committee decision is MMP, how about returning to 2011 boundaries - go back to 308 ridings and add 30 seats for prop rep? 

Mayrand says interesting but would have to think about it.

Lib Sherry Romanado: Online voting. Outreach for seniors and students and homebound.

As EC CEO you aren't allowed to educate people over 18 but what can we 338 MPs do?

Mayrand : Aside from mending the legislation? 

Yes, once again, how about it Libs? How about allowing Elections Canada to do voter outreach and education again?

CPC Gerard Deltell : Will potential disputes over new electoral boundaries slow things up?

Mayrand : Independent commissions decide boundaries, not EC.

Deltell : So you are "a hostage" of these commissions. We should take our time to do this right.

Lib Ruby Sahota : Can you educate new Canadians about our electoral process?

Mayrand : We publish info in 35 languages. We try to recruit EC personnel that reflects diversity of riding. First generation Canadians have lower turnout but it picks up with next generation.

Sahota : What are pitfalls of different systems, like taking too long to count ballots?

Mayrand : Most people see elections as marking a ballot, not understanding the system. Changing from a simple system to something more - you should not underestimate the level of educating people required to even start a discussion.

NDP Boulerice : Is increasing the vote part of your mission?

Mayrand : "It has been clearly laid out it wasn't Elections Canada's role to do so."

Boulerice : Scottish model - 2/3 elected by FPtP; remaining third appointed by list. Urban ridings could be merged; single ridings on large land masses. 

Mayrand : Difficult to compare Scotland with Canada because of size of Canada.

Boulerice : How can we increase % of women and minorities? A list system could have rules mandating 50% of women.

CPC Blake Richards : Timelines for referendum and changes to the system - December report will start it? When is the "drop dead rate" for the government calling a referendum plus time for resdistribution?

Mayrand : Dec. 1st is date of report from this committee and next May is date for legislation. If by next spring there is nothing on the table, right there it tells me I won't see anything before the end of 2018. That means January 2019 and that means we're out of it. 

Lib John Aldag :  Last thoughts? 

Mayrand : Aging demographic. Important for Elections Canada to be able to provide service for homebound. I have exhausted what I'm able to do under current legislation. I need your support on changing legislation to prevent poll line-ups. 

Aldag : Aboriginal engagement?

Mayrand : Progressively closing the gap with the rest of the population but great disparities in participation across the country.

Aldag :  What is #1 Canadian challenge or attribute to designing a system?

Mayrand : Canadians have an extremely high level of trust in their elections system. Once you lose it, it's very difficult to regain. Be extremely careful in doing anything that may impact the trust of Canadians.

ERRE meeting #4

.

3rd Electoral Reform Committee meeting

Maryam Monsef, Minister of Democratic Institutions, spoke for 15 minutes and answered questions.  

Monsef acknowledges meeting taking place on traditional Algonquin territory, calls for collaboration, hopes committee will work towards more than just submitting five reports representing their respective party's views.

Gives her personal perspective on why we should move beyond FPtP. FPtP is 19th century system not designed for multi-party system. We need stronger link between will of voters and election results. Since 1960 we've had 10 elections giving majority results but only in one in 1984 did winning party receive more than 50% of the vote. This leads to lower voter turnout because of feeling their vote doesn't count.

FPtP tends to favour parties with regional rather than national appeal. 

In last election less that 40% of MPs were elected by majority of constituents, including herself, while 63% of Canadians voted for parties advocating alternative to FPtP.  So what type of system would best replace FPtP while recognizing that no one system is perfect.

Government not prepared to proceed without broad support, must reach Canadians disengaged from the electoral system. In 2016, facebook and twitter are primary tools for engagement, cannot be overlooked [Take that, Jason Kenney, not here because he's currently announcing his Unite the Right campaign for Alberta]. 

She brings up online and mandatory voting as two means of increasing participation.

She is not in favour of a referendum - they do not lend themselves to deciding complex issues and less than half of Canadians have participated in recent ones.

Stascan study after 2011 election : Under 45s, high school grads, single, unemployed, immigrants, renters, and rurals vote in lower numbers than over 45s, uni/college grads, married, employed, Canadian-born, home owners, and urbans.

A referendum would reflect these numbers, an incomplete picture of Canadians.

Previous electoral changes done without a referendum : secret ballot in 1874, began to extend voting to women in 1918, Office of Chief Electoral in 1920, FN get vote in 1960, 18 year olds get vote in 1970.  In fact all previous electoral changes have been done without a referendum.

Questions 

All CPC MPs - Scott Reid, Gerald Deltell, and Blake Richards sitting in for Jason Kenney -restricted their questions entirely to whether she would accept or put in place the necessary mechanisms to hold a referendum. Referendum, referendum, referendum. Monsef answered CPC Scott Reid that if that was what listening to Canadians and a consensus on the committee recommended, then "It would be incumbent upon me and the government to take it seriously".

Scott Reid tries again, badly wants a yes or no. She doesn't give him one.

He is particularly agitated that a referendum becomes impossible if it is not aligned with the Elections Act between when the committee winds up in December and the next election in October 2019. I'm not sure where this sense of urgency originates. Marc Mayrand told PROC in May :"Six months minimum to set up a national referendum" .. because legislation on referendums has not been updated since 1992. 

NDP David Christopherson says CPC is for FPtP, NDP is for PR, and Trudeau's favoured system is "alternate ranked voting system" plus PCO just hired ranked ballot proponent Derek Alton, so what does Monsef's pledge of wide-open options really mean?

We're not a monolith, says Monsef : 

"We haven't made up our mind about any given system.... This isn't about us; this isn't about our parties. This is about Canadians - their electoral system. ...We don't do hiring for the PCO."   

Luc Theriault, Bloc, is concerned Monsef's dept has a budget of $10.7M to conduct parallel research to the committee which only has $300K. Monsef explained Board of Internal Economy sets budget and the dept money is to reach out to people not traditionally engaged with the process.
Did he just also make a case for holding a referendum? I think he did. That shifts the committee dynamics a bit.

Elizabeth May : Liberal Speech from the Throne promised "In order to make sure every vote counts, 2015 will be the last election held under FPtP. I intend to hold you to that promise." She notes the first parliamentary committee to study PR to replace FPtP was in 1921, and another in 1937. Plus "1970 was the first time ever the identity of the candidate became subservient to the name of their party with the party named next to candidate on the ballot."

May says media focus is more on attacking the process to get rid of FPtP than on why we need to get rid of it. Yup, she's got that right, as was borne out by media questions to Monsef after she left committee. Referendum, referendum, referendum. 

May asks if majority Liberal government is willing to choose a voting system that goes against their own self-interest. 
"Will you give us your word that you will fight for whatever this committee recommends?"

Monsef does not answer yes, says she looks forward to their report. Huh. 

May reads 2 questions from twitter, one about the skewed "truth in advertizing"surrounding this debate. Monsef says debate must be non-partisan and she is counting on the good work of "our free and independent press" to present the issues fairly.   Huh.

Monsef walked out of the committee 15 minutes later to a scrum of seven questions from "our free and independent press". Five were about holding a referendum and whether or not time was running out to have one.

3rd ERRE Meeting 
. 

Hey Electoral Reform Committee: It's our system, not Parliament's

Sometime between the first televized ERRE committee meeting and the end of the second in camera meeting, Nathan Cullen's motion to have the committee set aside a timeslot for members of the public to ask questions of expert witnesses in real time via social media got axed.

As Cullen put it at the time of his motion in the first meeting : "This process is not ours - This entire conversation belongs to Canadians."

Cullen's motion, seconded by Elizabeth May, was received cautiously at first by the Lib MPs and then with growing enthusiasm to give it a chance. 

Jason Kenney's response was to suggest that Cullen could just give up one of his own allotted speaking slots to questions from the public if he was all that keen on it. 

A majority vote sent the motion off to subcommittee, from whence I noted at the time, it may or not return intact. 

Kenney, who was also very keen on the Brexit referendum, was not on the in camera June 28 subcommittee or at the also in camera second meeting of the whole committee that followed it but something akin to his view appears to have prevailed nonetheless, and the original motion favoured by Cullen and May did not. 

Le Devoir :

"The problem was to determine who would have chosen the issue, says Mr. Scarpaleggia. It's not fair to ask the researchers or clerks to select questions because, for them, it could remove their neutrality. And it becomes very difficult to manage. "

The amended motion [see below] allows you to tweet your questions to #ERREQ for members of the committee to decide at their discretion whether or not to pose any of them to the witnesses. 

Big whoop. We can do that already.

David McLaughlin: It's our electoral system, not Parliament's 
Anything less than a citizen-focused electoral reform consultation will cheat Canadians out of their rightful voice.

"During its first meeting, the ERRE Committee announced it had $300,000 to hold nationwide consultations and to complete its work. That same week, the National Energy Board announced $10 million for citizen consultation on the Energy East pipeline.

Such a contrast in priorities and effort is disturbing. The government and House of Commons need to reassess their thinking on electoral reform and engaging Canadians. A more citizen-focused electoral-reform consultation is required.

To do anything less will cheat Canadians out of their rightful voice. After all, it’s our electoral system not Parliament’s."

Mr McLaughlin, deputy minister of the New Brunswick Commission on Legislative Democracy 2003-05, now with Policy Options, has five good recommendations for the committee "to expand its process to fit its own expansive mandate."   Go. 

ERRE calendar this week, all televized :
Wednesday July 6, 2:00 p.m. to 3:30 p.m : Maryam Monsef, Minister of Democratic Institutions

Thursday, July 7, 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m : Marc Mayrand, Chief Electoral Officer

Thursday, July 7, 2:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m : Jean-Pierre Kingsley, Chief Electoral Officer, 1990-2007

CPC MP Scott Reid, who so far is speerheading the idea of an electoral reform referendum in committee, was adamant at the 1st meeting that Marc Mayrand not share a session with JP Kingsley because he intends to question Mayrand in depth on the time needed to set up a referendum. 

Mayrand was already pretty clear about this at PROC last month : 

Six months to set up a national referendum because the act has not been amended in 24 years. 10 months to redraw electoral boundaries, another 7 months to implement ... total of 24 months before the next election on October 17, 2019. 

Cullen's amended motion :

"That the Committee invite Canadians to participate in the debate through Twitter using the hashtag #ERRE #Q; and that this participation includes questions that can be submitted to members of the Committee, who may, at their discretion, be selected to be posed to witnesses appearing before the Committee; and that the Analysts provide analysis of the public input received and that this analysis be included in the Committee report."

.

Get Your Spy On : Bill C-22

International Civil Liberties Monitoring Group : OUR ANALYSIS OF C-22: AN INADEQUATE AND WORRISOME BILL

"The Liberal government has recently tabled Bill C-22, the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act, in order to create the long-awaited committee to look over Canada’s national security activities."

Andrew Mitrovica : National security oversight woefully inadequate

"Ralph Goodale's heralded National Security and Intelligence Committee is not robust, independent and meaningful but merely enshrines the lousy status quo into law."

Craig Forcese makes many of the same points - Knee Jerk First Reaction - on the bill designed to deliver parliamentary oversight to CSIS, CSEC, RCMP among 20 other national security agencies, but nonetheless gives Bill C-22 a "high pass".

The committee will consist of seven MPs and two senators, all appointed on the recommendation of the PM. I'm guessing the more stringent security clearance they will need to undergo has something to do with Harper having appointed Arthur Porter to SIRC, the watchdog committee overseeing CSIS.

And yes, CSE really is following 34 people on twitter. I imagine they're also on The Book of Faces. ;-)
.

2nd Electoral Reform Committee meeting

was held in camera yesterday. 

The entire three hour meeting from 10am til 1pm - with presentations from five in-house analysts and tech experts and questions from MPs - was held in camera.

What happened to last week's decision to televise them? 

Meanwhile ...

Former Ontario Progressive Conservative Party president Richard Ciano and Nick Kouvalis of Campaign Research - pollsters and managers of the Rob Ford and John Tory campaigns, harriers of Liberals - 

have teamed up with Liberal Toronto Councillor Justin Di Ciano to found a "grass roots advocacy group" Keep Voting Simple . 
Their aim is to fight electoral reform and advocate for a national referendum. 
Funny how those two ideas keep cropping up together.


Canadians wishing to appear before the ERRE committee or submit a brief have until Oct 07 to do so. 
Questions to be submitted a la Cullen's motion for public participation in questioning witnesses can be left at #ERRE#Q. 
A notice with the deets will be put up on the committee site.

Minutes from yesterday's meeting

My notes on first ERRE meeting
.
Update : 

.

Lelu Island : LNG Divide and Conquer Politics

A community torn apart by LNG and pipeline politics. 

A mayor who sent a letter to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency confirming opposition to the PacificNorthWest LNG plant on Lelu Island in accordance with a community vote. He then sent another letter eight days later retracting the first letter and replacing it with one of conditional support.

The mayor and his brother are VP and CEO of Eagle Spirit Energy FN pipeline company backed by Aquilini Group, donors of $1.2 million to the BC Liberal Party. 
Aquilini has pledged financing to Eagle Spirit on condition of securing First Nations consent to a pipeline route to nearby Grassy Point, future LNG site.
On June 3 2016 Christy Clark announced an FN vote supporting the LNG project.

Discourse Media : Divide and Conquer June 2016

Last year, members of the Lax Kw’alaams First Nation, whose traditional territory includes Lelu Island, overwhelmingly rejected the proposed development on the island — and almost $1.2 billion in promised benefits.

A 2014 report by PNW LNG suggests initial contact with Lax Kw’alaams occurred in December 2012. But at least six months prior, Petronas had already earmarked Lelu Island for its plant and signed a feasibility agreement with the Prince Rupert Port Authority. 

Despite this mounting pressure, elected and hereditary leaders remained relatively united in their opposition to LNG development on Lelu Island — until a new mayor and council were elected in November 2015.

At first, the newly elected leaders maintained the community’s position. Mayor John Helin even submitted a letter to the CEAA reiterating the band’s rejection of the benefit deal on March 7, 2016.

But eight days later, in a move that hereditary leaders call a betrayal, Helin submitted a second letter to the CEAA that contradicted his earlier letter and offered conditional support for a project. The letter was dated March 15, when several elected councillors were away on an annual kelp-gathering trip on Digby Island.

Community members in Lax Kw’alaams were shocked. According to Smith, “the last time we had a band meeting was in a previous administration,” before Helin’s November election.

The Letter:

Ottawa Citizen : Lax Kw’alaams band council offers conditional support for Pacific NorthWest LNG terminal March 2016

The Lax Kw’alaams letter of March 15, incorrectly dated 2015, was filed with the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency four days after the March 11 deadline for comments on a draft report on the terminal that found the project would increase greenhouse gases significantly and harm porpoise, but not harm salmon.

The letter, signed by elected mayor John Helin, retracts an initial letter to CEAA dated March 7, in which Helin had said the Lax Kw’alaams “continue to oppose the project in its current form,” in particular locating a liquefied natural gas facility on Lelu Island adjacent to Flora Bank over concerns of harm it could cause to fish habitat

The new letter replaces a lengthy series of concerns, questions and recommendations in the first letter with two “legally-binding” provisions that Helin said will be needed to gain support of the Lax Kw’alaams for the project.

The Canadian Environment Assessment Agency also removed the March 7 letter from their documents website.

Mayor John Helin is vice president and his brother Calvin is president of Eagle Spirit Energy Holdings, founded in 2012 to establish a First Nations Energy Corridor across northern British Columbia. 

Macleans : A pipeline of their own May 2014

Luigi Aquilini, the billionaire patriarch of the Aquilini Investment Group ... was in attendance at the launch event in Vancouver, and said his company would arrange funding for the project if Eagle Spirit is able to secure buy-in from First Nations along the route.

The Aquilini Group has donated $1.2 million to the BC Liberals

Canada’s Most Powerful Business People 2016: #39 — Calvin Helin  Nov 2015

Calvin Helin’s Eagle Spirit Energy confirmed that it has something rival oil pipeline projects do not: consent from all the First Nations chiefs along the route of an energy corridor from Alberta to the Pacific Coast. 

Buzzfeed : In Spite Of What B.C.’s Premier Says, There’s No Evidence This First Nation Voted In Favour Of A Major Pipeline June 24 2016

At a June 3 press conference, British Columbia Premier Christy Clark said a major hurdle had been cleared for the proposed $36 billion Pacific NorthWest liquefied natural gas pipeline and plant.

“The Lax Kw’alaams voted massively in favour of supporting LNG, with some conditions,” Clark said.

However, an investigation by Discourse Media, which sent two reporters to Lax Kw’alaams, suggests that no vote in favour of the project ever occurred.

The Tyee, June 24 2016

But it is the federal government that now holds the pen on whether or not to let Petronas, the state-owed Malaysian oil company that is the key investor in PNW LNG, build its project on Lelu Island. If the Discourse Media investigation isn't proof negative of the corrosive, divisive, opaque and utterly bankrupt nature of how resource development gets done in Canada's so-called Reconciliation age, I don't know what else is.

Yet on Monday, when six federal cabinet ministers announced a wholesale review of the rules for approving major resource projects, they stuck to the Trudeau government's line that pipeline proposals already in process when the Liberals were elected will not be sent back to the drawing board, but will be reviewed according to the rules set by the Harper regime. 

This is a confounding decision, because part of the reason Trudeau & Co got elected in the first place is because Harper's major project review process was -- and remains -- rotten to the core.

.

Mark Blyth : Trumpism and Brexit

"The Hamptons is not a defensible position."

I'm trying to imagine a Canadian economist speaking this bluntly about austerity.

Mark Blyth, professor of Political Economy at Brown University, author of "Austerity: The History of a Dangerous Idea" on Trumpism and Brexit
The above is an excerpt. Full 23 minute interview here.

h/t Antonia Zerbisias.
.

First meeting of Electoral Reform Committee

The most interesting and innovative idea to come out of the first meeting of the all-party Special Committee on Electoral Reform, or ERRE, was Nathan Cullen's suggestion, seconded by Elizabeth May, to allow members of the public access to question the expert witnesses before the committee in real time via email or twitter hashtag.

Cullen (paraphrased @mark 18:00) :  As MPs we will have the privilege and advantage of engagement with experts from around the world, and with televised meetings Canadians can be learning right alongside us. It is always possible a Canadian will notice something we have missed or have a completely different insight or perspective on expert testimony that will open up avenues we had not considered before. Their questions can be sent to the impartial clerk of the committee and read out by the Chair in the equivalent of one MPs speaking slot. [That would be about six minutes for Q&A]

May : Seconded. The more Canadians are able to interact with this unprecedented committee and its witnesses, the more interested and informed they will be. Instead of thinking - gee I wish they'd asked *this* question, they can submit it. This will reach tens of thousands more Canadians.

DeCourcey : Open and accessible is good but we're already conducting consults in our ridings. What if the same person sends in questions over and over again? [Note : Clerk could deal with that!] Send motion to subcommittee for study. [DeCourcey warmed to the idea as debate progressed]

Kenney : 

"My primary concern about this motion is that it proposes a fundamental change in the role and nature of parliamentary committee thereby creating a precedent before we've studied the implications of such a precedent. This is a parliamentary committee ... woof woof woof ... We are not here to be conduits for twitter or other platforms of social media in which there is sometimes a robust and vulgar public debate ... woof woof woof... " 

Kenney suggested if Cullen were so keen on this idea, he could give up one of his own allotted speaking slots to questions from the public ; Cullen said he would be willing to do that.

May : This isn't radical, will engage young people and lend to the legitimacy of this process.

Cullen : "This process is not ours - This entire conversation belongs to Canadians."

A majority vote in favour sent Cullen's motion to the untelevised subcommittee for study ... from whence it may or may not return. We'll see. 

Meantime, send @ElizabethMay and @nathancullen kudos for their excellent work here.

Cullen's motion : 

"That the committee alot the equivalent of one MP's speaking spot per meeting to hear questions directly from Canadians at each meeting with witnesses, that the committee receive questions from Canadians via the committee's email address and twitter hashtag #yourvotecanada #yourvotecda, and that questions be reviewed and selected by the clerk of the committee and posed to the witnesses by the Chair."

Site C Dam : Leave the Peace in peace

"All over the world countries are tearing out old mega-dams because they are expensive and destructive. Yet in British Columbia the government is forging ahead with the Site C hydro dam even though there's no immediate need for the power and it means displacing farmers from their land, destroying First Nations territory and flooding agricultural land that could feed an estimated one million people."

"Since 2005, domestic demand for electricity in BC has been essentially flat. I think we're making a very big mistake, a very expensive one." 

~ Harry Swain,  Chair of Joint Review Panel on Site C Dam.

Petition : PM Trudeau: Don't sign construction permits for the Site-C dam  

'Site C is a disastrous plan to build a giant dam in the Peace River Valley of northeastern BC. It’s an $8.8 billion project that will flood 83 km of farmland, drown wildlife habitat, and trample indigenous rights — all to supply electricity for dirty tar sands extraction and fracking. 

The most expensive, unnecessary public project in BC history, the Site C dam could also trigger a massive rate increase on BC hydro bills — between 30 – 40% within three years.

Farmers, environmentalists, First Nations, and the public are united against the project, and want this massive amount of money to go towards sustainable local energy instead. First Nations are fighting a legal battle to defend their Treaty rights to hunt, fish, and trap on the lands Site C will destroy.

Despite the overwhelming opposition, BC Premier Christy Clark is bulldozing through her plans to build Site C – a project that few want and nobody needs.
The federal government is caught in the middle. 

PM Trudeau will have to pick a side within the coming weeks because Premier Clark needs federal permits to ramp up construction on the dam. She wants to build Site C past the point of no return, before the courts rule on the outstanding First Nations legal challenge.[5]

Under increasing pressure from Premier Clark, PM Trudeau could sign federal construction permits at any moment. If we all speak out, they’ll have the support they need to do the right thing: side with First Nations, environmentalists, and farmers and stop construction on Site C until the court has ruled on the legal challenge. 

[Your name here]

.