This story seems like a good reminder of the commission’s issues in April — and that, even though we have a minority Parliament, it’s not clear what has been done about them.
Jaded_Promotion8806 on
I bet the settlement amounts to an apology, and I kind of think it should be extended to the rest of us at the very least. That was a ridiculous stunt the commission pulled. How about next time take responsibility for writing terrible rules instead of making someone else pay.
RNTMA on
Perhaps it could have been done a different way, but the Greens being excluded was a very good decisions. The party is a clown show, whose “co-leader” got fifth in his own riding. He even lied about why they were missing so many candidates to distract from their internal problems. Why should they get equal time on the stage to the other leaders who are actually running campaigns?
I think it’s more likely than not that the party elected some nutjob like Lascaris as their leader if May followers her word and steps down. I hope they don’t get invited to a leader’s debate ever again.
bign00b on
It was nonsense excluding them at the last minute. I think it’s debatable if the Greens met the criteria or not but the decision should have been made well in advance. Every day matters in a campaign, wasting some for a debate you’re told hours before you’re excluded from is incredibly unfair.
j821c on
I don’t know why a party that got removed from the debate for not meeting the requirements deserves any settlement at all.
Radix838 on
The Debate Commission has been a disaster since day 1. It is bad at hosting debates, bad at setting invite criteria, bad at hosting press conferences, and since it’s a government body it can be sued for being bad at all these things and then we have to pay for it being bad.
Just abolish the thing and let the Consortium come back.
Routine_Soup2022 on
So today I learned that the leaders debates commission is not subject to right to information laws. How is an organization created by parliament and which reports to parliament, which assists in Canadas election process, not subject to RTI? I think this is worthy of a letter writing campaign.
An agency of the federal government should not be able to come to a secret settlement with a political party who then has to file disclosure statements (but only during an election campaign)
I think we could be doing better with transparency on this one.
7 Comments
This story seems like a good reminder of the commission’s issues in April — and that, even though we have a minority Parliament, it’s not clear what has been done about them.
I bet the settlement amounts to an apology, and I kind of think it should be extended to the rest of us at the very least. That was a ridiculous stunt the commission pulled. How about next time take responsibility for writing terrible rules instead of making someone else pay.
Perhaps it could have been done a different way, but the Greens being excluded was a very good decisions. The party is a clown show, whose “co-leader” got fifth in his own riding. He even lied about why they were missing so many candidates to distract from their internal problems. Why should they get equal time on the stage to the other leaders who are actually running campaigns?
I think it’s more likely than not that the party elected some nutjob like Lascaris as their leader if May followers her word and steps down. I hope they don’t get invited to a leader’s debate ever again.
It was nonsense excluding them at the last minute. I think it’s debatable if the Greens met the criteria or not but the decision should have been made well in advance. Every day matters in a campaign, wasting some for a debate you’re told hours before you’re excluded from is incredibly unfair.
I don’t know why a party that got removed from the debate for not meeting the requirements deserves any settlement at all.
The Debate Commission has been a disaster since day 1. It is bad at hosting debates, bad at setting invite criteria, bad at hosting press conferences, and since it’s a government body it can be sued for being bad at all these things and then we have to pay for it being bad.
Just abolish the thing and let the Consortium come back.
So today I learned that the leaders debates commission is not subject to right to information laws. How is an organization created by parliament and which reports to parliament, which assists in Canadas election process, not subject to RTI? I think this is worthy of a letter writing campaign.
An agency of the federal government should not be able to come to a secret settlement with a political party who then has to file disclosure statements (but only during an election campaign)
I think we could be doing better with transparency on this one.