Harper's Triple-U Senate.

The senate reform idea is one I fully support.  Not sure about the method, but if you want you can work within current rules (ie: avoid another nightmare of getting the provinces onside) by having an agreement by the parties to select and put in people based on popular vote with those people agreeing to leave the senate when the next election comes and reset who is there based on popular vote.

Thus the ballot would have who you want as your local represenative (as it is today) plus which party you want to represent you in the senate.  Seats assigned based on percent gained per party, you must get a high enough percentage to 'earn' a seat in order to get to pick a person.  Seats given out provincially as they are today.  Thus a lower percent required for a seat in Ontario than in PEI but given seats per person it would take fewer raw votes in PEI to get a seat than in Ontario.

If a senator refuses to leave when an election occurs (as they have the right to refuse right now) then that party loses a seat selection and gets a lot of negative publicity over it.  IE: if someone has been a thorn in a parties side since being put in there and they want to kick them out then that person can drive the party up the wall and refuse to leave at the end of the term until they hit the mandatory retirement age.

Later on true reform can occur via negotiations with the provinces and a referendum if needed.  However, this would work as a short term elected/equal solution that would pull a lot of CPC voters who are mad about their party dumping senate reform onside by showing how a simple reform could be done today and a greater one later on.

I have long thought that we have to be careful about how our success impacts the Canadian political landscape. I am no fan (to put it mildly) of the social conservative agenda. Since Elizabeth's election as leader, we have shifted the public perception of us more to the 'left', with what (I hope) was an unintended result.

The impact of this has been terrible, and counter-intuitive. We have become THE major contributor to the repeated election of the CPC with a minority mandate. If we had the brains that god gave a hampster, we would have realised that an all out assault on the Conservative Party was the best favour we could do for the neocons. Instead, we should be carefully evaluating our platform, to ensure that we are poaching from all 3 Party's equally. Even if we are only able to split 2%-3% of the CPC vote away, then the result would be a Liberal minority, and a few extra dipper seats as well, while the CPC fades back into well deserved obscurity.

I am always happy to see Greens discussing policy options that will appeal directly to part of the CPC vote, as it might enable us to turn back the clock 5 years, and re-calibrate the election outcomes closer to what Canadians actually voted for.

If Fryer is managing Elizabeth's SGI campaign, somebody should show him your' flyer. He'll need all the help he can get to win the CPC vote in SGI. Your' flyer is not perfect, but you're doing the right thing. Wouldn't it be nice if there was a well researched conversion piece for you to print, and distribute to the Conservative friendly polls?

I'm not putting you down at all, I'm just saying that every individual EDA should not have to fly by the seat of pants. Ideally we should have tons of flyer templates, customizeable for the voter profile poll by poll. Good job Dan, and thanks for bringing this to everybody's attention.