PEI Election April 23 2019

185 posts / 0 new
Last post
Sean in Ottawa

I just did some reading to see if I could find the answer and I keep coming across things like this

"After a general election, by convention, the leader of the party with the largest number of elected representatives will normally form the Government. The Governor General will ask the leader of that party to be the Prime Minister. He or she must be able at all times to maintain the confidence of the House in order to remain in power."

My understanding is what you had -- that the previous government gets the first kick at the can but this contradicts it. There seems to be a lot of cause for Canadians to be confused over who gets to try for Confidence first.

Pondering

Pogo wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

As for Manitoba the difference in seats per population for the 4 Atlantic Canadian provinces and Manitoba is minimal. Atlantic Canada has abaout double the seats and population. Saskatchewan with a slightly lower population does a little better than Manitoba.

As to Pondering saying that was the deal and those are the breaks. A deal can become unfair over time. Quebec joined confederation as a part of the Britich Commonwealth, queens english and all.  Nobody (except my brother probably) will argue that this was the deal and everyone should just live with it.

  I mentioned three measures, HofC, Senate and First Ministers.  You focussed on one.  Senators (30 versus 6) and First ministers (4 versus 1)

Even if the constitution is reopened no province will willingly give up power in either the HoC nor the Senate. Its citizens would be outraged. 

I don't think the consitution should be reopened for decades to come. 

Sean in Ottawa

Sorry -- this is interesting: I found an article before the last provincial election in Ontario and it raises the stakes in this province:

"under section 44 of the assembly’s Standing Orders, the opposition can’t hold a non-confidence vote without the governing party’s agreement. "

"it’s unclear if voting against the throne speech counts as a matter of non-confidence under the definition found in the Standing Orders."

https://lagassep.com/2018/05/28/ontarios-flawed-standing-orders-under-a-...

This means that whomever gets the first attempt to meet the legislature might get effective control that prevents a non-confidence vote.

The article has a second opinion that says:

"Also, there is no constitutional requirement that the party with the largest number of seats gets an automatic first try. That’s up to the LG, who takes advice from the departing Premier."

It does not say that the LG always has to take that advice.

another opinion says that the throne speech would count as it must be moved by the government not the opposition. But still there would be few chances for nonconfidence thereafter -- only money supply budgets

"Standing Order 44 speaks to what motions may be “moved” my the opposition parties. "

I have still found nothing to clarify any absolute rule that says that the outgoing premier (or PM) has the right to meet the House of Leg first. I remember reading that but cannot find it now. It seems most are saying it is up to the LG or GG based on advice from the outgoing Minister. This suggests more power in the LG or GG than I was aware of.

It is possible that they the statement that the Outgoing advices the LG or GG has been conflated to mean a first shot at a throne speech as I have seen before but maybe that is not the case.

I am really thinking of a plurality of seats with one party when the other two woudl like to meet the House first. If one of those is the outgoing First Minister then they can advise but does that have to be taken? If it is the outgoing party with the plurality and the two opposition parties who want to get together, it seems they cannot advice and can only take down the government at the throne speech which we have seen previously in Canada provincially.

Anyone know?

 

 

 

Sean in Ottawa

Pondering wrote:

Pogo wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

As for Manitoba the difference in seats per population for the 4 Atlantic Canadian provinces and Manitoba is minimal. Atlantic Canada has abaout double the seats and population. Saskatchewan with a slightly lower population does a little better than Manitoba.

As to Pondering saying that was the deal and those are the breaks. A deal can become unfair over time. Quebec joined confederation as a part of the Britich Commonwealth, queens english and all.  Nobody (except my brother probably) will argue that this was the deal and everyone should just live with it.

  I mentioned three measures, HofC, Senate and First Ministers.  You focussed on one.  Senators (30 versus 6) and First ministers (4 versus 1)

Even if the constitution is reopened no province will willingly give up power in either the HoC nor the Senate. Its citizens would be outraged. 

I don't think the consitution should be reopened for decades to come. 

Also -- Arguably there is also no objective way to measure clout - the Senate and the House are not equal and the value of having a separate Premier and government vs being a part of a larger province is hard to quantify. The organization into provinces is also a complicated matter as it is more than admisistrative.

I was offended upthread about the idea that PEI could be suggested to be erased and said the people there ought to have a say. I took for granted that people would understand what I meant -- let me be more clear:

The national government is not above the provinces in status like the provinces are senior to cities. A province in many ways is not much different than a country in terms of power or identity. If we accept the self determination of countries ANd we accept self determination of provinces (as we do in Canada) this right is not just about seperating from Canada were a province to want to leave but also for remaining as a province.

The self determination of peoples apart from provinces is also something with widespread support here in theory. but it can be controversial. The reason is this is a partnership with rights and numbers. Say for example Northern Ontario wanted to be its own province (this does come up at times - or wanting to join Manitoba): If Norther Ontario went on its own, this changes the number of provinces, the relative rights of those provinces. Some might like to see a smaller Ontario (I think that would be a good thing) while others might feel that the people of Ontario would now be getting two votes in the federation. But still shouldn't the people of Northern Ontario get to decide that?

We seem to have a consensus here on Babble that Quebec or BC or Alberta have the right to cecede. to suggest they don't would produce howls of anger. Yet the idea that a province could be erased as a province was raised (especially the way it was) and when I responded as offended this was not understood as legitimate. How does an Altantic Province not have the same right to self determination as a larger province? Is it about size? Do you ahve to be a certain size to have these rights?

Then what about self determination of Indigenous peoples? This does not come up often since their lands have been occupied and cut up (much like what happened to the Palestinians I might add). But Indigenous nations also ought to have the right to self determination acknowledged -- they want to govern themselves differently than what the rest of Canada wants to impose and they have that right.  Let's consider Nunavut for a moment -- if it wanted to be independent to pursue its own resources -- despite the low population -- it too has that right. I was surpirsed to see anyone here think to deny this for any in Canada.

Pondering

I don't think anyone was suggesting we have the power to force a change and simply declare PEI no longer a province. I think people are just noting that logically PEI really shouldn't be a separate province given its size and population. If Canada was being created as a whole from scratch now PEI probably wouldn't have provincial status. 

But it isn't, so we have a legal framework that we must work within. 

Sean in Ottawa

Pondering wrote:

I don't think anyone was suggesting we have the power to force a change and simply declare PEI no longer a province. I think people are just noting that logically PEI really shouldn't be a separate province given its size and population. If Canada was being created as a whole from scratch now PEI probably wouldn't have provincial status. 

But it isn't, so we have a legal framework that we must work within. 

The change was suggested as something that should be done -- more to the point interest in PEI was questionned as a waste of time. This while we have interest in many countries outside Canada.

I would not have been offended if it had been put as ideally it not been a seperate province becuase I would ahve agreed with that and have actually said that here before. It is another thing to say the place does not matter and should not be a province.

For the haters -- no worries it is a sanbar and will be gone as a single island due to climate change soon.. (Maybe 100 years or less )

Pondering

Is PEI really at risk of vanishing from global warming? 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Conceding on election night is merely a symbolic gesture with absolutely no Constitutional ramifications.

Sean in Ottawa

Pondering wrote:

Is PEI really at risk of vanishing from global warming? 

No not vanishing completely -- but since it is a sand bar it is at tremendous risk to lose so much coast that it no longer be a single Island and much of the land is at risk. It depends on the model.

Sea level rise alone is not the risk. The problem is coastal erosion due to intense storms and storm surges.

It depends on the level of sea level rise and the intensity and frequency of the storms.

This is a large sand bar -- there is no bedrock.

Look at a map and see the shape of it.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Sean the hilarious part of my "hatred" of the East is that I was born in NB and have spent lots of time in the area. My maternal ancestry in Acadia goes back to 1626. I have read extensively on Acadian history and love the Maritimes. That does not change the fact that I live on an Island that is larger and far greater populated. PEI citizens actually have more representatives than me and my neighbours. The history of PEI is like the history of the rest of Canada in that it is imperialist to its core. The British stole the Island from the Acadians and at Confederation the biggest question was how to get rid of the parasites who had been given the spoils.

Prior to the British the local Acadians and their relatives who were refugees from the mainland were deported. The idea that the genocidal British rule on Ilse Saint Jean has been a good thing is just another matter of perspective and viewpoint.

The Ile Saint-Jean Campaign was a series of military operations in fall 1758, during the Seven Years' War, to deport the Acadians who either lived on Ile Saint-Jean (present-day Prince Edward Island) or had taken refuge there from earlier deportation operations. Lieutenant-Colonel Andrew Rollo led a force of 500 British troops (including James Rogers leading his company of Rogers Rangers) to take possession of Ile Saint-Jean.[2][3] The percentage of deported Acadians who died during this expulsion made it the deadliest of all the deportations during the Expulsion (1755–1762). The total number of Acadians deported during this campaign was second only to that of the Bay of Fundy Campaign (1755).[4]

Sean in Ottawa

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Sean the hilarious part of my "hatred" of the East is that I was born in NB and have spent lots of time in the area. My maternal ancestry in Acadia goes back to 1626. I have read extensively on Acadian history and love the Maritimes. That does not change the fact that I live on an Island that is larger and far greater populated. PEI citizens actually have more representatives than me and my neighbours. The history of PEI is like the history of the rest of Canada in that it is imperialist to its core. The British stole the Island from the Acadians and at Confederation the biggest question was how to get rid of the parasites who had been given the spoils.

Prior to the British the local Acadians and their relatives who were refugees from the mainland were deported. The idea that the genocidal British rule on Ilse Saint Jean has been a good thing is just another matter of perspective and viewpoint.

The Ile Saint-Jean Campaign was a series of military operations in fall 1758, during the Seven Years' War, to deport the Acadians who either lived on Ile Saint-Jean (present-day Prince Edward Island) or had taken refuge there from earlier deportation operations. Lieutenant-Colonel Andrew Rollo led a force of 500 British troops (including James Rogers leading his company of Rogers Rangers) to take possession of Ile Saint-Jean.[2][3] The percentage of deported Acadians who died during this expulsion made it the deadliest of all the deportations during the Expulsion (1755–1762). The total number of Acadians deported during this campaign was second only to that of the Bay of Fundy Campaign (1755).[4]

You want to pretend Vancouver Island is not stolen as well?

You say: "The idea that the genocidal British rule on Ilse Saint Jean has been a good thing" -- this is the kind of insinuation that earns you four-letter word insults. NOBODY every advanced this idea here but you raise the straw man becuase you are a dishonest debater who fights with insinuation rather than logic.

I responded to a dismissive attack on why babblers in a thread about PEI in a section on Atlantic Canada were so interested in PEI. You barged in to get your piece of the action.

I am more than willing to hear about and discuss any injustice but it is not possible when someone like you is more interested in smearing the other person than making a point. You only pretend it is about a point when you are finished with the smears, got your reaction and want to deflect from what you were really doing.

Now let's be clear we absolutely have no respect for each other. There is no chance of a constructive debate. So go harass other posters for a while. I am sure there are some disagreements between other people that you can barge in to in order to prove whatever the hell it is that you think you are proving.

 

WWWTT

Pondering wrote:

I don't think anyone was suggesting we have the power to force a change and simply declare PEI no longer a province. I think people are just noting that logically PEI really shouldn't be a separate province given its size and population. If Canada was being created as a whole from scratch now PEI probably wouldn't have provincial status. 

But it isn't, so we have a legal framework that we must work within. 

This comment comes closest to where I was coming from when making my comment that stirred the hornets nest. 

Sean makes good albeit obvious comments. We all know that the charter is impossible to change, so any arrangement involving any province would be a constitutional nightmare. 

But when it comes to Indigenous people’s, they get shafted robbed ignored and forgotten. 

Sean in Ottawa

WWWTT wrote:

Pondering wrote:

I don't think anyone was suggesting we have the power to force a change and simply declare PEI no longer a province. I think people are just noting that logically PEI really shouldn't be a separate province given its size and population. If Canada was being created as a whole from scratch now PEI probably wouldn't have provincial status. 

But it isn't, so we have a legal framework that we must work within. 

This comment comes closest to where I was coming from when making my comment that stirred the hornets nest. 

Sean makes good albeit obvious comments. We all know that the charter is impossible to change, so any arrangement involving any province would be a constitutional nightmare. 

But when it comes to Indigenous people’s, they get shafted robbed ignored and forgotten. 

All agreed -- but comments insulting to people who live in a province in Canada have no place here. Of the many things you cannot change about Canada the size of the provinces are just one small thing and there is no point attacking the importance of or the interest in the smallest province.

As far as things we cannot change the bigger issues include problems with division of powers: education is understandably provincial given the diversity of cultures. Healthcare should not be: Canada is one of few countries to fight running jurisdictional battles that compromise portability and the public system itself. The division of powers did not anticipate public healthcare in any event. Another issue is the way cities are governed in Canada. We depend on financing them by a tax on an essential service housing and that compromises affordability. Cities struggle with jurisdictional overlap with provinces and as creatures of provinces have no control when they are being shafted and the downloading begins.

These two issues compromise the effectiveness of local government, social programs -- healthcare and affordable housing.

As mentionned above Indigenous government through the federal authority is shameful and is the aspect of Canada that has never left the colonial system.

Compared to all that whining about the smallest province having 1% of the seats instead of 0.3% is pitiful or even discussing if provinces should be amalgamated without considering their will is pathetic. This insult to the people who live in this province is a distraction from meaningful conversations. The biggest problem we cannot change is jurisdiction over healthcare. Many other problems in national structure we can deal with. The attacks and the joining of the attack were offensive as much given the subject as by what energy was diverted to this rather than discuss something meaningful.

quizzical

oh so it's ok to attack AB or BC but not points east?

been following Sean's smack towards Kropotkin it's bs.

western provinces are treated unfairly and Kropotkins points on Acadia were on point with my family's experiences of  forced relocation, lies and colonialism by Britain.

 

Pondering

PEI is not getting insulted by saying it is so small it doesn't make sense that it is a province and Vancouver is not, or saying that it shouldn't be a separate province. Concerning the history of PEI no one is saying the history of the other provinces is any cleaner. 

 I can't count the number of times I've been told Quebec should just go. I live in Quebec but that isn't insulting me. It's making a political statement. 

You are making a big deal out of a flippant comment made in passing. You are taking insult on behalf of other people who like me might not be so insulted. You have a right to your opinion that the comments were insulting to PEI but not to attack other posters for it. They have a right to their opinions on PEI and to express them. 

Sean in Ottawa

quizzical wrote:

oh so it's ok to attack AB or BC but not points east?

been following Sean's smack towards Kropotkin it's bs.

western provinces are treated unfairly and Kropotkins points on Acadia were on point with my family's experiences of  forced relocation, lies and colonialism by Britain.

 

Quizzical you are better than this.

I have always been with you whenever anyone attacks any province in the West. I have never supported any attack on any part of Canada. Period.

I did not attack Kropotkin stating your experience- I merely pointed out that it was not the point being made and that it is not unique to one part of the country. It is most famous becuase it is Europeans. What has happened in other parts of the country are no less serious -- forced relocations of Indigenous people, also Chinese and Japanese in the West. There is no part of the country that can start to claim superiority.

I absolutely detest Kropotkin's efforts to turn this into a competition for pain from colonialism between one part of Canada and another. It stinks and that was what this poster was trying to do.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

 The attacks and the joining of the attack were offensive as much given the subject as by what energy was diverted to this rather than discuss something meaningful.

Please feel free to discuss anything meaningful anytime you feel like it. It would be a pleasant change from long rambling posts about how other peoples posts are not up to babbles standards or your ideal chat room.

Sean in Ottawa

Pondering wrote:

PEI is not getting insulted by saying it is so small it doesn't make sense that it is a province and Vancouver is not, or saying that it shouldn't be a separate province. Concerning the history of PEI no one is saying the history of the other provinces is any cleaner. 

 I can't count the number of times I've been told Quebec should just go. I live in Quebec but that isn't insulting me. It's making a political statement. 

You are making a big deal out of a flippant comment made in passing. You are taking insult on behalf of other people who like me might not be so insulted. You have a right to your opinion that the comments were insulting to PEI but not to attack other posters for it. They have a right to their opinions on PEI and to express them. 

Pondering did you read the comments? Each response ratched up the one before. You don't get to decide that a person comng into a thread on Atlantic Canada questioning the merits about interest on a province that is too insignificant to merit it -- is not a big deal. Nor are you an authority about which is the more offensive.

Sean in Ottawa

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

 The attacks and the joining of the attack were offensive as much given the subject as by what energy was diverted to this rather than discuss something meaningful.

Please feel free to discuss anything meaningful anytime you feel like it. It would be a pleasant change from long rambling posts about how other peoples posts are not up to babbles standards or your ideal chat room.

Please feel free to practice what you preach any time at all. That would be such a welcome change.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Has anybody heard if the by-election has been called?  Does a government have to be formed before that can happen?

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Has anybody heard if the by-election has been called?  Does a government have to be formed before that can happen?

Sean in Ottawa

Interesting to observe that thought out posts, that involve ideas and even some research on topics to contribute original content here are mostly ignored or subject to trolling snide sarcastic comebacks but everyone here likes to get involved in a pile-on that is nothing but shit.

This is the character of this place now and any person here that is whining about the deteriorating content here can look at themselves when much of the time this pile-on stuff is what they are really interested in responding to.

The most popular thing in this place is a witty takedown as nasty as possible or an insult. Best if you can really nail someone in a few words. That is what we are about. Ideas -- well not so much.

I have something else to do now.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

You don't get to decide that a person comng into a thread on Atlantic Canada questioning the merits about interest on a province that is too insignificant to merit it -- is not a big deal. Nor are you an authority about which is the more offensive.

Give your head a shake Pondering, Sean is the absolute authority on all that kind of shit.

In the meantime I think that the PEI Greens look like they will be good partners with the PEI Red Tories. In BC a significant portion of the Green vote comes from "conservatives with composters."  If you believe in the Red Tory philosophy of good stewardship by the ruling class then that must include some measure of environmentalism. It is the neo-con ideology of greed that drives the Conservatives in the rest of the country so this could be a very interesting government.

I have been thinking of a Red Green movement but until now had not really considered a Red Tory Green alliance.

Pondering

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Pondering did you read the comments? Each response ratched up the one before. You don't get to decide that a person comng into a thread on Atlantic Canada questioning the merits about interest on a province that is too insignificant to merit it -- is not a big deal. Nor are you an authority about which is the more offensive.

No I am not but neither are you. I did go back and read the thread. It is like you regard all threads to be as sensitive as those in the racism and feminism forums. I think that is a misconception. Your objections were inflamatory. 

105)  Here’s an odd thread? PEI is the smallest province but has got babblers attention in this thread. 

My self they have too much representation as is. 

They should probably be amalgamated with Nova Scotia like cape breton was long ago. 

It was just an off the cuff post indicating surprise that the thread is getting so much attention. Saying it should be amalgamated with Nova Scotia wasn't arguing that it actually should happen. Obviously it couldn't change without PEI's permission and reopening of the Constitution. You took the comment way too seriously. 

Sean)  As for interest to babblers -- the only judge is babblers. This is not up to you and your snide remark on this is deeply offensive.

It wasn't deeply offensive or snide. Dismissive maybe but no more than that. I don't think you interpret your words as a personal insult but I think most people would take it as one. You were not addressing the content of the remark you were passing judgement over it. 

An alternative would be to say: Why do you find it odd that we would discuss PEI? It doesn't happen often but they did just have an election. The Greens had an unusually strong showing that might have implications for the rest of Canada. it appears they are more left than their federal counterpart. Aside from that they also just had a referendum on PR. 

So there is lots to talk about. 

As to their size and amalgamation that would be up to them so it is unlikely they will give up provincial status and the constitution would have to be reopened so no point in discussing it. 

Sean I am not saying this to gang up on you. You know I have a ton of respect for your knowledge and willingness to share. Maybe I am all gunho because of my recent truces but I really think we should just all let go of the past. Start fresh with a determination to try not to insult one another no matter how much we disrespect each other's views. 

Yes Kropotkin does have a bias against the east, or rather anything east of the rockies. He would dearly love part of BC to become an independent country not just a separate province. He denounces Canadian imperialism across the country not just in PEI. I do take that into account when interpreting his posts but it doesn't change the strength or weaknesses of his arguments. You can still just challenge his arguments. 

All the talk about which province PEI should amalgamate with if Canada had PR for provinces is pure theory. It is an intellectual exercise, a flight of fancy. Theoretically all ridings should be the same size by population otherwise some of us have more say than others. I think the conversation only developed because you objected to what was a casual statement in passing. 

We all know there are historical reasons the provinces formed the way they did and why they got the deals they did. I don't know what they are but I know they exist. There is no need to justify PEI's existence. It isn't under threat. 

Just a suggestion given in friendship, when you take offence at something on the board PM someone and wait  a while before responding. 

Sean in Ottawa

--

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

I think that the PEI Greens look like they will be good partners with the PEI Red Tories. In BC a significant portion of the Green vote comes from "conservatives with composters."  If you believe in the Red Tory philosophy of good stewardship by the ruling class then that must include some measure of environmentalism. It is the neo-con ideology of greed that drives the Conservatives in the rest of the country so this could be a very interesting government.

I have been thinking of a Red Green movement but until now had not really considered a Red Tory Green alliance.

jerrym

The Green Party has had to withdraw a potential candidate for the riding election that was delayed due to the death of their earlier candidate. They still have one candidate left in the running for the nomination. 

The Green Party of P.E.I. has withdrawn Susan Hartley as a contestant from Friday's nomination vote for the District 9 deferred election, the party said in a news release. The withdrawal is a result of a ruling by Chief Electoral Officer Tim Garrity on the interpretation of a section of the Election Act.

"There was a question that came forward from the Green Party themselves just asking about this part of the Election Act and asking for our interpretation of it," Garrity said.

The interpretation ruling has to do with Section 38 of the Election Act, which says that "No person shall be eligible for nomination in more than one electoral district." Hartley was a candidate in the recent provincial election in District 2 Georgetown-Pownal, making her ineligible.

The District 9 election didn't take place due to the death of Green candidate Josh Underhay and his young son.

That means the upcoming election is not considered a byelection, but a deferred election, Garrity said.  "This District 9 election that will be taking place at some point in the near future is just an extension of the 2019 general election." ...

Martin Ruben, P.E.I. Green Party president said he was surprised by the ruling. ...

Ruben said the party had a process to identify two qualified candidates and now the party is down to one, John Andrew

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/prince-edward-island/pei-green-withdrawal...

    jerrym

    There has been some complaints within the Green Party about the selection process for the District 9 election, which was delayed due to the death of the Green Party candidate. The party had reduced the number of candidates who had applied to run down from five to two, only to then have one of those two eliminated by Elections PEI on a ruling that this was a continuation of the provincial election, not a by election, and PEI law does not allow a candidate to run in more than one riding. Some members complained the selection process was too secretive and unaccountable to the membership. 

    As a result of this John Andrews won the nomination on a vote of 128 to 33 for "no candidate". Despite being asked by the newspaper below, the party would not reveal who was on the committee that reduced the number of candidates from five to two.

    Ruben said the party had a process to identify two qualified candidates and now the party is down to one, John Andrew.

    Bevan-Baker’s apology followed a controversy surrounding the party’s decision to restrict its number of nominees in Charlottetown-Hillsborough Park.

    Five individuals had initially applied to be the party’s nominee for the deferred election in the district. A party committee narrowed this down to two nominees who could face a vote by the membership. One was later deemed ineligible by Elections P.E.I.

    Several party members had complained publicly about the process, with some accusing the party’s provincial council of being overly secretive and unaccountable.

    In the end, most members voted for the sole remaining nominee, retired medical physicist John Andrew, by a margin of 128 to 33. The 33 votes were for a “no candidate” option, a protest vote allowed in Green nominations, through which members can express a lack of confidence with all of the potential nominees. ...

    When asked by The Guardian, Green party officials did not identify the names of the individuals who sat on the party’s candidate selection committee. Party president Martin Ruben did say the committee included a member of the Underhay family, a member of provincial council, a member of the party’s caucus and one or more residents of Charlottetown-Hillsborough Park.

    https://www.theguardian.pe.ca/news/local/pei-green-leader-offers-apology...

     

    jerrym

    Pondering wrote:

    Is PEI really at risk of vanishing from global warming? 

    There are significant risks to a number of PEI communities as the following article on climate change research details. The community of Lennox Island, Canada will require relocation due to climate change-induced erosion and sea-level rise. "Lennox Island is expected to be one of the first Canadian communities requiring relocation due to climate change. Situated on the northwest coast of Prince Edward Island, Canada, Lennox Island is located in the Malpeque Bay." (http://rabble.ca/babble/canadian-politics/canada-and-global-warming-stat...)

    However, the Lennox Island Reserve in PEI is not the only Prince Edward Island community under threat from global warming says Lab director Adam Fenech of the UPEI Climate Research Lab in this article from 2018. He says sea level rise around the world is occurring three times faster than previously thought making the need for at risk communities to adapt much faster. Some global warming problems that weren't expected until the next century are happening now.

    Lab director Adam Fenech and other researchers are travelling across Prince Edward Island over the next few weeks to speak to communities about sea-level rise. Eight communities across PEI will be visited. Lennox Island was the first stop in the tour. ...

    Mr Fenech said new reports are indicating that sea-level rise is going to increase three times as much than originally thought by scientists, adding oceans are getting warmer and are expanding while ice around the world continues to disappear faster than scientists anticipated, rising sea levels.

    “Those two things that scientists didn’t think were going to happen until at least the next century are happening now,” said Mr Fenech during his portion of the presentation entitled Our Incredible Shrinking Island, “That’s why we are getting a little concerned about this idea of sea-level rise.”

    With PEI’s sandstone not very resistant to erosion, it’s estimated the Island has lost an overall 5,000 acres of land from 1968-2010 as a result of coastal erosion. ...

    As a First Nations member, Natalie Knockwood said she feels it’s her responsibility to care for the whole of PEI, not just Lennox Island and asked why Island reserves were being treated as separate entities.

    Mr Jardine explained the climate lab does conduct studies for the rest of PEI as well, but admitted there isn’t a whole lot of funding available for since research. The Mi’kmaq Confederacy applied for the funding for these projects through INAC, which provides funding specifically for Canadian reserves.

    “This work that we are describing is not being done for all of PEI, it’s just being done for the reserves. You’re getting special treatment in a sense because you’re getting special focus on your territories,” said  Mr Fenech’s colleague Don Jardine.

    [Lennox Island First Nations residents Natalie] Knockwood agreed with Mr Labobe then that politicians need to be attending these meetings.

    “This isn’t just a Lennox Island problem, it’s not just a Rocky Point problem, Scotchfort problem, a Morell problem, it’s a whole Prince Edward Island problem and we all need to get on the same bandwagon in order for things to change here,” she said, “We can do things here in our First Nations community, but what about all of PEI? What all of PEI does affects us in our First Nations communities... We’re at risk. Is the government of PEI going to allocate us land somewhere else for our community... Those are the questions we have that need to be answered.”

    http://www.peicanada.com/west_prince_graphic/article_3bc68786-1672-11e8-...

    cco

    jerrym wrote:

    Five individuals had initially applied to be the party’s nominee for the deferred election in the district. A party committee narrowed this down to two nominees who could face a vote by the membership. One was later deemed ineligible by Elections P.E.I.

    Huh, what do you know. Even in Canada's smallest province, in a party with a tiny membership, once something real is on the line, the party establishment steps in to throw its weight around.

    Aristotleded24

    Throne speech passes unanimously:

    Quote:

    After roughly three-and-a-half hours of debate, the throne speech was supported by the PCs, Greens, and Liberals. Absent for the vote was Liberal MLA Heath MacDonald. 

    "It's, I think a very proud day for all of us as legislators here in this historic chamber, and I think it's a reflection of the very best we can be in here," King said after the vote.  "Do I think it will be this easy all the time? I'll have to say 'no.'"

    Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

    cco wrote:
    jerrym wrote:

    Five individuals had initially applied to be the party’s nominee for the deferred election in the district. A party committee narrowed this down to two nominees who could face a vote by the membership. One was later deemed ineligible by Elections P.E.I.

    Huh, what do you know. Even in Canada's smallest province, in a party with a tiny membership, once something real is on the line, the party establishment steps in to throw its weight around.

    Who knew the PEI Greens even HAD a party establishment yet?

    jerrym

    The District 9 Charlottetown-Hillsborough Park riding election that was delayed due to the death of the Green candidate will be held on July 15th. 

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/prince-edward-island/pei-date-determined-...

    robbie_dee

    Results (11 of 11 polls): Jameson (Con) 1080, Andrew (GRN) 780, Lavers (LIB), 635, Gay (NDP) 46.

    Pages