發文作者:kahoo | 十月 9, 2007

MMP 混合代表制: 今日你會投 YES 定 NO?


特別嘉賓﹕

YES派– Reference Group 吳婷婷
NO派– 評論人 Roy Ho


精彩重溫:

Part 1 (starts at 27:00): MMP係乜?
www.torontofirstradio.com/archive.asp?filename=ampart12-10-4-2007.asf

Part 2: YES派 vs NO派 空中激辯 (I)
www.torontofirstradio.com/archive.asp?filename=ampart13-10-4-2007.asf

Part 3: YES派 vs NO派 空中激辯 (II)
www.torontofirstradio.com/archive.asp?filename=ampart14-10-4-2007.asf

Part 4: 聽眾各抒己見 + 齊猜Roy Ho的提問
www.torontofirstfadio.com/archive.asp?filename=ampart15-10-4-2007.asf

Part 5: YES / NO 論點再交鋒
李家豪 vs 吳婷婷
蘇賡哲博士 vs 吳瑤瑤律師

www.torontofirstradio.com/archive.asp?filename=ampart14-10-9-2007.asf

Part 6:
有參與 Ontario Citizens’ Assembly的聽眾也致電本台加入討論
www.torontofirstradio.com/archive.asp?filename=ampart15-10-9-2007.asf


Responses

  1. cela ne fait rien

  2. Main Objection:

    To achieve the single goal of proportionality, the proposed MMP system shifts power from the local voter in ridings across Ontario to the power brokers at Queen’s Park.

    Specifically MMP would bring:

    17 fewer local ridings, covering more territory, with less contact with your local representative

    39 politicians chosen by other politicians … not you

    Closed door party deal-making for weeks after elections, to decide who governs the province

    Tax dollars paying for 22 more politicians and their staff at Queen’s Park

    A confusing ballot and vote-counting system

    A weaker, indecisive Ontario

    Fringe parties holding the balance of power with 2 or 3 seats

    On October 10th, vote to keep our present voting system!

  3. My opinion is simple as that. The source of power must be given DIRECTLY from voters, not from party leaders or by any other means.

  4. Say NO to MMP…..

  5. Because voters should have their belief/principles, they need to pick party agreed with their belief. So they DO NOT like Tam if Tam is not a conservative candidate. Tam’s personal characters are not in consideration…..

  6. Who made the name list? Party leaders? Forget them…..The name list is not made by VOTERS….

  7. The answer to your question: New Zealand….

  8. Some may say MMP is good for minorities. Can they tell the different needs/concerns among minorities and majorities? If you go one step further, you may say these are our concerns, of all Canadians…….

    Think about it. Party leaders make up the list. You need to suck up with those political brokers. Agreed….?

  9. Agreed with Roy. MMP is just anti-Chinese Canadian and anti-democracy……….

  10. 中華民國🙂

  11. Compare the cases of New Brunswick and from Roy, I like the case of New Brunswick; because it is our majority intention…..

    Roy. I give you hands…..

  12. 我係學校聽完返黎一本政經都完lu,不過同一topic, 同個poli sci prof 講完,我覺得MMP個39 seats 會變左似功能組別咁,所以反對。而家個first pass the post 咪幾公平囉。個3個人猛咁針住個prof, 話 first pass the post=no democracy,神又係佢地,鬼又係佢地,不過係得個prof 反對MMP,我覺得佢嘅reasoning 仲好過個3個人。

  13. 講一人一票,不如加多個條例,如果做錯或太差工作表現就一人一票要打佢落台、唔駛等四年,咁就公平。講下就加多三十多席不服務議席,因不是民選,又怎會關心地區席選民的需要呢?根本明加席位和加重立稅人負擔比班辦公室燒烤燃料~~廢柴,再如此下去真的萬萬歲稅稅省。最大疑問是明知此問題重要性又沒有計劃地教育大家就推出,個個講教育議題重要但呢D選民教育就側側博,候選人請不要再打出教育議題牌,你地有冇良心和羞恥之心。請大家選民要小心,瞞天過海手段就是唔比時間你唸,米己成飯時就話選民慨意願,到時就完蛋。

  14. No啦。我哋納稅人要養多39個閑人。為咩噃?而且佢哋都唔知點樣甄選出來,投票者完全蒙在鼓裡。如果咁係叫民主嘅話就真搞笑囉。

    萬一唔知選人或選黨嘅話,大可以投廢票。做人有時確係好難選擇,就好似撿老婆一樣。千難萬難最終未又係撿到?相對來講投票只係小菜一碟而已。何必咁傷神?

  15. 是政治分贓,基本上三黨已拿了過90%選票,剩
    下 10%只得3票。綠黨是否一定能拿到一票,也
    是未知數。華人、親共華人想潬水摸魚撈番一票,
    真係痴人說夢,鬥人多鬥齊心,點夠班gay佬和工
    會鬥!
    至於名單點決定?當然是最大黨利益,唔係選民
    利益。例如X聯會,X工會能拉到大量選票或銀
    紙,就理所當然可次要求加入名單。
    MMP 咪 揾 我"笨" 老"實" 人啦!

  16. Thanks to ML // Oct 4th 2007 at 11:08 pm.

    TO THE POINT!

    要改革選舉基制,不如講下 recall d 唔守競選諾言 d 政棍把啦。

  17. Monsieur/Mademoiselle/Madame “oui ou non":

    Pourquois ne fait rien? Expliquer s’il vous plaît?

    Mr./Ms “NO to MMP":

    Rationale noted but don’t agree to your complete write-off of MMP. MMP is indisputably a fairer system of voting in an imperfect electoral system. Your points of objection, though valid, could easily be accommodated by:

    1. 17 fewer local ridings, (each) covering more territory:

    With the huge wage increase they just had, shouldn’t we pass on more responsibility to them, i.e. serving larger ridings?

    2. 39 politicians chosen by other politicians:

    Some capable politicians (such as the unpopular candidates with ethnic background in some white-dominated ridings) who lost in the election to a celebrity-class opponent may now have a chance to be appointed as List Members because all parties have a chance to hand-pick these list members within their respective party.

    3. Closed door party deal-making for weeks after elections, to decide who governs the province:

    “The political party with the largest number of seats in the legislature, including ‘Local Members’ and ‘List Members’, is asked to form a government" (source: http://www.yourbigdecision.ca/en_ca/mmp1.aspx)

    Did I miss something here? Where does this closed door party deal come in?

    4. Tax dollars paying for 22 more politicians and their staff at Queen’s Park:

    Current no. of ridings: 107

    Proposed no. of ridings under MMP: 90
    Additional no. of seats for List Members: 39

    I sort of understand why we can’t have only 17 list members to keep the same number of seats at Queen’s Park? Anyway, to answer this question, we just have to listen to Howard Hampton and roll back MPP’s salaries. If we still have to pay more for the additional 22 politicians after the wage roll-back, so be it because this is the price we have to pay for a fairer voting system.

    Points 5-7: Confusing ballot…Fringe parties holding…

    Points too subjective and/or insignificant to justify your opposition to the MMP.

    Answer to today’s question: The nation closest to HK that uses MMP is South Korea.

  18. 政治分贓,養多39個人又好,對我黎講都唔重要,因為睇下liberals 上台後點洗錢法就知。d錢點都會冇啦啦唔知係邊度用左,仲要報出黎個amount 有冇細到都唔知。我覺得個選舉意念同方法緊要d,世上冇一個最公平嘅voting system, 唯有揀個比較好d。

  19. MMP- More Money to Politician??? or to the politician who failed the test but try to get a seat through the side door? Over is over, if we don’t pick you, Good-bye!!!

  20. My turn to backtrack on my support to MMP. Here is something to think about before saying YES to MMP:

    http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/261749

  21. MMP是太公分豬肉式政治分贓,三大政黨分了豬肉後,回到黨後,又輪到政黨內部分豬肉,自己友當然有份去分,如果政黨不需要在大選前交出名單,那麼更加揾老襯,因為政黨知道拿到多少席位才分派給自己親信,那會如一本政經一位嘉賓話會給我們想要的華裔政客。
    一於反對MMP。

  22. 聽講話有39席會係的黨歛點落去的地區去選,咁攪法唔多好,又多左的冗員,每人出糧十二三萬,咁即係多的無人性的出嚟混!!

    各位選民,百上加斤,咁攪法安省住唔過,的人仲古惑過壞過咩呀!

    投票記住千奇唔好制呀,公投過單嘢呀!!!

    NO NO NO NO ; NON NON NON NON
    NEIN, NEIN NEIN ,否, 否, 否!!!!


發表迴響

在下方填入你的資料或按右方圖示以社群網站登入:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / 變更 )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / 變更 )

Facebook照片

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / 變更 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / 變更 )

連結到 %s

分類

%d 位部落客按了讚: