Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Opinion

Should government have more power or less?

Published

4 minute read

We welcome our readers’ opinions. Here’s one from Central Alberta resident Norman Weibe.

I’m told a coalition government is a possibility in this election. That if the Federal Liberals don’t get quite enough votes, the NDP and Greens will prop them up, to deny the conservatives a chance to govern.

More-so, the NDP or Greens, would use this capability to their advantage, and force concessions from the Liberals on the environmental agenda and other socialist policies. We’ve seen this before, so it’s a valid concern.

I understand this tactic could embolden past supporters of those parties to stick with them, in the hopes that this situation could arise. If it did, they would exert far more power as a ‘king maker’ than their few votes ever could under normal circumstances.

This whole scenario I find truly disturbing. Not just due to the thought of ever expanding socialist policies introduced into our lives through government, but the fact that the voters have no say or input in such coalitions.

This flaw in our system of government, where parties are given such sweeping powers should never be allowed to happen. Additionally, the leadership of the nation is something that all of us should be able to directly participate in.

Perhaps the electing of a Prime Minister or Premier should be a separate vote. Those running for such leadership positions would have assembled their leadership team in advance, and created their platform. This would give us the opportunity to scrutinize our options for entire leadership teams.

They would have the opportunity to select the people they considered the best and brightest to support their platform and achieve the goals they have laid out. That leadership group would then run collectively as a team, and upon winning take that role.

There would be no more opportunity for a coalition government to be formed, because that power would no longer reside with the leaders of each of the political parties, but with the people alone. Anyone losing the leadership contest would be out completely, and unable to negotiate a power sharing deal.

The platform that the leadership team ran on would influence each individual MP/MLA, but it wouldn’t mean they are whipped, and have no voice as is sometimes the case. The leadership would now have to ensure they could count on the support of those representatives, and couldn’t take them for granted.

It seems to me that much of the political power in our Canadian systems, remains in the hands of very few. The voters have some say, but not enough.

Power is held by those who jealously guard it and do not wish to see it reduced. We should look at every possibility to put more power in the hands of the people, and have as much decision making done as close to the source of the issue at hand.

There are many examples to look at the world over. Systems that have decades of use, and we can learn from others successes and mistakes.

No matter what alternative solutions are presented to us in the future; I believe it is imperative that political power should be decentralized, as much as possible.

 

Before Post

Norm Wiebe is a local Financial Advisor and political policy enthusiast. He and his wife Lera, live in Red Deer with their two children. Norm uses facebook to promote ideas, so look for him there. https://www.facebook.com/norman.wiebe

Follow Author

More from this author

2025 Federal Election

Liberal MP Paul Chiang Resigns Without Naming the Real Threat—The CCP

Published on

The Opposition with Dan Knight     Dan Knight

After parroting a Chinese bounty on a Canadian citizen, Chiang exits the race without once mentioning the regime behind it—opting instead to blame “distractions” and Donald Trump.

So Paul Chiang is gone. Stepped aside. Out of the race. And if you’re expecting a moment of reflection, an ounce of honesty, or even the basic decency to acknowledge what this was really about—forget it.

In his carefully scripted resignation statement, Chiang didn’t even mention the Chinese Communist Party. Not once. He echoed a foreign bounty placed on a Canadian citizen—Joe Tay—and he couldn’t even bring himself to name the regime responsible.

Instead, he talked about… Donald Trump. That’s right. He dragged Trump into a resignation about repeating CCP bounty threats. The guy who effectively told Canadians, “If you deliver a Conservative to the Chinese consulate, you can collect a reward,” now wants us to believe the real threat is Trump?

I haven’t seen Donald Trump put bounties on Canadian citizens. But Beijing has. And Chiang parroted it like a good little foot soldier—and then blamed someone who lives 2,000 miles away.

But here’s the part you can’t miss: Mark Carney let him stay.

Let’s not forget, Carney called Chiang’s comments “deeply offensive” and a “lapse in judgment”—and then said he was staying on as the candidate. It wasn’t until the outrage hit boiling point, the headlines stacked up, and groups like Hong Kong Watch got the RCMP involved, that Chiang bailed. Not because Carney made a decision—because the optics got too toxic.

And where is Carney now? Still refusing to disclose his financial assets. Still dodging questions about that $250 million loan from the Bank of China to the firm he chaired. Still giving sanctimonious speeches about “protecting democracy” while his own caucus parrots authoritarian propaganda.

If you think Chiang’s resignation fixes the problem, you’re missing the real issue. Because Chiang was just the symptom.

Carney is the disease.

He covered for it. He excused it. He enabled it. And now he wants to pose as the man who will stand up to foreign interference?

He can’t even stand up to it in his own party.

So no, we’re not letting this go. Chiang may be gone—but the stench is still in the room. And it’s wearing a tailored suit, smiling for the cameras, and calling itself “leader of the Liberal Party.”

Subscribe to The Opposition with Dan Knight .

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Continue Reading

2025 Federal Election

PM Carney’s Candidate Paul Chiang Steps Down After RCMP Confirms Probe Into “Bounty” Comments

Published on

Sam Cooper

 

Just after midnight Monday, Liberal MP Paul Chiang announced he is stepping down as the Liberal candidate in Markham–Unionville — hours after Canada’s federal police confirmed it was “looking into” allegations that he endorsed handing a political rival to a foreign government in exchange for a bounty.

“This is a uniquely important election with so much at stake for Canadians,” Chiang wrote in a late-night statement. “I do not want there to be distractions in this critical moment. That’s why I’m standing aside as our 2025 candidate.”

The announcement followed a day of escalating controversy, triggered by The Bureau’s Friday report and a series of breaking developments over the weekend and Monday, detailing Chiang’s remarks at a January meeting with Chinese-language media.

At a January news conference with Chinese-language media, Chiang suggested that Joe Tay’s criminal charge in Hong Kong would create a “great controversy” if he were elected to Parliament, according to the Ming Pao newspaper. He then reportedly crossed into territory that Hong Kong rights groups have asked the RCMP to investigate — potentially amounting to counselling kidnapping and violating Canada’s foreign interference laws — by suggesting that Tay, a Canadian citizen wanted under Hong Kong’s National Security Law, could be “taken” to the Chinese Consulate in Toronto to claim a HK$1 million bounty.

The UK-based human rights NGO Hong Kong Watch filed a formal letter to RCMP Commissioner Mike Duheme on Monday morning, requesting a criminal investigation. The letter alleged Chiang’s comments may amount to “counselling to commit kidnapping” under Canada’s Criminal Code, and potentially violate the new Foreign Interference and Security of Information Act.

By late evening, the RCMP confirmed it was “looking into the matter,” citing the serious and growing threat of foreign interference and transnational repression. While no criminal charges have been laid, and no details about potential protective measures have been released, the federal police said it is working closely with intelligence and law enforcement partners.

Chiang did not reference the controversy directly in his resignation statement, instead framing his decision as a step to protect the broader interests of the Liberal campaign. He expressed pride in his record and gratitude to his community.

“For the past three-and-a-half years, it has been the greatest honour of my life to serve the people of Markham–Unionville as their Member of Parliament,” he wrote. “Every single day, I served with integrity and worked to deliver results.”

The move comes after mounting calls for Chiang’s removal, including from more than 40 Hong Kong diaspora groups and international human rights advocates who said his remarks endorsed Beijing’s tactics of transnational repression. Joe Tay, the Conservative candidate targeted in the remarks, revealed Monday that he had contacted the RCMP for personal protection even before the comments were made public.

Chiang had previously apologized for what he called a “terrible lapse in judgment,” but had retained the backing of Prime Minister Mark Carney — until Monday night.

More to come on this breaking story.

The Bureau is a reader-supported publication.

To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Support a public interest startup.
We break international stories and this requires elite expertise, time and legal costs.
Continue Reading

Trending

X