Site Administrator Of:

Supporter Of:


The Star decides to attack MMP again.

Quite remarkably, the Toronto Star has decided to attack MMP a 2nd time within a week in their editorial section and again recommend it be rejected. This time in their editorial, they decided to stay away from charging there would be “appointed MPP’s”, a feature of their column last week, but they repeated the “unstable government” theme, as well as the fear of radical fringe parties holding the legislature hostage.

I’m not going to get into attacking their charges; they’ve used the same stuff before which has been easily refuted – what I find of interest is that they are so concerned about MMP that despite some polls showing it won’t likely pass, they felt the need to attack it again. I believe the clue to the reasoning behind this is in their last sentence of this editorial: Our system does not need a “fix,” because it isn’t broken. They have indicated in this column (and last week’s) that the Star editors have no desire for electoral reform of ANY kind, and I believe they want the “status quo” vote to be so overwhelming, that it will end any talk of electoral reform for at least a decade. At least with the Globe, they indicated that they like MMP, just not this particular version of it – and they advocated another go at it. The Star has become the status-quo champion on the other hand – a disappointment from a normally progressive-minded paper.


11 comments to The Star decides to attack MMP again.

  • Notice that Aaron is  cutting and pasting this nonsense all over, but only on Pro-MMP blogs? Oh gosh and he is against MMP!

    Aaron, the referendum is tomorrow. Get over it.

  • I hope someone contacts rat bastard Frank Klee’s who has put out several paid advertisements in the ERA Banner against MMP durring the course of the election.His adds were definately paid advertisements against MMP and probably against the election act ruling, it they get heavy with bloggers they had better get on the asses of candidates like Klees.

  • Dan

    I doubt that Ontario would rule differently, given how important precedent is to our legal system.

  • Jim

    This has come up before with the previous federal election.

    Elections Canada ruled that "political blogs are a form of free expression, not political advertising."

    Granted, Elections Ontario could come to a different conclusion – but, I highly doubt it.

  • Dan


    Let us know what they say, I’d be curious to hear/read it.

  • If you or anyone else interprets the sections of the law differently, then so be it.  As I say, I am merely providing information.  If you choose to ignore that information, that is your choice.

  • Informed, or trying to intimidate everyone into silence?

    I guess we’ll see which one it is, since I’m already in contact with Elections Ontario about this.

  • I am simply keeping bloggers informed of the relevant election law.   Especially those who are going to be bound by the proposed code of conduct for prog blogs.   I leave it to Elections Ontario to decide what is in violation of their regulations.  I would hate to see good blogs get in trouble out of ignorance of election laws. 

  • Are you trying to imply I can’t talk about this editorial, Aaron? Are you also writing to the Star, admonishing them for attacking MMP yet again?

  • Lord Kitchener's Own

    How did Al Franken describe these kinds of things again?

    I believe it was "lies, and the lying liars that tell them".


  • Please note the rules dictated by Elections Ontario:
    From Section 1:
    “referendum advertising” means advertising in any broadcast, print, electronic or other medium that, (a) has the purpose of promoting a particular result in the referendum, and (b) appears during the referendum period,From Section 17:(2)  No person or entity shall arrange for or consent to referendum advertising that appears during the blackout period. O. Reg. 211/07, s. 17 (2). (3)  No broadcaster or publisher shall allow a referendum advertisement to appear during the blackout period. O. Reg. 211/07, s. 17 (3).

unique visitors since the change to this site domain on Nov 12, 2008.