this post was submitted on 21 Mar 2025
93 points (98.9% liked)

Fairvote Canada

481 readers
131 users here now

Matrix Chat


What is This Group is About?

De Quoi Parle ce Groupe?


The unofficial non-partisan Lemmy movement to bring proportional representation to all levels of government in Canada.

🗳️Voters deserve more choice and accountability from all politicians.


Le mouvement non officiel et non partisan de Lemmy visant à introduire la représentation proportionnelle à tous les niveaux de gouvernement au Canada.

🗳️Les électeurs méritent davantage de choix et de responsabilité de la part de tous les politiciens.




Related Communities/Communautés Associées

Resources/Ressources

Official Organizations/Organisations Officielles



We're looking for more moderators, especially those who are of French and indigenous identities.


Nous recherchons davantage de modérateurs, notamment ceux qui sont d'identité française et autochtone.


founded 9 months ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] AlolanVulpix@lemmy.ca 1 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (4 children)

~~Security clearances for candidates would be a slippery slope toward government agencies determining who can run for office. The solution to foreign influence isn't restricting who can participate in democracy, but ensuring our electoral system properly represents citizens. If people don't want Poilievre, they shouldn't vote for him - that's how democracy works~~.

Edit: any security clearance processes must not undermine democratic institutions

[–] SaturdayMorning@lemmy.ca 2 points 23 hours ago (3 children)

Security clearance is required. We can still allow politicians to put their names on the ballot even if they fail security clearance, but they need to go through it because I, as a voter, want to know who has the "kompromat" for any particular politicians, whose pockets are the politicians are holing up in.

[–] AlolanVulpix@lemmy.ca 2 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

I've changed my position, in response to thinking about this topic more.

I agree that security clearances can play an important role in our electoral system, but must be carefully designed. If we're going to implement a system where failing a clearance disqualifies candidates, then several critical safeguards must be in place.

The clearance process must be:

  • Administered by a truly independent, non-partisan body with clear oversight
  • Completely transparent in its methodology and criteria
  • Applied equally to all candidates regardless of party affiliation
  • Subject to meaningful appeal mechanisms through our courts
  • Protected against partisan manipulation
  • Focused only on legitimate security concerns (foreign influence, corruption)

Democracy requires that citizens have meaningful choices, but also that our electoral system is protected from malign interference. Just as we have residency requirements and other basic qualifications for office, security clearances could be viewed as another reasonable qualification in our modern context where foreign interference is a real threat.

The key distinction is between arbitrary disqualification (which undermines democracy) and reasonable, transparent standards that protect democratic integrity. If security clearances meet these strict criteria, they could legitimately serve as a qualification for office.

This position doesn't contradict support for proportional representation - in fact, they're complementary. PR ensures citizens' votes translate fairly into representation, while security clearances help ensure those representatives aren't compromised by foreign interests.

[–] SaturdayMorning@lemmy.ca 2 points 22 hours ago (1 children)

I think this is well thought and I agree with "This position doesn’t contradict support for proportional representation - in fact, they’re complementary. PR ensures citizens’ votes translate fairly into representation, while security clearances help ensure those representatives aren’t compromised by foreign interests."

[–] AlolanVulpix@lemmy.ca 2 points 21 hours ago

I agree that security clearances and proportional representation address different but complementary aspects of democratic integrity.

What makes these complementary is that both strengthen democratic legitimacy in different ways: PR ensures fair translation of votes to seats, while security clearances maintain the integrity of those representatives once elected.

In today's complex geopolitical environment, we need both representative fairness and institutional safeguards to create a resilient democracy that truly represents citizens while remaining protected from external manipulation.