What are the advantages/disadvantage of fixed election date?

[canuckforpeace]

The Conservative party up here has sent us a post card asking us if we want to change our current system, where the PM decides the election date.

Tired of guessing when the next election will be? Sick of having your tax dollars spent on Liberal pre-election campaigning? Why should election dates be decided at the personal whim of Paul Martin? Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party of Canada believe that elections shouldn't be called whenever Paul Martin feels like it. A Stephen Harper government would set fixed, predictable, election dates, and provide Canadians with meaningful democratic reforms.

I'd appreciate your thoughts.

Happy Thanksgiving! Hope the turkey was good.

:9

[billyoc]

1. Yeah, I never understood that,

I think England does the same thing. What if the PM never sets a date? :shrug:

[shraby]

2. Fixed date is better, but enough time between

an election and the certifying in case something like what we have going down right now in the good old U.S. of A.

[canuckforpeace]

4. But why?

Why is a fixed date better?

[robbedvoter]

11. So people would KNOW. bad enough that polling places change

many dirty tricks are played that way. I saw notifications about "voting on November 3rd"
Knowing it's the first Tuesday in November counteracts such BS.

[canuckforpeace]

3. (S)he has to set a date.

They have terms and have to announce an election before the end of their term. I don't know what the parameters are.

[leftofthedial]

5. great pun

a date for the fixed election?

[Silverhair]

6. Big disadvantage of variable dates.

To subject to temporary emotional tides.

PM has just done something that gets him high approval ratings, and calls an election, wins easily, get complete new term, even if his is poor overall.

PM is basically doing the right thing, but country is in a rough time and he has poor ratings. He needs time for his policy to work. Opponents get a vote of no-confidence, new elections, PM loses, good policies that just needed time are removed.

Of course, the flip side of this is that a poor PM, with low ratings, could be removed before his full term was complete.

Basically, I prefer a fixed term. It gives a fair chance for the policies to work and a known time schedule that everyone knows in advance for the elections.

[Djinn]

7. Australia has a similar system to Canada

an election has to be called within a timeframe but the specific date is chosen by the PM.

It's true that an election can be called just after an opinion poll hike but it's rarely done that way - a week is a long time in politics and after a 6 week campaign that high rating could have plummeted again.

The only reason I'd prefer a fixed date is we wouldn't have to put up with endless speculation on when it's called, we basically end up with "defacto" campaigns that last for months and months - but from what I can tell the US presidential election campaign seems to start way before the official start too

[Silverhair]

8. In a democracy, all politics is permanent campaigning.

And, although we grip about it, it is a good thing. It means that the politicians are mindful the WE are the boss and can fire them so they continually try to stay in our good graces. And that is a good thing, even if it does get annoying at times.

[Djinn]

10. in theory I agree

but what we currently have (and from my outsiders opinion the US has the same thing) is two parties who don't really differ much on many issues I consider pretty crucial. Both major parties are spending their time on petty and/or dubious attacking or speaking in bland offend no-one sound-bites. If we ever got to have a campaign where real ideas were debated but it's looking less and less likely these days.

[wickerwoman]

9. Not only a fixed date, should be a national holiday.

If our most important responsibility as citizens is to vote, why shouldn't it be easily accomodated?