Here are the candidates running in Egmont
It is also the only riding in the province that has changed hands over the years, shifting from the Liberals to the Conservatives and back to the Liberals.
Three candidates are running in this riding and they're listed alphabetically by first name.
Bobby Morrissey, Liberal Party
Robert (Bobby) Morrissey is the incumbent MP, having defeated former Conservative Fisheries Minister Gail Shea in 2015. Prior to the last election, Morrissey was an MLA from 1982-2000 and spent his years between politics in the private sector.
He's the former president of the Tignish Seniors Home Care Co-op and was vice-chair of Tignish Special Needs Housing.
Carol Rybinski, New Democratic Party
Carol Rybinski lives in Tyne Valley, where she owns and operates Tyne Valley Teas Café. She is a past president of the West Prince Chamber of Commerce and a board member of the P.E.I. Women's Business Association.
She also serves on the board of Friends of Tyne Valley Library and is chair of the promotions committee for the Summerside Community Choir.
Logan McLellan, Conservative Party
Born and raised in Summerside, Logan McLellan is an entrepreneur and financial adviser.
This is McLellan's second time running in Egmont. McLellan was the Conservative candidate in 2019 as well. He lost to the incumbent MP, Bobby Morrissey, by about 1,100 votes.
Other ridings
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBC
10 hours ago
- CBC
Trudeau radically overhauled the Senate — will Carney keep his reforms?
Former prime minister Justin Trudeau upended 150 years of Canadian parliamentary tradition when he dumped Liberal senators, named Independents to the upper house and generally stripped the place of partisan elements. The experiment produced mixed reviews, with some old-guard senators — those who were there well before Trudeau — arguing the Senate is now irrelevant, slower, less organized and more expensive. Some of Trudeau's appointees say the reforms have helped the Red Chamber turn the page on the near-death experience of the expenses scandal, which they maintain was fuelled by the worst partisan impulses. Defenders of the new regime say partisans are pining for a model that's best left in the dustbin of history. The Senate has been more active in amending government bills and those changes are not motivated by party politics or electoral fortunes — they're about the country's best interest, reformers say. As the debate rages internally over whether the last 10 years of change have been worth it, Prime Minister Mark Carney has said almost nothing about his vision for the upper house. Under the current model, would-be senators are recommended by an outside panel but the decision is still up to the prime minister. Most of Trudeau's early picks were strictly non-partisan but, as polls showed his party was headed for an almost certain defeat, he increasingly named Liberals to the chamber. Carney has already scrapped Trudeau's carbon tax, introduced legislation to bypass Trudeau-era regulations, repaired once-frosty relations with the provinces and taken a different approach to the trade war. All that has some senators wondering whether the non-partisan push in the Red Chamber will be the next domino to fall. In an interview with CBC Radio's The House, House leader Steve MacKinnon signalled there may indeed be more changes coming. "I think the Senate is very much a work in progress," he said. "We continue to work constructively with the Senate in its current configuration and as it may evolve. I know many senators, the various groups in the Senate and others continue to offer some constructive thoughts on that." Asked if Carney will appoint Liberals, MacKinnon said the prime minister will name senators who are "attuned to the vagaries of public opinion, attuned to the wishes of Canadians and attuned to the agenda of the government as is reflected in the election results." Carney is interested in senators who "are broadly understanding of what the government's trying to achieve," MacKinnon said. As to whether he's heard about efforts to revive a Senate Liberal caucus, MacKinnon said: "I haven't been part of any of those discussions." Alberta Sen. Paula Simons is a member of the Independent Senators Group, the largest in the chamber and one mostly composed of Trudeau appointees (she is one of them, appointed in 2018). Simons said she knows the Conservatives would scrap Trudeau's reforms at the first opportunity. What concerns her more are those Liberals who are also against the changes. "There's a fair bit of rumbling about standing up a Liberal caucus again. And I am unalterably opposed to that," she said. When the last Liberal caucus was disbanded, some of its members regrouped as the Progressive Senate Group, which now includes senators who were never Liberals. "To unscramble that omelette, whether you're a Liberal or a Conservative, I think would be a betrayal of everything that we've accomplished over the last decade," Simons said. "I think the Senate's reputation has improved greatly as a result of these changes. I think the way we are able to improve legislation has also increased tenfold. It would be foolish and wasteful to reverse that." Still, she said there's been pushback from some Trudeau appointees. Senate debates are now longer, committee hearings feature more witnesses and there's more amendments to legislation than ever before, she said. Not to mention Independent senators can't be whipped to vote a certain way. All of that makes the legislative process more difficult to navigate. "Partisan Liberals don't like the new independent Senate because they can't control it as easily," she said. Marc Gold, Trudeau's last government representative in the Senate who briefly served under Carney before retiring, said his advice to the new prime minister is to keep the Senate the way it is. "The evolution of the Senate to a less partisan, complementary institution is a good thing. I think it's a success, and I certainly hope that it continues," Gold said. On the other side of the divide, Quebec Sen. Leo Housakos, the leader of the Conservative Senate caucus, welcomes the idea of injecting some partisanship. He said, under the current model, the chamber is less influential. "The place has become, unfortunately, an echo chamber," he said. Housakos said the old Senate was more honest, when members were more transparent about their political leanings. Many of Trudeau's Independent appointees are Liberal-minded and their voting record suggests they often align with the government, Housakos said. "Look at how often they've held the government to account," he said. "Look how often they've asked the difficult questions in the moments when the government needed … their feet held to the fire." Simons sees things differently. "It's really difficult for people who've been brought up in a partisan milieu, whether they're Conservative or Liberal or New Democrat, to understand that it is actually possible to be a political actor without a team flag," she said. "It's not my job to stand for a political party." Saskatchewan Sen. Pamela Wallin is a member of the Canadian Senators Group, which is made up of non-partisan senators including some who, like her, formerly sat as Conservatives. She said the current process has produced some senators who are political neophytes, unfamiliar with the Senate's traditional role. "I don't care if somebody belongs to a political party.… I think people need to be better educated about what they're signing up for," she said. "Our job is to be an arbiter of legislation and laws put forward by the House of Commons. It's not a place where we can all ride our individual hobby horses." That's a reference to the proliferation of Senate public bills — legislation introduced by senators themselves. These bills often have no hope of passing through both chambers, while still taking time and resources to sort through. There is data to support Wallin's contention that there are more of these bills than there were before the Trudeau reforms. During Stephen Harper's last term, there were 56 Senate public bills introduced and nine of them were passed into law, according to a CBC News review of parliamentary data. By comparison, Trudeau's final session saw 92 bills introduced over a shorter time period. Only 12 of them passed — a worse success rate. In the first few weeks of this new Parliament, more than 32 such bills have already been introduced, some of them a revival of those that died on the order paper. Wallin said those bills often reflect senators' "personal interests or the interests that they've shared over a lifetime." She wants the Senate to take a "back to basics" approach. "Our job is sober second thought," she said. Wallin is also calling for better regional representation in the Senate, which may be a tricky proposition given the constitutional realities. A change in seat allocation would require cracking open that foundational document, a politically unpalatable idea. Still, Alberta separatists are agitating for change, calling the current breakdown grossly unfair. Housakos said depriving some parts of the country of meaningful representation needs to be addressed. In B.C., for example, the province's nearly six million people are represented by just six senators. P.E.I., by comparison, has four senators for about 180,000 people — an allocation formula that dates back to Confederation. "Western Canada has a legitimate beef. They are not fairly represented in the upper chamber," Housakos said. "It's probably the biggest problem that needs to be addressed." But the government isn't interested in that sort of change, MacKinnon said.
Vancouver Sun
19 hours ago
- Vancouver Sun
Electoral flashback: B.C. MLAs mull proportional representation despite voters saying no three times
VICTORIA — A B.C. legislature committee recently spent two weeks on a trip down memory lane, revisiting the debate over proportional representation that dominated three referendums over the past 20 years. The committee on democratic and electoral reform — four New Democrats, two Conservatives and one Green — was appointed to review a range of issues after the last provincial election. But in two weeks of public hearings earlier this month, most of the witnesses focused on the committee's specific mandate to examine 'models for electing members of the legislature, including proportional representation.' A daily roundup of Opinion pieces from the Sun and beyond. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Informed Opinion will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. The switch to a form of proportional representation, or PR, was an option in a referendum during the 2009 provincial election and another in a ballot-by-mail in 2018. Both times voters endorsed the existing first-past-the-post system by a decisive 61 per cent. PR got 58 per cent support in a 2005 referendum but fell short of the 60 per cent threshold set by the then B.C. Liberal government. Yet it is back on the agenda this year at the behest of the Greens. The B.C. party could have won as many as eight seats under PR in the last provincial election as opposed to the two it did win under first-past-the-post. The prospect drew a scornful submission from Bill Tieleman, political consultant, one-time press secretary to NDP Premier Glen Clark, and a leader of the successful fight against PR in the earlier referendums. 'The public has clearly spoken,' said Tieleman. 'Yet here we are again. I regret that the provincial legislature is once more examining an issue that B.C. voters have democratically, decisively, and not once but twice strongly rejected. 'The reason is clear. The B.C. Green party insisted on this committee examining proportional representation as a condition for supporting the B.C. NDP government. I get it. It's political reality. 'But this committee should not be examining electoral systems for the fourth time. It's kind of ridiculous after 20 years, when B.C. voters have heard all the arguments and voted against proportional representation with what should be finality.' Tieleman offered a shorthand take on why voters prefer the status quo to PR. 'The reason why voters strongly supported our current first-past-the-post system is that it is simple, stable and successful,' he argued. 'By comparison, proportional representation is complicated and confusing, and it removes local, accountable elected officials. It is a foreign voting system that has chronic problems where it's used.' Most of those who made submissions — electoral reform advocates, university professors, Green party members and others — disagreed. Many of their arguments for proportional representation were similar to ones mounted in the past two referendums. But I was struck by how some PR advocates have turned against the whole idea of referendums after losing two in a row. Leading the way on that score was the first speaker in the lineup, Adriane Carr, a former Vancouver city councillor and a former leader of the Greens. Referendums are too time consuming, she argued. 'Timeliness is important, so no referendum beforehand,' she argued. Rather, Carr says the government should impose proportional representation by a vote of the legislature before the next election. Then, after a term or two of governments elected under PR, it would submit the system to referendum after the fact. Fair Voting B.C. went further, declaring that 'voting reform is a civil rights issue, and referendums are not an appropriate way to settle such questions.' Rejecting the notion of bypassing referendums was Bob Plecas, a Tieleman ally in the fight against PR and a deputy minister under former Social Credit and NDP governments. 'The legislature should not unilaterally end this relationship with the voters who today directly elect their MLA, especially after 61 per cent of them have just recently rejected the idea of pro rep,' said Plecas. 'If it proceeds, it would be essential to go to a referendum including a supermajority in both vote and constituency.' The committee wrapped up hearings last week and closed the door on written submissions Friday. The members will then get to work crafting recommendations to the legislature. Their final report is due Nov. 26. If the MLAs felt bound by the majority of submissions on electoral reform, they would recommend a shift to proportional representation. But I doubt that will happen. Since dodging the PR bullet in 2018, the B.C. NDP has won back-to-back majorities under first-past-the-post. The party's provincial director, Tania Jarzabek, did propose some electoral reforms in a submission to the committee. Pointedly, she did not take a stand on PR, one way or the other. Nor can I see the Conservatives supporting an electoral system that could empower further splits in their already fractious caucus. Besides, just this past week, Research Co. reported an opinion poll on electoral reform. While respondents showed some interest in other systems for electing governments, 65 per cent said they were satisfied with the existing first-past-the-post system. I expect committee members, apart from the one Green MLA, will reach a similar conclusion in favour of the status quo and avoid a call for proportional representation, with or without a referendum. vpalmer@
Ottawa Citizen
a day ago
- Ottawa Citizen
MacDougall: Carney's cuts won't be able to hide behind Trump forever
Article content In another time, Prime Minister Mark Carney's talk of steep government spending cuts would be the talk of the town. But these aren't other times. Article content We now live in the age of Trump, and the U.S. President's ongoing trade war with the world is a story that is able to erase much of most other country's domestic news agenda. And so it is with Canada and its need to reduce spending after years of Trudeau-era bloat. Article content Article content Article content Make no mistake; Carney's cuts are major news. Finance Minister François-Philippe Champagne has told his colleagues around the cabinet table that the Liberal government must cut operational spending by 7.5 per cent for the 2026-27 fiscal year, 10 per cent the following year and 15 per cent in 2028-29. Carney has already ruled out cuts to provincial transfers and pensions and other old age supports. Article content The Liberal government has also ruled out cuts to programs like child care, pharmacare and dental care, while also committing to increased spending on defence. There is either a magic money tree in Carney's garden or pain on the way for Ottawa's army of public servants, as their salaries and benefits are a key part of 'operational spending.' Article content I'm old enough to remember the furore around the Harper government's proposed cuts to return to a balanced budget in the wake of the 2008-09 financial crisis. Indeed, I was the man who had to answer the many, many media questions about said cuts. And so it's astonishing to see how little coverage is being generated by what will be, in absolute terms, much bigger cuts. Article content Article content Of course, it helps that Trudeau grew the size of the federal public service so much that achieving a similar quantum to the Harper era would be child's play. Senior Liberals say they will achieve much of the reduction by eliminating vacant positions and 'reallocating' staff rather than giving public servants the boot. Unions like PSAC are skeptical about those promises, as well they should be. Article content Article content Enter that other great media attention hog: artificial intelligence. Everyone is now talking about AI, holding it up to be either a demon or a saviour. Carney and Evan Solomon, his new AI minister, are promising the latter, at least with respect to achieving efficiencies in program delivery without compromising service levels. But you should never trust anyone who says tough goals can be achieved without pain. Article content What's more, the kinds of improvements Canadians are looking for in their lives will not be achieved without a federal public service that's fit and firing on all cylinders. Taking a scythe through the fields of bureaucrats at the same time as they are being called on to deliver will be difficult on morale. And so it is incumbent on Carney and his ministers to be as specific as they can on what is required, and what is surplus to requirements. It is not enough to hide behind the promise of technology and operational efficiencies.
