Tory minority in jeopardy as opposition talks coalition. Will there be another election?

[Reccesoldier]

And your trusted source for this "information" is?

Apparently it was during a press conference.  I didn't see or hear it myself or I'd have provided proof positive.  Being quoted on SDA

 

[Blakey]

As others have mentioned...

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20081202/dion_may_081202/20081202?hub=Canada

Green party throws support behind coalition
Updated Tue. Dec. 2 2008 2:06 PM ET

CTV.ca News Staff

Green Party Leader Elizabeth May confirmed Tuesday that she has had discussions with Liberal Leader Stephane Dion about playing a role in a potential coalition government, which her party supports.

At a press conference in Ottawa, she suggested she would be open to the possibility of becoming a senator or cabinet minister, but the discussions with Dion were not specific.

:

"Double, double toil and trouble; Fire burn, and caldron bubble"
   

 

[vonGarvin]

OK, reference "French only in federal institutions in Quebec", isn't that contrary to the constitution, the one that states that Canada has two official languages, and that business conducted at the federal level may be conducted in either official language?  For example, if I go to a Canada Border Services Agency in Come-By-Chance, Newfoundland, I can do said business in French, if I so desire?

Just asking, is all...

 

[ballz]

of course May supports something undemocratic. the only reason they ever had an MP in the House was because he jumped off a whale ship and landed in the green party's rubber dingy. :

 

[Reccesoldier]

May's comments reported here http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/262947

“It’s not a parliamentary crisis, unless Mr Harper rings Parliament Hill with tanks and tries to stop the opposition members.”

Her very own troops in our cities moment

 

[PMedMoe]

Her very own troops in our cities moment

I'd love to go on that call out! 

 

[Huzzah]

Question:  If Jack Layton will be playing Curly in this "Coalition",will Dion be Larry or Moe? The Three Stooges
                in Parliament,now I've seen it all.

 

[Old and Tired]

I have been watching, reading and trying to digest this whole thing.  While I must say that this whole thing leaves me in a cold fury, from everything I can find it is permissible.  I have been able to find that according to "Roberts Rules of Parliamentary Procedure"  (http://www.rulesonline.com/) that the house of commons follows, all this is above board.  That being said, the preamble work that Layton was involved in is questionable.  According to the rules, those discussions are supposed to talk place after the Governing Party "Looses the confidence of the house and members".

As to the phone call taping stunt; unethical probably, immoral, likely. Illegal, unlikely given that:

A) the CON that recorded it was invited to participate. (Unintentional though it may have been)
B) was conducted in part by cell phone, which in Canada are considered radio transmitters.
(the Department of Justice, Criminal Code: The Current Criminal Code definition of “private
communication” provides that a communication is private when
it is made under circumstances in which it is reasonable for the
originator to expect that it will not be intercepted by any other
person than the person intended by the originator to receive it.)
I may be out of date here, (I'm still researching) but on an open transmitter there cannot be an expectation of privacy as you are utilizing public domain "Airwaves".

From what I can see, the vast majority of us are pretty much outraged that something like this can happen.  It can and it's legal.  Is it "RIGHT", I don't know, I'm not smart enough to riddle that out.

I don't really like any of the options, I do find the CON's to be the least offensive of the whole crew.  The Coalition that has been formed is perhaps the single most offensive thing I have seen come out of politics in Canada.  I think it's the mindless stupidity that the three Opposition leaders are spouting that turns me off the most.  If it weren't for the fact that I cannot in good conscience not vote, I'd just throw up my hands and say oh well, nothing I can do about it.

What pray tell is SDA?  I'd love to read, see, or hear this quote.  Makes me wonder what those people on the hill are up to.

 

[Reccesoldier]

Here you go O&T
http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/010166.html#comments

 

[Old and Tired]

Thanks for that.  How did she ever get 12,600 (+/-) people otherwise sane rational human beings to vote for her. (not the million she said on CTV when she said she'd be the only senator that received a million votes)

 

[Blakey]

Just released today, new radio ads by the Cons.

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/posted/archive/2008/12/02/new-conservative-radio-ads-reject-coalition-push-for-election.aspx
Here is one:
Listen: http://nationalpost.com/documents/081202-no-coalition-separtists.mp3


Transcript

Last election, Stephane Dion gave his word, he said his Liberals would never form a coalition with the NDP.

[Dion's voice] "Cannot have a coalition with a party that has a platform that would be damaging for the economy. Period."

But now he's cut a deal with the NDP, and he's working with separatists to make it happen. He EVEN thinks he can take power without asking you, the voter. This is Canada, power must be earned, not taken.
A paid message from Canada's Conservatives.

 

[Reccesoldier]

Thanks for that.  How did she ever get 12,600 (+/-) people otherwise sane rational human beings to vote for her. (not the million she said on CTV when she said she'd be the only senator that received a million votes)

It's a disturbing look into her psyche.  Every single vote the Greens got was "for her"...  that's scary.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Hope is not a strategy, and there is no reason to "hope" the Bloc will pull the plug suddenly.

The Bloc has demands now, and will doubtless have more in the future.  This is their chance to get goodies for their constituents/province.

The Bloc is not "in support" to a Liberal-NDP coalition; that's just spin for those who need to believe it in order to reconcile cognitive dissonance.  People who believe that line should shake off the dreamy partisan fog and regain common sense.  The Bloc is a partner, not even a silent one, notwithstanding that Duceppe negotiated fewer privileges.  He was up there handshaking with all the rest; his signature features in this alongside the other key players.  It stretches credulity a little too far to try to believe that Duceppe walked into a meeting with the NDP saying something along the lines of "Before you say anything, I don't want any cabinet positions."  Negotiations took place.  If Duceppe chose to not have any cabinet positions for the sake of a principle the Bloc adopted long ago, that's fine, but it doesn't negate his stake.  I suggest people drop the "in support" misdirection and stick to the other two lines of information operations: that the Bloc are, after all, MPs like the rest (despite not having repudiated certain key principles); and the makeoverthat is intended to reposition the Bloc as a kind, gentle, NDP-like party that just happens to confine itself to Quebec by choice.

And the Liberals are right in there with them.  They may have used the NDP as a "chinese wall", but it's a three-way deal.  The Liberals, NDP, and Bloc are, as the lawyers like to say, jointly and severally going to wear - for several years - everything that happens, especially the three-way backscratching deals and other sweetheart arrangements that aren't really related to vital interests of Canada in a time of uncertainty.  This might matter to the Liberals in the future if the aforementioned information operations don't succeed.  But they will wear it.

 

[Blindspot]

This is getting really weird now. Oliver Stone should be tapped to write and direct the movie:

Jacques Parizeau (remember him?) is expected to come out in support of Dion. Why? Because Duceppe is suffering from a backlash of hardcore separatists who are unhappy with throwing himself in with the Liberals. The only thing more unholy than an alliance involving Dion, Layton and Duceppe is an alliance of Chretien, Broadbent and Parizeau. Who the hell is running this show?

 

[Infanteer]

Jacques Parizeau (remember him?) is expected to come out in support of Dion. Why? Because Duceppe is suffering from a backlash of hardcore separatists who are unhappy with throwing himself in with the Liberals. The only thing more unholy than an alliance involving Dion, Layton and Duceppe is an alliance of Chretien, Broadbent and Parizeau. Who the hell is running this show?

No kidding.

I will again reiterate that anyone who is angry at the parties involved in the coalition has misplaced their angst.  Despite the fact that you feel you voted for Stephen Harper and the Conservatives, you didn't.  You sure as heck voted in support of them, but that support only goes so far in the way the system is currently organized.  I restate my belief that this, if nothing else, should have people directing their angst at the system itself and force the public to ask "Why isn't the system working?  Why are we only getting pluralities and minorities?  Why are the other branches of government so ineffective and the House and the PMO so powerful?

These politicians are only playing monopoly with rules we gave them.

On another note, Question Period was something else to watch today.  I think we were a few words short of one of those Taiwanese government punch-ups.  The Conservatives have reacted quickly (as we should expect when the back is against the wall) and have put all their weight into the Liberal-Bloc link.  Layton is basically a sideshow; nobody cares what he has to say while Duceppe will pipe up from time to time to defend his honor.  He doesn't really seem to care because he's enjoying his status as Kingmaker right now.  But Harper and Dion are getting downright catty.  I still contend that this may hurt the Liberals more than it hurt the Conservatives. 

Do we have a pool yet on what's going to happen?  I put 5 internet dollars on Harper proroguing Parliament in order to allow the excitement of the coalition to wear off amongst its members and the obvious sores of this Frankenstein to fester in public for a few months.  By then, the Liberals may be too caught up in their next leadership race.

 

[TCBF]

This is getting really weird now. Oliver Stone should be tapped to write and direct the movie:

Jacques Parizeau (remember him?) is expected to come out in support of Dion. Why? Because Duceppe is suffering from a backlash of hardcore separatists who are unhappy with throwing himself in with the Liberals. The only thing more unholy than an alliance involving Dion, Layton and Duceppe is an alliance of Chretien, Broadbent and Parizeau. Who the hell is running this show?

- If you want the truth, then follow a dollar bill.  Dollar bills never lie.  All of these super-annuated has-beens traipsing around Ottawa like they will own the place again?  Who is paying their hotel bills and per diem?

 

[Kirkhill]

Agreed Brad.

The Bloc is In Government, if this thing comes to fruition, but prefers not to be SEEN to be In Government.  Cardinal Richelieu, the original Eminence Grise, would be proud.

By not taking a seat in cabinet, doubtlessly on the principle that they can't swear fealty to Her Majesty, they also are not capable of being held accountable during Question Period.  They are no longer directly responsible to the House or the Canadian public.  

There goes Responsible Government.  Either they are in or they are out.  Either they swear fealty and are held accountable or else they don't in which case they have no standing in Her Majesty's eyes and can't be seen to be supporters of Her Majesty's Government.  That alone should rule out the notion that Dion can cobble a majority coalition.  The Bloc can never be part of the Government's support base and thus should be irrelevant to this discussion.

The Bloc is looking for a position in the Government that the Queen herself hasn't enjoyed since the days of the Stewarts.

 

[Kirkhill]

...
Do we have a pool yet on what's going to happen?  I put 5 internet dollars on Harper proroguing Parliament in order to allow the excitement of the coalition to wear off amongst its members and the obvious sores of this Frankenstein to fester in public for a few months.  By then, the Liberals may be too caught up in their next leadership race.

I'm in a Hot Iron mood just now.  I would prefer to see the GG put it back in the hands of the public - expense be damned.  If ever there were a time to have an election on issues now is the time.

 

[Lil_T]

I'm in a Hot Iron mood just now.  I would prefer to see the GG put it back in the hands of the public - expense be damned.  If ever there were a time to have an election on issues now is the time.

I'm right there with you.  This has gone beyond the realm of the ridiculous.

 

[Retired AF Guy]

As to the phone call taping stunt; unethical probably, immoral, likely. Illegal, unlikely given that:

A) the CON that recorded it was invited to participate. (Unintentional though it may have been)
B) was conducted in part by cell phone, which in Canada are considered radio transmitters.
(the Department of Justice, Criminal Code: The Current Criminal Code definition of “private
communication provides that a communication is private when it is made under circumstances in which it is reasonable for the originator to expect that it will not be intercepted by any other person than the person intended by the originator to receive it.)
I may be out of date here, (I'm still researching) but on an open transmitter there cannot be an expectation of privacy as you are utilizing public domain "Airwaves".

Interesting question. According to Section 184 (1) of the CC of C:

"Every one who, by means of any electro-magnetic, acoustic, mechanical or other device, wilfully intercepts a private communication is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years." Which sounds pretty serious, however, Subsection (2) has this to say:

"Saving provision

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to
(a) a person who has the consent to intercept, express or implied, of the originator of the private communication or of the person intended by the originator thereof to receive it;" (My emphasis)

In the previous section "intercept" is defined as:
"includes listen to, record or acquire a communication or acquire the substance, meaning or purport thereof;"

If I read that correctly, and if the Conservatives are telling the truth, I don't think the knee-dippers have a leg to stand-on. If they are to stupid to check the telephone numbers before sending them out, well tough titty. And further to my argument I remember a while back the Conservatives sent an email to an opposition staffer by mistake (can't remember which party) who then published it for all to see. That email would have been considered as private communication, but no one was prosecuted. However, I'm not a lawyer so I could be talking through my hat.

What pray tell is SDA?

SDA=Small Dead Animals, is a blog run by a young lady out of Saskatchewan. Its one of the top conservative blogs in Canada. [/quote]