• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

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

:)  Nope you you hammered at almost all my points.

Canadians spoke for themselves when they elected a Parliament that had a majority of members that subscribe to Keynesian economics.  Even the conservatives said they would come forward with a stimulus package.

The reasoning for public funding of political parties is actually sound,  with good reasons for and against.  Independent of ones position on the issue, knowing how the opposition would be affected by its removal,  one can see there was no way it was going to pass.  This was a factor that started off this 'crisis'. Provoking the wrath of others,  expect wrath. 

I'm glad you feel comfortable with giving away your rights,  funny thing,  rights are allot easier to give away than to get back.  They're also the kind of thing that seems silly, until you need them. 
 
Had both [to strike/ can't strike] in the same job, prefered not to have them. An opinion from one who had BTDT and knows most of his civil servant co-workers would rather not finance our own raises with the saved money from us not getting paid for months....
 
Just to play devils advocate here......Suppose Dion succeeds in getting to power with Bloc and NDP support......... what's to say in 8 or 10 weeks, this marriage of the damned breaks up? The Liberals would be then caught in one massive predicament as they don't command anywhere near enough seats to get anything passed in parliament on their own. Let's face the facts.... the Liberals, Bloc and NDP are all saying here and now that they can work together to run an efficient government that will help this COuntry through this tough crisis..... but these are the SAME people who just 6 weeks ago passed the throne speech to let the Conservatives run with the ball.

Now why should anyone for one second believe that they'll all be pulling in the same direction as a coalition party? The 3 parties united all have VERY different agendas and the 3 of them running government together is not going to work. How many Canadians would want Jack Layton as PM? If this coalition is allowed to take power, Jack Layton and the NDP party will now have power that far exceeds what their seat representation suggests they should have.

Hopefully, this coalition doesn't get into power, because if they do, this circus is just going to continue.
 
As a side note.... glad to see I wasn't the only one thinking of how this could directly affect me......... If this coalition takes power, can they decide that the new FOA allowance and retroactive backpay is a waste of money and s***can it? Or is that a guarenteed thing?
 
Zell_Dietrich said:
When the non confidence vote happens, and it will,  the GG by tradition will ask the collation to form the government. 

How can that be a tradition? It's never happened.
 
This certainly doesn't exactly instill confidence, IMHO

My fave from this story:
Jean Lapierre, broadcast journalist and former Liberal MP, mocked the party's video address.
"This was the cheapest video. I don't know if the Liberal party has financial problems, but they didn't have to go to a high school kid to get their video made," he said on CTV's Mike Duffy Live. "You ask people to forget about their normal TV show tonight. We did that on TVA. We had a million people waiting for a show call 'Le Poulet' -- 'The Chicken.' We didn't even get the egg!"

 
I find it funny... I can't believe Harper is trying to scare everybody with the "separatist" thing...
I live in Quebec and I have to say that Harper talks about the separation of Quebec more than anybody here.
This is an old idea that has expired a long time ago (1995) and the social and political situation in Quebec has changed and I can guarantee that if there is another referendum (and I don't think that there is going to be another one ever) the yes would get maximum 30% and I am being generous.

Things have changed and I feel that the separatist movement is limited to a circle of politicians, artists and some citizens (but not every proud Québécois is a separatist)
But I am very disappointed that Harper is using this to influence Canadians, because lately we have heard very nasty things about Quebec from the rest of Canada, and unfortunately that is one thing that could feed the separatist movement.

my 2 cents
 
john10 said:
Paul Martin was responsible for managing a budget of $160bn+. Do you really expect him to have known how every increment of tens of millions was spent or mis-spent? It's a pretty silly allegation.

Yes I do.  I did budget reports and the people I reported to were aware of where every penny went.  The amount of the budget doesn't matter - 1 billion or 160 billion if you are responsible then you should know where millions of dollars are going.
 
In making her decision, the GG must place the priority of Canada above school yard shenanigans of Parliament.

As Commander in Chief of our Armed Forces, at a time when we have troops under fire in combat in Afghanistan, she must evaluate the morality of having a Separatist Party operating in a de facto coalition government of  the country the troops serve.

Bad move.
 
drunknsubmrnr said:
How can that be a tradition? It's never happened.

Canada has had two coalition government in it's history, though never quite under circumstances like this.

During the defeat of the Joe Clark government the GG of the time stated he was waiting to hear if the opposition had a plan to for a coalition government.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20081204/gg_schreyer_081204/20081204?hub=TopStories
 
the_girlfirend said:
I find it funny... I can't believe Harper is trying to scare everybody with the "separatist" thing...
I live in Quebec and I have to say that Harper talks about the separation of Quebec more than anybody here.
This is an old idea that has expired a long time ago (1995) and the social and political situation in Quebec has changed and I can guarantee that if there is another referendum (and I don't think that there is going to be another one ever) the yes would get maximum 30% and I am being generous.

Things have changed and I feel that the separatist movement is limited to a circle of politicians, artists and some citizens (but not every proud Québécois is a separatist)
But I am very disappointed that Harper is using this to influence Canadians, because lately we have heard very nasty things about Quebec from the rest of Canada, and unfortunately that is one thing that could feed the separatist movement.

my 2 cents
What then, is the goal of the PQ and the BQ?  Promoting Quebecois values?  I would argue that though they don't currently speak of "sovereignty", it's never far from their minds.  If Quebecois don't mind sitting in perpetual opposition (the proposed coalition notwithstanding), then go ahead and vote BQ.
 
Mortarman Rockpainter

Actually, the PQ is not so popular these days, I am anxious to see the result of the election on December 8th.  ;D
But I can tell you that a lot of people vote PQ because they hate the liberals, and because they think it is the only other valuable option.
Many people who voted for the PQ would be against another referendum.

And the Bloc Québécois is only defending the interests of Quebec in Ottawa and again many people vote Bloc because they think it is their best option, it is far from being a vote for l'indépendance du Québec.

And yes these parties promote l'indépendance, but I can tell you that the population is not for it... it is an old politician's dream, can you imagine how proud Pauline Marois would be if she succeed where everybody else failed!!!

L'indépendance is an old dream that is just not relevant anymore, and it is only a matter of time before we all forget about it.
 
the_girlfirend said:
Mortarman Rockpainter

Actually, the PQ is not so popular these days, I am anxious to see the result of the election on December 8th.  ;D
But I can tell you that a lot of people vote PQ because they hate the liberals, and because they think it is the only other valuable option.
Many people who voted for the PQ would be against another referendum.

And the Bloc Québécois is only defending the interests of Quebec in Ottawa and again many people vote Bloc because they think it is their best option, it is far from being a vote for l'indépendance du Québec.

And yes these parties promote l'indépendance, but I can tell you that the population is not for it... it is an old politician's dream, can you imagine how proud Pauline Marois would be if she succeed where everybody else failed!!!

L'indépendance is an old dream that is just not relevant anymore, and it is only a matter of time before we all forget about it.

I think that the people of Quebec vote for the Bloc, as it is seen to represent their interests as a distinct society within Canada, rather than as an entity to separate from Canada (even though that was the initial mandate when the party formed).

I believe that Mr. Harper with his talk of the separatists, is alienating what support he had in the province. But this is just my opinion.
 
reccecrewman said:
Just to play devils advocate here......Suppose Dion succeeds in getting to power with Bloc and NDP support......... what's to say in 8 or 10 weeks, this marriage of the damned breaks up? The Liberals would be then caught in one massive predicament as they don't command anywhere near enough seats to get anything passed in parliament on their own. Let's face the facts.... the Liberals, Bloc and NDP are all saying here and now that they can work together to run an efficient government that will help this COuntry through this tough crisis..... but these are the SAME people who just 6 weeks ago passed the throne speech to let the Conservatives run with the ball.

Now why should anyone for one second believe that they'll all be pulling in the same direction as a coalition party? The 3 parties united all have VERY different agendas and the 3 of them running government together is not going to work. How many Canadians would want Jack Layton as PM? If this coalition is allowed to take power, Jack Layton and the NDP party will now have power that far exceeds what their seat representation suggests they should have.

Hopefully, this coalition doesn't get into power, because if they do, this circus is just going to continue.

This coalition of the inept seems set to self destruct even before it starts:

Micheal Ignatieff will not sit in the cabinet of a putative coalition government. One only wonders what the estimated 30-50 MP's who support him think.

At least one Liberal MP has openly condemned this action (Frank Valeriote)

Jack Layton comes to the networks demanding equal time to the other party leaders (without telling the leader of his own coalition), believing he is an equal partner rather than the junior one (and has the fewest seats to contribute to the coalition to boot).

The public is reacting in fury and disbelief as the price the BQ demanded is being revealed ($1 Billion immediate transfer to Quebec, killing the national securities regulator, preventing the adjusting of electoral boundaries and seat assignments due to population changes etc.)

Rumors abound that 12+ MP's will quit their caucus and sit as independents to quell the crisis. I'm pretty certain none of these are CPC MP's. Will they be welcomed back into their Party caucus later?
 
Just in from Canadian Press - highlights mine.....
Prime Minister Stephen Harper has asked the Governor General to shut down Parliament until January.

It's a bid to avoid Monday's non-confidence vote that would bring down his minority Conservative government.

Harper - his job on the line - spent more than 45 minutes at Rideau Hall talking with Michaelle Jean.

The Governor General has already been consulting with constitutional experts about her options, but it's unclear when she will announce her decision.

The opposition coalition has told Jean that Harper no longer enjoys the confidence of the House of Commons and asked her to refuse prorogation.

The Liberal and NDP leaders have requested a meeting with Jean before she makes her decision.
 
While the BQ does have Indépendentiste roots, they've been in ottawa for so long that, to say their root reason for being there is the secession of Quebec from the rest of Canada - must be rethought.

In 1990 the party was initially intended to be temporary and was given the goal of the promotion of sovereignty at the federal level.  Given that we are closing in on being around for some 20 years now, I believe that they should be considered a regional party pure and simple - they are in Ottawa looking after their constituents interests, pure and simple.  They figure they can align themselves with either the party in power OR with the party(ies) in opposition as a means to an end.... I personally consider that by doing so they are marginalizing themselves - but that's their choice.
 
At least some MPs are truly representing the interest of their ridings by taking a stand agaisnt coalition.

This whole coalition smacks of being morally wrong. Enough of the Harper did this and did that. His part had the more seats then the other parties and he was elected Prime Minister.

There is no way to put window dressing on this coalition, it is ugly and a filthy grab for power.

People who are saying that the majority of Canadians wanted this are right out to lunch.

The people who voted NDP, wanted Jack layton and the NDP.

The people who voted Grenn Party, wanted Elizabeth may and the green party.

You get the picture?

People who are saying that Harper brought this on are not using ANY logic at all (Zell, I am calling you on!)

 
A former GG speaks out. His Excellency was (according to rumor) prepared to use his reserve powers in the event of a constitutional crisis surrounding the repatriation of the constitution, so his opinion carries weight. On the other hand, the final half of the article is clear partisan hackery. Pay attention to what His Excellency has to say:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081204.wparlmartin04/BNStory/Front

One governor-general to another: Don't aid in evading Parliament's will

LAWRENCE MARTIN
December 4, 2008 at 12:09 AM EST

The heat is on Governor-General Michaëlle Jean – and it's coming from a former governor-general.

Ed Schreyer said in an interview yesterday that granting a wish for the prorogation of Parliament at this point would constitute an evasion of the process of Parliament and should not be done.

“I'll put it this way and I will make this a plain-spoken sentence. Nothing should be done to aid and abet the evasion of submitting to the will of Parliament. I think one can stop there. It's about as basic as that.”


With a new Parliament having just opened, the only circumstances to justify prorogation, Mr. Schreyer said, would be a genuine emergency. “The only emergency seems to be a desire [of the Harper government] to avoid facing Parliament. That is not an emergency.”

Ms. Jean is under no obligation to listen to Mr. Schreyer, but his observations go to the heart of a problem she faces. No governor-general should be seen to be in the business of closing down Parliament for the crassly political reason of saving a government from almost certain defeat on a confidence motion.

The driving imperative of the Harper government's adjournment request is survival. Ms. Jean knows that last Friday the Prime Minister stood in the House of Commons foyer and announced that the opposition would be allowed a confidence vote on Dec. 8. She knows that his reason for wanting to renege on that vow is that he is likely to lose that vote. To grant prorogation could make her look complicit in the Prime Minister's political power play.

That's the type of thing, Mr. Schreyer said, that has to be avoided. Speaking of political neutrality, he said: “I regard that as the sine qua non of the office. … What the Governor-General must not do is start canvassing because that too quickly comes to destroy respectful neutrality, political neutrality.”

She must also consider the danger of setting an unacceptable precedent.
Granting prorogation in dire circumstances for a government is tantamount to saying it should be granted at any time – that the governor-general should be a rubber stamp in the process. That means any time a minority Parliament is in trouble, facing a confidence vote, the prime minister could simply prorogue to head off the crisis. (interpolation: either precedent is bad; what is the least bad choice?)

Paul Martin could have done so in the fall of 2005 and avoided losing an election campaign that extended over Christmas. John Diefenbaker could have tried it in the early 1960s. Joe Clark could have tried it in 1979, though Mr. Schreyer said he's not sure he would have granted it.

Those leaders may have had second thoughts, realizing that the governor-general of the day might have turned them down. But with the precedent of a go-ahead for Mr. Harper, why would any future PM hesitate?

Mr. Schreyer, who served as NDP premier of Manitoba, was appointed governor-general by Pierre Trudeau in 1979. He later campaigned for the NDP in the 1999 Manitoba election. While his political bias is clear, he said he was speaking from the point of view of his experience at Rideau Hall. He said he didn't want to get into giving advice to Ms. Jean, but his strong views will certainly be interpreted as such.

In an earlier interview with the CBC, Mr. Schreyer, who favours the Liberal-NDP coalition being allowed to form a government, would not give his view on prorogation, saying he hadn't yet thought it through. But that has become the critical issue. Many are talking as though the die is cast, that the Governor-General is very likely to accept the Prime Minister's request to adjourn Parliament. The prevailing sentiment appears to be that Ms. Jean will, indeed, grant prorogation, that a timeout is needed, that cooler heads should prevail – until late January.

This could well be the solution for the Harper Conservatives. By then, with the Prime Minister outfoxing the opposition at every turn, they might be able to put this crisis to bed. The Conservatives have gained ground over the past two days with an impressive blitzkrieg of demagoguery, painting the opposition deal as a separatist coalition. Mr. Harper, whose Conservatives have had many close ties to the Bloc Québécois, went so far yesterday as to label the opposition pact “a plan to destroy Canada.”

The Liberals, meantime, have been woefully inadequate in Question Period, steamrollered by the Tory onslaught. They've missed a golden opportunity to paint Mr. Harper as a coward running away from his promise of a confidence vote.

Given a few weeks time, the Conservatives will be able to flesh out an economic plan while bombarding the airwaves with their propaganda machine. The coalition will see its support fritter away. Their only chance is to strike now. They had better hope Michaëlle Jean listens to Ed Schreyer.(interpolation. Covering the news or writing an editorial are we? At any rate the government has already "fleshed out an economic plan", and are sitting on a series of options based on what Washington might do after the inauguration. The coalition has yet to present any real plan with numbers, recipients of the payoff [excuse me, "stimulus"] or any other reason we, the people, should think of them as prepared to govern. If Her Excellency follows the advice given here, she should also call an election so these issues can be placed in the open).
 
Back
Top