Canada: Possible fall of government

[Jimmah]

Originally posted by: Number1

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: Number1
Liberals think they may lose some of their entitlement so what do they do? bring down the government. LOL what a bunch.

What entitlement?

Do you have the foggiest idea what you are talking about?

The Lieberals just want to get back to power so they can fill envelopes with cash and bail out their broke party a tax payers expenses. I guess when you are entitled to your entitlement like the Lieberal it just makes sense.

So you think because the Libs see the one-party Gov trick Stephen is trying to pull, oppose him trying to bankrupt every other party but his, him revoking the right for Federal employees to strike before 2011, jacking with women's rights, as a grab for power and entitlement? Fool.

I would rather a coalition government anyday, where the MAJORITY of the population has voted them in, than Stephen Harper's Conservative rule, hell any one party rule, ANYDAY.

 

[Number1]

Originally posted by: Jimmah

Originally posted by: Number1

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: Number1
Liberals think they may lose some of their entitlement so what do they do? bring down the government. LOL what a bunch.

What entitlement?

Do you have the foggiest idea what you are talking about?

The Lieberals just want to get back to power so they can fill envelopes with cash and bail out their broke party a tax payers expenses. I guess when you are entitled to your entitlement like the Lieberal it just makes sense.

So you think because the Libs see the one-party Gov trick Stephen is trying to pull, oppose him trying to bankrupt every other party but his, him revoking the right for Federal employees to strike before 2011, jacking with women's rights, as a grab for power and entitlement? Fool.

I would rather a coalition government anyday, where the MAJORITY of the population has voted them in, than Stephen Harper's Conservative rule, hell any one party rule, ANYDAY.

The only reason this coalition is possible is because the liberal's entitlements were threatened. THAT'S what got them to move. It had nothing to do with the fiscal policies. The government is quite right to take a little time to come up with a fiscal plan.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com...ry/specialComment/home

SHortly after the election Harper promised a new era of cooperation, then Thursday tried to cripple all 3 opposition parties. Unfortunately for him, it looks like he is the one who is going to end up on crutches.

 

[Jimmah]

Originally posted by: Number1

Originally posted by: Jimmah

Originally posted by: Number1

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: Number1
Liberals think they may lose some of their entitlement so what do they do? bring down the government. LOL what a bunch.

What entitlement?

Do you have the foggiest idea what you are talking about?

The Lieberals just want to get back to power so they can fill envelopes with cash and bail out their broke party a tax payers expenses. I guess when you are entitled to your entitlement like the Lieberal it just makes sense.

So you think because the Libs see the one-party Gov trick Stephen is trying to pull, oppose him trying to bankrupt every other party but his, him revoking the right for Federal employees to strike before 2011, jacking with women's rights, as a grab for power and entitlement? Fool.

I would rather a coalition government anyday, where the MAJORITY of the population has voted them in, than Stephen Harper's Conservative rule, hell any one party rule, ANYDAY.

The only reason this coalition is possible is because the liberal's entitlements were threatened. THAT'S what got them to move. It had nothing to do with the fiscal policies. The government is quite right to take a little time to come up with a fiscal plan.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com...ry/specialComment/home

SHortly after the election Harper promised a new era of cooperation, then Thursday tried to cripple all 3 opposition parties. Unfortunately for him, it looks like he is the one who is going to end up on crutches.

You're right, the Libs and NDP only moved when it messed with their money, which is very sad. Harper messing with the ability of other parties is just as sad, as it shows he wants a one party rule no matter what.


Oh, sorry about the insult, it was said in frustration but un-called for, my apologies.

 

[SickBeast]

None of the major parties in Canada seem to be able to gain any traction and form a majority. It feels like there is a change going on in the political spectrum right now. Look at the votes the Greens have been getting - they have been going up with each election by quite a dramatic rate. I think that within the next decade or two, they will be running our country, and I look forward to seeing what they can do.

For now, I think we'll be stuck with these floundering minority governments. I personally don't have much problem with a coalition or a Conservative minority.

Really I think only the Liberals are moderate enough to win a majority right now. The older generation is too stubborn to accept the Greens.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: Number1

Originally posted by: Jimmah

Originally posted by: Number1

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: Number1
Liberals think they may lose some of their entitlement so what do they do? bring down the government. LOL what a bunch.

What entitlement?

Do you have the foggiest idea what you are talking about?

The Lieberals just want to get back to power so they can fill envelopes with cash and bail out their broke party a tax payers expenses. I guess when you are entitled to your entitlement like the Lieberal it just makes sense.

So you think because the Libs see the one-party Gov trick Stephen is trying to pull, oppose him trying to bankrupt every other party but his, him revoking the right for Federal employees to strike before 2011, jacking with women's rights, as a grab for power and entitlement? Fool.

I would rather a coalition government anyday, where the MAJORITY of the population has voted them in, than Stephen Harper's Conservative rule, hell any one party rule, ANYDAY.

The only reason this coalition is possible is because the liberal's entitlements were threatened. THAT'S what got them to move. It had nothing to do with the fiscal policies. The government is quite right to take a little time to come up with a fiscal plan.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com...ry/specialComment/home

SHortly after the election Harper promised a new era of cooperation, then Thursday tried to cripple all 3 opposition parties. Unfortunately for him, it looks like he is the one who is going to end up on crutches.

Key words: Tried to cripple all the other parties.

This isn't a matter of entitlements, it's a matter of Harper trying to win the next 2-3 elections, all at once.

The 'entitlement' you are talking about was created to fund parties while making it harder for corporate interests to buy government. Personally, I think it was an excellent policy change.

Don't forget that Harper introduced this policy to force an election, not because he expected it to pass (that of course would be even better for him). He's only upset now because he might lose the vote and not get to fight another election with lame-duck leader Dion.

 

[sammyunltd]

The coalition will fail.

Harper will be reelected come Spring 2009.

 

[dennilfloss]

Harper himself considered such a coalition afew years ago when he was in the Opposition.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/546135

Around the country, many Conservatives were furious that Harper's inner circle had failed to consult more widely before delivering the fiscal update.

One senior Conservative said Harper had shot himself in the foot for ideological reasons ? much as he did when he announced $45 million in arts funding cuts last summer, which cost his party seats in Quebec in the Oct. 14 federal election.

"These guys think it's campus politics, so they get too cute by half and then f--- everything up," he said.
"We're in the middle of an economic crisis and they pull a stunt like this?"

How I miss the Progressive Conservatives.

I never cease to be amazed by the petty vindictive politics (de la petite politique mesquine) of this new brand of Blue Conservatives. Hillbilly stuff you'd expect from Boss Hogg clones in Hazard county or from My Cousin Vinnie. Robert Stanfield and Joe Clark had so much class that they'd never allowed or even considered it. Even that blowhard buffoon John Crosby was kept under a tighter leash while in Joe Clark's short-lived cabinet. Once the Mulroney clan took over, Crosby was free to go tequila-Sheila on us and Canadian politics lost much class, decorum and respect when other right-wing small-thinkers followed his example.

Of course, he wasn't the first. Rural fear-mongering, city/elite social-progressive hate, control-freakiness, and dirty politics were omnipresent under the Conservative-in-all-but-name dictature, err, government of Maurice Duplessis. Harper caters to the same crowd.

In the eulogy for his father, Justin Trudeau related an anecdote at the end of which his dad had taught him that one may disagree with the politics but one should always respect the man when the youngster had made fun of Joe Clark. I think that Harper has little respect for his fellow politicians and little respect also for us Canadians. Sadly, his example is rubbing on me and I nowaday tend to have little respect for Harper the man.

Whereas the Red Tories were lionesque and honourable, the current bunch is like a pack of hyenas. There is nothing grand or noble about them.

 

[Number1]

Originally posted by: sammyunltd
The coalition will fail.

Harper will be reelected come Spring 2009.

They keep shooting themselves in the foot. During the election they lost a massive ammount of support from Quebec with that stupid art funding cut and now, Harper is just playing stupid petty politic instead of dealing with the real problems.

I wonder how long the coalition is going to last.

 

[dennilfloss]

A coalition is one of the checks and balances in a minority parliament. Harper is showing his true Canadian Alliance face and I sure am glad he did not deceive our country into giving him and his small-minded ideologist minions a majority.

 

[desy]

Many countries have the pay per vote, problem with our its too generous, should be half of what it is , he'd have been smarter to do that than wipe it out.
The governor general has to accept that a coalition will be able to govern better and considering the one party sole purpose is the desolution of Canada I'd think that would be a hard sell.
It was the wrong play but to pretend Cretian would have done any much different is a joke Liberals have as many dirty tricks in their closet

 

[dennilfloss]

"A Governor General must take all steps necessary to thwart the will of a ruthless prime minister."

This was said by parliamentary & constitutional expert and Senator Eugene Forsey, better known for his excellent work "How Canadians govern themselves" (a must-read). Part of our parliamentary checks and balances.

http://www.parl.gc.ca/informat...ern_Themselves-6ed.pdf

Even if Harper goes to the Governor General to ask for Parliament to be dissolved and a new election be called, Her Excellency could reject that request according to Senator Forsey.

In very exceptional circumstances, the Governor General could refuse a request for a fresh election. For instance, if an election gave no party a clear majority and the Prime Minister asked for a fresh election without even allowing the new Parliament to meet, the Governor General would have to say no. This is because, if "parliamentary government" is to mean anything, a newly elected House of Commons must at least be allowed to meet and see whether it can transact public business. Also, if a minority government is defeated on a motion of want of confidence very early in the first session of a new Parliament, and there is a reasonable possibility that a government of another party can be formed and get the support of the House of Commons, then the Governor General could refuse the request for a fresh election. The same is true for the Lieutenant-Governors of the provinces.

(bold mine)

Some on the farther right side of the Canadian political spectrum question the sincerity of the would-be members of a coalition government but I bet the opposition parties are more sincere in making a workable arrangement to govern than Harper each time he vowed to work with Parliament only to go schoolyard bully on the House of Commons. The main difference is this time the other kids are standing up to the bully and he went to his mama to cry.

BTW, Steve just blinked also on banning of the right to strike by the Public Service, another right-wing idea.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/11/30/politics.html

It remains to be seen if he's still against equal pay for female employees.

 

[dennilfloss]

Here's an interesting article on some aspects of Canadian governance that are too often forgotten, most obvious lately by Harper himself.

http://www.thespec.com/article/474317

 

[dennilfloss]

Anyone remember this letter?

September 9, 2004

Her Excellency the Right Honourable Adrienne Clarkson,C.C., C.M.M., C.O.M., C.D.Governor General
Rideau Hall1 Sussex Drive
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A1

Excellency, As leaders of the opposition parties, we are well aware that, given the Liberal minority government, you could be asked by the Prime Minister to dissolve the 38th Parliament at any time should the House of Commons fail to support some part of the government?s program. We respectfully point out that the opposition parties, who together constitute a majority in the House, have been in close consultation. We believe that, should a request for dissolution arise this should give you cause, as constitutional practice has determined, to consult the opposition leaders and consider all of your options before exercising your constitutional authority. Your attention to this matter is appreciated.

Sincerely, Hon. Stephen Harper, P.C., M.P.Leader of the OppositionLeader of the Conservative Party of Canada
Gilles Duceppe, M.P.Leader of the Bloc Quebecois
Jack Layton, M.P.Leader of the New Democratic Party

 

[dennilfloss]

The videos are worth watching.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/Arti...0081130?hub=TopStories

Was any law broken by the Conservative member who secretly taped the NDP Conference? Sure looks like it.

 

[Number1]

Originally posted by: dennilfloss
The videos are worth watching.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/Arti...0081130?hub=TopStories

Was any law broken by the Conservative member who secretly taped the NDP Conference? Sure looks like it.

From the tape:

"During Saturday's conference call, Mr. Layton also is heard saying it doesn't matter what the policy issues are, they just need to defeat the Harper minority. He says he hopes a lasting coalition can be built that will survive two or three years in government."

The government was not going to be allowed to govern no mater what they did. It's all about power, nothing else.

 

[Firebot]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: Stunt
While this may look bad on Harper for those into politics...most Canadians will look at this as a power grab by Dion/Liberals/NDP.
Perceptions of the general pubic is key...Harper looks pretty clean on this one...

Why do you think people will see Harper as innocent on this? He wanted to remove public funding for political parties and effectively bankrupt everyone but the Conservatives.

You are so partisan in your views that I will never put any credence in anything you post here. You are just like the Republicans in the south that vote for them no matter what.

At least Yllus was reasonable enough to see the problem with what Harper just tried to do.

The other parties aren't going to bring them down over nothing.

Bull. So before Chretien put in the public funding, all parties were unable to fund themselves? Remember, this was put in at a time when the Liberals had a huge chunk of the votes, and was the party which benefitted the most out of this measure. The Conservatives are the party which loses the most money if this passes.

If Harper goes back on the measure to cut public funding for parties, and the Liberals and NDP force a coalition onto the Canadian public, it will cause a huge backlash within Canada. Coalitions aren't always a bad thing, but here it's very opportunistic and the last thing this country needs is the economy run by the left at it's critical point.

I disagreed with Harper's move, but the Liberal's move is much much more sadistic and power hungry.

 

[silverpig]

Man, this Canadian Watergate is making things interesting. I might have to watch CPAC tomorrow

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: Firebot

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: Stunt
While this may look bad on Harper for those into politics...most Canadians will look at this as a power grab by Dion/Liberals/NDP.
Perceptions of the general pubic is key...Harper looks pretty clean on this one...

Why do you think people will see Harper as innocent on this? He wanted to remove public funding for political parties and effectively bankrupt everyone but the Conservatives.

You are so partisan in your views that I will never put any credence in anything you post here. You are just like the Republicans in the south that vote for them no matter what.

At least Yllus was reasonable enough to see the problem with what Harper just tried to do.

The other parties aren't going to bring them down over nothing.

Bull. So before Chretien put in the public funding, all parties were unable to fund themselves? Remember, this was put in at a time when the Liberals had a huge chunk of the votes, and was the party which benefitted the most out of this measure. The Conservatives are the party which loses the most money if this passes.

If Harper goes back on the measure to cut public funding for parties, and the Liberals and NDP force a coalition onto the Canadian public, it will cause a huge backlash within Canada. Coalitions aren't always a bad thing, but here it's very opportunistic and the last thing this country needs is the economy run by the left at it's critical point.

I disagreed with Harper's move, but the Liberal's move is much much more sadistic and power hungry.

Absolutely wrong. The current funding eliminated corporate donations, at a time when the Liberals made a killing on those donations.

Harper expected to either get his way, or get another election with no Liberal leader.

I don't think he had considered the possibility of a coalition, and it's a litle amusing to see him squirm now.

That said, I wish he had tried to govern, like he said he would, instead of his very first action in the new parliament being pure political manipulation, with no regard for actual government, or his country and its citizens.

The guy's a total douche, and, with luck, people will start to realize this.

 

[Number1]

it looks like the mother fucking Lieberal BASTARD, at the lowest level of support ever from the last election will take over power. Taliban jack and his minions will get a quarter of the seats in a Ignatieff led coalition.
Granted, the conservatives brought it on themselves but FUCK, Canada deserves better then that.

FUCK.

I need a drink.

 

[Martin]

Originally posted by: Number1
it looks like the mother fucking Lieberal BASTARD, at the lowest level of support ever from the last election will take over power. Taliban jack and his minions will get a quarter of the seats in a Ignatieff led coalition.
Granted, the conservatives brought it on themselves but FUCK, Canada deserves better then that.

FUCK.

I need a drink.

No, Canada deserves better than the scheming Nixonian retard that is Harper. As someone that voted for the Cons in 2006 let me say that after their first 2 years and especially after the events of last week, I'd be more than glad to have 6 NDP ministers.

And while you're ranting and raving and foaming at the mouth, do remember that:
1) Everything the Opposition is planning is perfectly fine and within the rules.
2) half of Canadians voted for the NDP & Liberals, only just over a third voted for the conservatives. We'd end up with a more representative government than the current one.

If Harper falls right now, Conservatives might realize they need a more competent and moderate leader so he might not get to fight a 4th election. He can still save himself, he just needs to act fast - get rid of the economic statement and consult the opposition on a new one, fire Flaherty and promise no more of this everything-a-confidence nonsense.

Unless Harper takes big BIG hit, he shouldn't be allowed to keep his job.

 

[dennilfloss]

Number1,

Think you'll need more drinks. From another forum:

so, it looks like

PM: Ignatieff
Foreign Affairs: Rae
Deputy PM: Layton
Finance: Brison

Iggy's on board.:thumbsup:

http://network.nationalpost.co...and-he-isn-t-game.aspx

 

[Number1]

Originally posted by: dennilfloss
Number1,

Think you'll need more drinks. From another forum:

so, it looks like

PM: Ignatieff
Foreign Affairs: Rae
Deputy PM: Layton
Finance: Brison

Iggy's on board.:thumbsup:

http://network.nationalpost.co...and-he-isn-t-game.aspx

Are you buying?

 

[silverpig]

Originally posted by: dennilfloss
Number1,

Think you'll need more drinks. From another forum:

so, it looks like

PM: Ignatieff
Foreign Affairs: Rae
Deputy PM: Layton
Finance: Brison

Iggy's on board.:thumbsup:

http://network.nationalpost.co...and-he-isn-t-game.aspx

I heard the NDP wouldn't get the Deputy PM post...

 

[yllus]

I still disbelieve this will actually happen - I think Liberal MPs will instead just not show up for the vote - but worst case scenario, that Cabinet makeup doesn't sound that bad. I sort of despise Mr. Layton and hope that he somehow gets shut out of it, but it could be worse.

 

[dennilfloss]

People seem to forget that under our system, during an election we don't vote for a government. We elect a member to Parliament. It is up to the House of Commons to select a government within itself as they see fit. It does not have to be the party with the most votes if 50% of the House does not support that party. A coalition is therefore constitutional under our system.

BTW, The NDP will get 25% of Cabinet position but not Finance or Industry. The Bloc will support the coalition for 30 months.