Breaking News: Canadian Government to Fall, Liberal and NDP Parties Negotiating Coalition Government

Originally posted by matth
Agreed, the Tory's do have the most seats, but they do not have enough to form a majority government. Therefore, if the NDP and Liberals formed this coalition government they are currently trying to work out, then they would have enough democratically elected seats in Parliament to topple the Conservatives, while using their seats to continue running the government (as a coalition majority)...hence, no election would be needed. It's kind of a back door, slimy way to do things, but it's legal and it works.

I've never heard this before. I'm not doubting you but can you provide some info on this?

@Rook. I believe that many in Quebec would vote for Justin, they are into the "legacy" thing but outside of Quebec I doubt you'd see the same thing happen.

Originally posted by intrepid

Originally posted by matth
Agreed, the Tory's do have the most seats, but they do not have enough to form a majority government. Therefore, if the NDP and Liberals formed this coalition government they are currently trying to work out, then they would have enough democratically elected seats in Parliament to topple the Conservatives, while using their seats to continue running the government (as a coalition majority)...hence, no election would be needed. It's kind of a back door, slimy way to do things, but it's legal and it works.

I've never heard this before. I'm not doubting you but can you provide some info on this?

@Rook. I believe that many in Quebec would vote for Justin, they are into the "legacy" thing but outside of Quebec I doubt you'd see the same thing happen.

Quebec would vote on the legacy, Ontario would vote for the non-PC party. That is all they need in this messed political system to win.

reply to post by Rook1545

Personally, I believe that the solution to getting one government to work for the entire country, would be first to unify our country. I personally believe that we are a very divided country and that has to stop, because the political lines always seem to be behind every other divisional line that is drawn in our country.

I can think of tons of inter-provincial squabbles going on both inside and out of politics. Then there are the racial and ethnic divides that plague us, while we have a national political party that is actually a provincial separatist group with more seats in the House of Commons than the NDP and a white man in charge of Native Affairs.

Once all Canadians, from the lower class right up to the upper class, stop blaming the Liberals or Conservatives (the people, not the party/politicians), the Albertans or Quebecers and the whites or the natives, depending on what location you live in this country, and realize that ALL of our problems are Canadian problems that need to be solved together, then I think that things will move forward here in Canada. But I think the politicians would be more happy to just keep us divided.

Originally posted by Rook1545
Quebec would vote on the legacy, Ontario would vote for the non-PC party. That is all they need in this messed political system to win.

I don't know man. Is it just a weak Lib. leader that let to this:

en.wikipedia.org...

Would Trudeau make a significant difference in Ontario?

Edit: Damn link didn't work. Click on the nations map, lower right, to enlarge.

[edit on 28-11-2008 by intrepid]

Originally posted by intrepid

Originally posted by matth
Agreed, the Tory's do have the most seats, but they do not have enough to form a majority government. Therefore, if the NDP and Liberals formed this coalition government they are currently trying to work out, then they would have enough democratically elected seats in Parliament to topple the Conservatives, while using their seats to continue running the government (as a coalition majority)...hence, no election would be needed. It's kind of a back door, slimy way to do things, but it's legal and it works.

I've never heard this before. I'm not doubting you but can you provide some info on this?

I actually just recently heard of this loophole myself. I cannot find the original article I was reading about it last night on the CBC website, however I did find this information on the process from another CBC news article about the situation:

The House of Commons is scheduled to vote on the package on Monday. If the opposition parties oppose the Conservative motion, they could topple the government and then request that the Governor General allow them to form a coalition government.

The Liberals were second in the Oct. 14 election with 77 seats to the Conservatives' 143, and would require the support of both the Bloc and New Democrats to form a coalition.

The Bloc holds 49 seats, the New Democrats have 37 and two MPs are Independents.

All parties appeared to be digging in their heels on Friday.

"We are deadly serious about opposing this measure," Liberal MP John McCallum told CBC News. "We will vote against it. Every Liberal. There is no doubt about it.

The Liberal finance critic called the mini-budget "pathetic and pernicious" for failing to take action on the economy and claiming to balance the budget in the face of several economist reports predicting a deficit.

Source:
CBC News

So basically, they would have to topple the government in a non-confidence motion as per usual, but then they can form a coalition government if they have enough seats/votes to do so, which is what the parties are currently negotiating now.

reply to post by matth


I agree with you. Either we fix it, and all get behind the idea of "Canada", or each province goes its own way. I do see a better solution to that though. Why not a more "American" approach to our provinces? Why not make them more accountable for regulating things? We have seen that what works in Quebec does not work anywhere else (the language laws). They should expand that. Using the gun registry as an example. Have places like Ontario and Quebec go through it if they really want it. Leave Alberta and Saskatchewan to their own devices.

Goal:

That's more or less how I see it too. Harper's way to smart to let himself get destroyed by a recession. If he forces his government to fall, then we will know for sure.

Originally posted by matth
The House of Commons is scheduled to vote on the package on Monday. If the opposition parties oppose the Conservative motion, they could topple the government and then request that the Governor General allow them to form a coalition government.

That sounds like rolling the dice. They would have to topple the government first. What if the Jean refuses this request? That would me another election and then you'd get a majority. Only it would be a Tory majority.

Edit: Because I suck at BB code today.

[edit on 28-11-2008 by intrepid]

Originally posted by Rook1545
reply to post by matth

 

I agree with you. Either we fix it, and all get behind the idea of "Canada", or each province goes its own way. I do see a better solution to that though. Why not a more "American" approach to our provinces? Why not make them more accountable for regulating things? We have seen that what works in Quebec does not work anywhere else (the language laws). They should expand that. Using the gun registry as an example. Have places like Ontario and Quebec go through it if they really want it. Leave Alberta and Saskatchewan to their own devices.

That is something that I would be open to, so long as it was decided via a national referendum and not just a decision made in each provincial legislature or on the House of Commons. I would be concerned about the possible Pandora's Box it could open, but if it came to that point, it would probably be the best plan on the table; however I still believe strongly in national unity being the best solution for facing international pressures as well as solving our domestic problems.

reply to post by intrepid


Intrepid:

I don't think Jean would willingly send the country to the polls again so soon. She would probably be badly criticised in the press for it and people would generally be pi**ed off. I know I would. No she'll shif the onus onto the Libs and NDP, so that if they can't figure it out, it will be their fault....and they do not want to be the cause of another election either....not to mention that the Libs still have Dion as a leader right now.


I see three possibilities:

1)Harper backs off (maybe, unless he is trying to make his Gov fall)
2)Libs back off (no way)
3)Libs and NDP form Government


[edit on 28-11-2008 by Silenceisall]

Originally posted by intrepid

Originally posted by matth
The House of Commons is scheduled to vote on the package on Monday. If the opposition parties oppose the Conservative motion, they could topple the government and then request that the Governor General allow them to form a coalition government.

That sounds like rolling the dice. They would have to topple the government first. What if the Jean refuses this request? That would me another election and then you'd get a majority. Only it would be a Tory majority.

Edit: Because I suck at BB code today.

[edit on 28-11-2008 by intrepid]

You make an excellent point! The problem being, however, is that the Governor-General position is really only a figurehead position, and although it will have to be her that makes the official call, she will simply do what is requested of her.

If she didn't, it would be the equivalent of her refusing to dissolve Parliament after the Opposition voted it down, or for her to read a Throne Speech she herself wrote as opposed to the one the Prime Minister writes for her to present. She will do what is asked of her based on Canadian law, because it is her job as a figure-head.

Originally posted by Silenceisall
I see three possibilities:

1)Harper backs off (maybe, unless he is trying to make his Gov fall)
2)Libs back off (no way)
3)Libs and NDP form Government
[edit on 28-11-2008 by Silenceisall]

Funny you should mention that, as Stephen Harper has just announced that he will be cutting the motion that eliminates public funding for political parties from his "Economic Update" that will be voted on Monday. Well played, Harper.

So now he has backed off on one of the major issues, and if the Opposition backs down, they will look like huge slimeballs as it will be apparent that they were in fact only worried about their public funding, and not the general economy of the country. However, if they call Harper out over the other issues with this "Economic Update", then Harper is sure to fall Monday regardless.

If we were playing Texas Holdem right now, I would say that Harper and the Conservatives just went all in with a K,10 off-suit and are hoping to God that nobody calls them to see the flop (I hope that made sense)...source here:

Conservatives Cut Party Funding From Key Motion

The ball is in the Opposition's court now...

I would never want to see a US form of democracy here, with the leader being elected separately. I don't think the leader is important, and in fact would like that position shared by a jury duty of Canadians 50/50 men and women. I want proportional democracy and I want it ASAP, because everything else is a psuedo democracy.

[edit on 28-11-2008 by mystiq]

Post removed

[edit on 28-11-2008 by Silenceisall]

Personally I think Harper was forced by the new political movement in the US, in conjunction with the decisions of the world's cabal to fold this government. There is no way he would have done such a transparent and obvious thing as attempt to scrap something that was definately going to be defeated.

Edit to add: they probably want something that will be bossed around by the European Union, and somehow marry us up to that nightmare. I will scream treason and insist if we want to form a coalition with any other countries, only Norway, Sweden, Finland will do.

[edit on 28-11-2008 by mystiq]

Originally posted by mystiq
I would never want to see a US form of democracy here, with the leader being elected separately. I don't think the leader is important, and in fact would like that position shared by a jury duty of Canadians 50/50 men and women. I want proportional democracy and I want it ASAP, because everything else is a psuedo democracy.

[edit on 28-11-2008 by mystiq]

I see where you're coming from there, but your comment brings up an interesting question...is there any true democracy?

I really don't mean to go off topic here, but think about it...when the majority rules, no matter what, corruption follows. Because as soon as the masses start deciding their own fate, the masses open themselves up to manipulation and control. I believe that in order for true democracy to work, you need a fully educated society that can think for themselves. Because we do not have that society (nor do I know of one that exists currently in the world), the masses will always be open to manipulation and control, therefore whoever controls the masses, controls the "democracy", hence, it's not a real democracy.

I think democracy in general is a very flawed political system, but at the same time there's nothing really out there that's any better...so, if you have to pick the best of the worst for a political system in Canada, and unity isn't an option, then I think the provinces should be able to have some more freedoms from Ottawa to see how they can manage.

Originally posted by mystiq
I would never want to see a US form of democracy here, with the leader being elected separately. I don't think the leader is important, and in fact would like that position shared by a jury duty of Canadians 50/50 men and women. I want proportional democracy and I want it ASAP, because everything else is a psuedo democracy.

[edit on 28-11-2008 by mystiq]

The problem is that the leader is important. It is the leader who is in the debates. It is the leader who steers the direction of the country. Your "jury duty" idea would not work. How you meet with other foreign leaders? Who is going to be the voice for our country on an international level? You would have to assign a leader of that group. If you want the proportional democracy, then you need so many french people, so many women, so many of every different racial group on this panel that it will no longer become feasible. Besides proportional would not be 50/50 men and women, it would need to be a proper representation of our country.

reply to post by Rook1545


Well, we have Dr. Ruby Dhalla, that count for 2 of the points. She smokin too:

Originally posted by intrepid
reply to post by Rook1545

 

Well, we have Dr. Ruby Dhalla, that count for 2 of the points. She smokin too:

haha yeah I watched her riding during the election. Who would win? The hot Liberal, or the hot Conservative? It was gripping Canadian content for once.

reply to post by Rook1545

I think Dr. Dhalla, Rona Ambrose, and a returning Belinda Stronach should form a CGMC, known in elite Ottawa circles as a Coalition Government of Milfs and Cougars.

[edit on 28-11-2008 by matth]