Governor General agrees to suspend Parliament

Originally posted by OldMedic,,,the Liberals and the NDP... have proven that they are immoral, stand for nothing at all, and are nothing but power mad politicians that do not give a damn about Canada.

So why were all these measures OK when contemplated by Harper? Why was it ok to use the Bloc to achieve a majority vote on 2 budgets? Why was it ok for Harper to team up with Layton and Duceppe and suggest to the GG that they could form a coalition in '04? Sorry, ya can't suck and blow at the same time.

The government has lost the confidence of the house. Therefore, the oppostion is justified in forming a government. Doesn't matter who occupies what position, it is entirely legal and ethical. Harper pissed in the pickles instead of playing nice...and he is being held to account. Quit crying.

reply to post by Trayen11

Read your CDN. political history the opposition party or parties are allowed to cast a vote of no confidence on any tabled legislation or vote. That is the way the system works any elected minority can be booted from office.

While you may be one of the few who voted for Bush Lite (Harper), I as sure would prefer even the Bloc party next to George Bush's flunky clone! The whole point of this confidence vote is that Harper's gov't has lost the confidence of the House of Parliament.

If Harper was such a good Prime Minister he would be able to get a few votes from across the floor to get thru this but he is way too arrogant, stupid and selfish to act in a partisan manner.

Originally posted by anti-baphomet
What part of Commonwealth do people not understand???

There is no part of Commonwealth that I do not understand. Let me refresh for those who might have problems with that term:

The Commonwealth of Nations, usually known as the Commonwealth, is a voluntary association of 53 independent sovereign states, most of which are former British colonies, or dependencies of these colonies (the exceptions being the United Kingdom itself and Mozambique).

No single government in the Commonwealth, British or otherwise, exercises power over the others, as in a political union. Rather, the relationship is one of an international organisation through which countries with diverse social, political, and economic backgrounds are regarded as equal in status, and co-operate within a framework of common values and goals, as outlined in the Singapore Declaration.[1] These include the promotion of democracy, human rights, good governance, the rule of law, individual liberty, egalitarianism, free trade, multilateralism, and world peace,[2] and are carried out through multilateral projects and meetings, as well as the quadrennial Commonwealth Games. The symbol of this free association is Queen Elizabeth II, known for this purpose as Head of the Commonwealth. This position, however, does not imbue her with any political or executive power over any Commonwealth member states; the position is purely symbolic, and it is the Commonwealth Secretary-General who is the chief executive of the organization.

en.wikipedia.org...

We are not subject to the British Crown. Anyone that has told you otherwise is misinformed.

On to the gang on the Hill -

Nobody is to blame for this but Harper. He got so used to the opposition rolling over and playing dead, he tried to introduce a motion to kill them by cutting funding and the other thing nobody seems to care about, removing public servants right to strike. I'm OK with making Canada Post an essential service, but not with extending that to every public servant in Canada.

While I can understand that folks don't like the idea of taxpayer money going to the parties, there is a reason it's done that way. That taxpayer funding was set up when the rules changed and it became illegal for corporations and unions to donate to the parties. Up until then, the parties were funded by special interest groups and now they raise funds from individual donations and get their taxpayer subsidy based on number of votes received. I'd much rather see taxpayer funding instead of corporate and union funding.

Not that I'm giving the other parties a free ride, but I'm not upset with them either. They played a damn good game and it was by the book. But honestly, how could they back right off after Harper changed his tune and said the funding would stay? That's like saying 'yes, we only care about the money'. They probably are, but they will never admit it. The end result is they put the government on notice that they can't act like they have a majority and that is what is best for this country right now. Restraint and cooperation.

If Harper does present a reasonable and not politically motivated budget in January and the coalition still votes it down, then I will be annoyed with them. But not until then.

Another thought - after Harper's address to the country, he can kiss goodbye to the seats in Quebec, the ones that would have given him his majority govt. All the gains he made in Quebec over the past two years - gone in less time than it takes me to do a load of laundry.

Originally posted by Duzey Nobody is to blame for this but Harper. He got so used to the opposition rolling over and playing dead, he tried to introduce a motion to kill them by cutting funding and the other thing nobody seems to care about, removing public servants right to strike.

I agree with your assessment, and add the third thing that the evil dwarf Flaherty proposed: That pay equity for women be removed from the Canadian Human Rights Commission and become, instead, a collective bargaining item. Every woman in the country should take umbridge that to these clowns, equal work for equal pay is irrelevant.

Originally posted by spitefulgod
How does this affect things in relation to someone stating.. "let's join the north american union!!" Do these changes make it harder or easier to achieve that goal?

I'll try to answer your question.

In a minority situation with our current seat distribution, it would be very difficult for a motion like that to pass. It would have to be supported by the Cons and the Libs or the Cons and the NDP. The Libs and the NDP, the only two parties that would actually cooperate, wouldn't have enough votes on their own because there is no way the Bloc would ever vote for something like that. They want to be seperate and a NAU is the complete opposite of that.

In a majority situation, the only person with the power to stop it would be the Governor General, by withholding Royal Assent on the bill. This is traditionally nothing more than a rubber-stamp exercise and no GG has never withheld RA in Canadian history, but they do have the power to refuse.

This is actually why I like the GG - not the NAU specifically, but if our government ever tried to do something absolutely horrible, Canadians would have somewhere to turn.

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck
Every woman in the country should take umbridge that to these clowns, equal work for equal pay is irrelevant.

I keep forgetting that one, thanks for reminding me. That's just an extension of the previous session, where they shut down 75% of Status of Women Canada offices (12 of 16), slashed the budget by nearly 40% and removed the words 'womens equality' from their legal mandate.

I think the current situation was initiated by Jack Layton, an egotist and power hungry, who saw a unique opportunity. The NDP has nothing to lose and much to gain, it brings them into the limelight, and Layton in the process.

Harper is guilty of bad diplomacy and bad politics. I don't think he should be unseated for that. Every politician makes tactical errors they regret, and his did not jeopardize the well being of Canadians - just other politicians.

A lot of bad feeling all aorund, this is an emotional stalemate. Many Liberal MPs feel uncomfortable aligning themselves with their opposition, particularly the Bloc, in a coup d'etat. If enough of them withdraw their support, the crisis will pass. That may come to pass, especially if Harper is able to reach them on some level.

Were it not for the economic situation, another election would be the only answer. If there is one, a decent chance Harper will achieve a majority this time. Dion will not be a PM candidate and his voluntary stepping down is a must now.

The wild card is Ignatieff, who noticeably has been very quiet. He looks like the untarnished good guy. I have a feeling he will be the winner by default in all this.


Mike F

Originally posted by mmiichael

The wild card is Ignatieff, who noticeably has been very quiet. He looks like the untarnished good guy. I have a feeling he will be the winner by default in all this.

You know those academic types that just haven't got a clue? The kind that have spent their whole lives in Academe, and to whom life is simply a series of formulae played out in sequence?

That's Iggy. After 23 years in the basement of the ivory tower, I know the type well. The savior of the Liberal Party has not yet entered the fray.

I got to talk to a few local Liberals tonight, as they were having a gathering in the same building my kids after school program is located. I know a few of them so stopped to chat for a few minutes and they seemed pretty split on what is going on. I wish I could have stayed longer and talked but it was close to closing time for the AS group so couldn't.

Michael Igantief was the scheduled speaker.

Mr. Ignatieff is to travel to New Brunswick today, Mr. Rae and his team are preparing to attend rallies across the country in support of a coalition government. He is also going to take to the airwaves.

www.theglobeandmail.com...

My bet is on Dion being gone by the time the House returns.

Originally posted by Duzey

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck
Every woman in the country should take umbridge that to these clowns, equal work for equal pay is irrelevant.

I keep forgetting that one, thanks for reminding me. That's just an extension of the previous session, where they shut down 75% of Status of Women Canada offices (12 of 16), slashed the budget by nearly 40% and removed the words 'womens equality' from their legal mandate.

I know a bit off topic but tomorrow is National Day of Remembrance and Action on Violence Against Women. There is still a lot of work left in the fight that tomorrow represents. The Conservative cuts to womens equality programs and wage gap measures doesn't help it.



[edit on 5-12-2008 by GAOTU789]

Hitler...hehem...I mean Harper and the GG should be stripped of their offices immediately. Harper is the one who created the mess and the GG is simply cowtowing to him.

Afterall, who promised no more elections before 4 years iwas up? Harper did. As soon as he did, he turns around and calls an election just before the Americans. He was hoping to salvage something before his compadre Bush went down. Then Harper wins a minority with less than 40% of the popular vote.

Then he tries to bankrupt the other parties, taking away the right to strike by Civil servants and sending rights for women back to the dark ages. Heck this guy wants kids put in jail!!! During that same economic update he failed to deliver any emergeny measure to simulate the economy. Something that all of the other developed nations are doing.

Harper basically provoked the other parties into this coup. All three are willing to put aside their differences to fight for the average Canadian.

We need to stand against this dictator, as that is exactly what he is!

I didn't write these but though it needed to be posted here:

"Let me cut to the chase. Every individual MP in the House, from every party, was duly elected. If a majority of duly elected MPs can form a majority, it may stand as a government. PM Harper was not elected PM, as there is no ballot in an election for a PM. He was elected as an individual MP who just happened to lead one party who received more seats than any other single party. But not more than the rest of the parties combined. And if these parties can combine to form a majority, that is their prerogative as Members of Parliament, with the consent of the GG. This was contemplated by Harper himself, during the Martin minority. It is unusual, but not unconstitutional.

And, amongst the MPs who are willing to support this coalition by votes, if not as part of the government, are duly elected Bloc Quebecois MPs. Whatever Harper states, the Bloc Quebecois is a LEGAL political party, and it's members are rightfull members of this parliament. If Mr. Harper doesn't like that, he can just try and ban them. Until then, they are rightfully serving, voting, active members of this institution, from whence all governments draw their right to govern.

PM Harper is only an MP. If he cannot hold the confidence of the majority of sitting members of the House, he loses that office to someone who has the confidence of the House. Period.

Now, if he asks the GG to prorogue Parliament, and she acquiesces, it will amount to suspending his duties as PM, when we need action, and suspending the abilities of all the MPs to represent their constituents in the House. As such, PM Harper puts our nation and economy at risk, only to retain power he does not really have, with a minority of MPs. Self-preservation for the PM is not in this nations interests."

and this:

"I am continually amazed at how many people seem unwilling or unable to understand how our democracy is set up in Canada.

We elect MPs, they represent us in the House of Commons, whoever can get support from at least 50%+1 of them can govern.

Harper got the first chance because his party won the most seats, but he rejected the will of Canadians who elected a government that required cooperation. Now the others get to try."