- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
Baden Guy said:
And we could clearly trust the Toronto Star to publish a fair and balanced cross section of letters that it received. :
Liberal MP Wajid Khan defects to Conservatives
- Thread starter George Wallace
- Start date
And we could clearly trust the Toronto Star to publish a fair and balanced cross section of letters that it received. :
- Reaction score
- 4,687
- Points
- 1,160
The Globe and Mail has, as expected, weighed in with all Liberal guns blazing in the form of an editorial, Saturday – “Mr. Khan’s crossing," found at: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20070106.EKHAN06/TPStory/Opinion/editorials , and a column today (9 Jan 07) by pundit Jeffrey Simpson – “Welcoming Khan makes a mockery of democracy,” found at:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070109.wxcosimp09/BNStory/National/home
Both betray a profound ignorance of parliamentary democracy and Canadian history.
While it is almost certainly true, as the Good Grey Globe insists, that most Canadians vote for a party leader and team rather than for a specific candidate, ignorance is not an excuse for upending the Constitution.
Constitutionally, parties do not matter; in fact they do not even exist. Remember the CCF, the Créditistes, Progressive Conservatives, and Social Credit? All were Canadian political parties which elected MPs during my voting life. Parties are transient things which provide a convenient but not vital way for a would be government to convince the sovereign (the people) that it can govern with parliament’s confidence.
The electors sent Mr. Khan to Ottawa as their representative – nothing more or less; not as a Liberal or a Conservative; and certainly not as a member of ‘Team Martin’ or such silliness. Mr. Khan did nothing wrong by deciding to join the government’s caucus, and neither the electors nor the press have any legitimate complaints. He is representing his constituents according to the best traditions of Edmund Burke – which is one helluva lot more than one can say for most of the other 307 MPs in the House of Commons. He is offering them his best judgement in pursuit of their best interests and those of the nation. If the electors don’t like that – and being as they are typically ill educated, ignorant Canadian electors I am certain they will not – they can reject him if he offers himself again.
While I, personally would prefer a purely political convention which would require members to sit as independents for a wee while after they abandon one caucus and prior to joining another there is no valid Constitutional reason why such a thing should exist. Calling for a by-election to get the voters’ views on a member’s choice is, quite simply, silly – even juvenile.
One, but only one, of the things which keeps Canada mired in a mid-19th century sort of proto-democracy is the rigidity of our system of party discipline. It could change if more and more MPs thought for themselves – rather than acting as drones in the Harper, Dion, Duceppe or Layton ‘teams’ – and broke party ranks often on any matter, including (save for cabinet ministers) matters of confidence.
So: Bravo, Mr. Khan, for striking a small, albeit self serving blow for democracy in Canada! And Hiss and Boo, Grope and Fail for making a mountain out of a molehill.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070109.wxcosimp09/BNStory/National/home
Both betray a profound ignorance of parliamentary democracy and Canadian history.
While it is almost certainly true, as the Good Grey Globe insists, that most Canadians vote for a party leader and team rather than for a specific candidate, ignorance is not an excuse for upending the Constitution.
Constitutionally, parties do not matter; in fact they do not even exist. Remember the CCF, the Créditistes, Progressive Conservatives, and Social Credit? All were Canadian political parties which elected MPs during my voting life. Parties are transient things which provide a convenient but not vital way for a would be government to convince the sovereign (the people) that it can govern with parliament’s confidence.
The electors sent Mr. Khan to Ottawa as their representative – nothing more or less; not as a Liberal or a Conservative; and certainly not as a member of ‘Team Martin’ or such silliness. Mr. Khan did nothing wrong by deciding to join the government’s caucus, and neither the electors nor the press have any legitimate complaints. He is representing his constituents according to the best traditions of Edmund Burke – which is one helluva lot more than one can say for most of the other 307 MPs in the House of Commons. He is offering them his best judgement in pursuit of their best interests and those of the nation. If the electors don’t like that – and being as they are typically ill educated, ignorant Canadian electors I am certain they will not – they can reject him if he offers himself again.
While I, personally would prefer a purely political convention which would require members to sit as independents for a wee while after they abandon one caucus and prior to joining another there is no valid Constitutional reason why such a thing should exist. Calling for a by-election to get the voters’ views on a member’s choice is, quite simply, silly – even juvenile.
One, but only one, of the things which keeps Canada mired in a mid-19th century sort of proto-democracy is the rigidity of our system of party discipline. It could change if more and more MPs thought for themselves – rather than acting as drones in the Harper, Dion, Duceppe or Layton ‘teams’ – and broke party ranks often on any matter, including (save for cabinet ministers) matters of confidence.
So: Bravo, Mr. Khan, for striking a small, albeit self serving blow for democracy in Canada! And Hiss and Boo, Grope and Fail for making a mountain out of a molehill.
- Reaction score
- 94
- Points
- 530
Edward,
+1.
I often wonder what this fine nation of ours would be like, when and if, each voting citizen in Canada actually voted for the best candidate for the job. Thereby duly electing the best candidate in each riding in Canada based on their credentials vice the current method of voting which is based upon which colour adornments are worn with the candidates dress or which colour tie is worn with the suit to the various photo-ops.
+1.
I often wonder what this fine nation of ours would be like, when and if, each voting citizen in Canada actually voted for the best candidate for the job. Thereby duly electing the best candidate in each riding in Canada based on their credentials vice the current method of voting which is based upon which colour adornments are worn with the candidates dress or which colour tie is worn with the suit to the various photo-ops.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 160
So then, I would ask, how would one juxtapose Mr Khan's actions with the actions of Ms Stronach?
cplcaldwell said:
I condemn them both. But understand that people (most people) wear their political affiliations on their sleeves here. Stronach has been slammed on this site many many times and it is directly related to her crossing over to the liberals.
Keep in mind though that that depending on how things go down will determine reaction. Khan was given an ultimatum. And he went with his conscience. So people wil react accordingly. Emmerson is the worst of the three in my mind, having crossed mere days after the election and after claiming he would be Harper's Worst nightmare.
Depends on what your convictions are and what the flavour of the day is. Belinda got re-elected, Emmerson wouldn't if he was running again (at 16% PC support in his riding during teh last election I doubt it) and Khan probably won't be back.
I'm not a fan of floor crossing, regardless of the party stripe.
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 430
In a perfect world we would vote for the best candidate/MP, unfortunately starting a few Prime Ministers ago the government in power virtually runs the government from the PMO. Therefore I vote for the election platform offered by the party. In Harper's case it was his "Five Priorities." Of course the platform normally confirms to the ideological beliefs of the party, more government or less, more taxes or less, public health care or two tier etc. Therefore when I voted for Mr.Khan I expected him to support the platform and ideas of the Liberal party and I rejected the platform presented by Mr.Harper. I now find my democratic choice is nullified and the MP from my riding has chosen on his own to support the platform opposed by the majority of his riding's voters.
- Reaction score
- 25
- Points
- 430
Baden Guy said:In a perfect world we would vote for the best candidate/MP, unfortunately starting a few Prime Ministers ago the government in power virtually runs the government from the PMO. Therefore I vote for the election platform offered by the party. In Harper's case it was his "Five Priorities." Of course the platform normally confirms to the ideological beliefs of the party, more government or less, more taxes or less, public health care or two tier etc. Therefore when I voted for Mr.Khan I expected him to support the platform and ideas of the Liberal party and I rejected the platform presented by Mr.Harper. I now find my democratic choice is nullified and the MP from my riding has chosen on his own to support the platform opposed by the majority of his riding's voters.
Perhaps, like many in his riding and taking their lead, he has re-evaluated which platform to support. ;D
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 410
I just want to know in what riding and when are we going to get to vote for Edward for MP? ;D
- Reaction score
- 5,127
- Points
- 1,060
Baden Guy said:. I now find my democratic choice is nullified and the MP from my riding has chosen on his own to support the platform opposed by the majority of his riding's voters.
How many voted liberal again? 32-35% was it? Hardly a majority of the voters. :
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 430
recceguy said:How many voted liberal again? 32-35% was it? Hardly a majority of the voters. :
46% LPC, 34.8% CPC :http://tinyurl.com/yhhd6u
- Reaction score
- 5,127
- Points
- 1,060
He said by a majority of the ridings voters. That would encompass all voters, from every party. So the total of the other parties combined would be the majority of the riding's voters, if the LPC only garnered 46%. Splitting hairs I know, but let's not give the liberal myth any more credit than they're due.
- Reaction score
- 25
- Points
- 430
The next question is whether or not 46% of those voters still approve of the Liberal platform?
We know 54% did not before. Perhaps those numbers have increased.
We know 54% did not before. Perhaps those numbers have increased.
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 7,511
- Points
- 1,040
>So then, I would ask, how would one juxtapose Mr Khan's actions with the actions of Ms Stronach?
Stronach crossed to save the life of Martin's government, and received an immediate cabinet appointment. She didn't have to sit as a Liberal let alone as a cabinet minister if she disagreed with the platforms of the CPC or wanted to preserve the minority government. We know this because we know Chuck Cadman was able to do his bit. Nothing untoward was proven, or likely ever will be - and perhaps nothing really untoward was done, even if there was a hint of a bad smell in the air. Make of the character of Martin and Stronach what you will.
Also, it happened after Martin refused to recognize what was intended as a statement of non-confidence (the motion to ask a parliamentary committee to express non-confidence) by the opposition parties, because the motion wasn't conventionally one of non-confidence:
Opposition to Government: Government, we have no confidence in you.
Government to Opposition: You forgot to say, "Simon says". Nyah nyah.
Neither of the crossings from the Liberals to the Conservatives since the last election have taken place with the stench of desperation in the air. Whatever Khan might receive, his work with the government preceded his crossing and any other perceived reward which might follow.
Stronach crossed to save the life of Martin's government, and received an immediate cabinet appointment. She didn't have to sit as a Liberal let alone as a cabinet minister if she disagreed with the platforms of the CPC or wanted to preserve the minority government. We know this because we know Chuck Cadman was able to do his bit. Nothing untoward was proven, or likely ever will be - and perhaps nothing really untoward was done, even if there was a hint of a bad smell in the air. Make of the character of Martin and Stronach what you will.
Also, it happened after Martin refused to recognize what was intended as a statement of non-confidence (the motion to ask a parliamentary committee to express non-confidence) by the opposition parties, because the motion wasn't conventionally one of non-confidence:
Opposition to Government: Government, we have no confidence in you.
Government to Opposition: You forgot to say, "Simon says". Nyah nyah.
Neither of the crossings from the Liberals to the Conservatives since the last election have taken place with the stench of desperation in the air. Whatever Khan might receive, his work with the government preceded his crossing and any other perceived reward which might follow.
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 430
recceguy said:
Your right recceguy. I was in a rush with thinking "first past the post" represented the majority.
- Reaction score
- 5,127
- Points
- 1,060
Baden Guy said:
Unfortunately, a regular, and all to common misconception of our antiquated political system. A ludicrous and entrenched view held by our politicians and the sheeple that follow them without question.
