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

Liberal Party Minister Defects to Tories

tomahawk6

Army.ca Legend
Inactive
Reaction score
63
Points
530
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060206/emerson_defection_060206/20060206?hub=TopStories

David Emmerson to get a cabinet post.

"He will be named the Minister of International Trade and the Minister responsible for the Olympic Games in Vancouver in 2010."
 
"Another surprise was the appointment of Michael Fortier, a key party organizer in Quebec, as public works minister, because Fortier is not an MP."

You dont need to be an MP to be a minister ?
 
tomahawk6 said:
"Another surprise was the appointment of Michael Fortier, a key party organizer in Quebec, as public works minister, because Fortier is not an MP."

You dont need to be an MP to be a minister ?

There are precedents: General Andy McNaughton was named Defence Minister in King’s cabinet in 1944, after he resigned as commander of the Canadina Army overseas (forced out, perhaps, by Brooke) – he replaced Ralston who favoured conscription.  McNaughton did not have a seat and did not contest one until the following year, in the general election.  He could not, however, win an election* or convince anyone else to volunteer; conscription came and McNaughton went on to a series of ever more distinguished appointments – probably doing more/better as a scientist And public servant than he had as a soldier.

----------
* As a note: he ran in Qu'Appelle, Saskatchewan which was thought to be a safe Liberal seat but he lost to Agnes Strum of the CCF after a campaign dominated by, largely, local and post-war issues.
 
Ujjal Dosanj, tried to emberass Mr Emmerson this morning during an interview, for crossing the floor. I LAUGHED SO HARD on the drive in, who is Ujjal to giving a lecture on changing allegiances?  This is good news for BC, and Canada. ;D :)
 
That *insert seven letter insult*! He's my MP! We didn't vote Conservative in our riding! We voted Liberal or NDP!  >:(
 
Armymatters said:
That *insert seven letter insult*! He's my MP! We didn't vote Conservative in our riding! We voted Liberal or NDP!  >:(

But it was all a big joke to the lieberals when it happened last time around eh?
 
recceguy said:
But it was all a big joke to the lieberals when it happened last time around eh?

He made this switch just mere weeks after being elected. And from friends, they are all shocked and outraged, even though all of them voted NDP. Unlike Belinda, who did it on a matter of values, Emerson did it just for a cabinet post, and nothing else.  >:(
 
Armymatters said:
Unlike Belinda, who did it on a matter of values.

Excuse me, you actually believe her and the Liberals when they open their mouths? :o
 
Piper said:
I wonder what Belinda has to say on this....

I didn't hear any outcry from pundits and 'experts' when Tories (read Belinda) left to the Libs during a critical time and coincidentally got a cabinet post.

Belinda was known as a 'Red Tory', meaning she was in general, to the left on the political scale than the rest of the Tories. On top of that, she publically disagreed with Harper, so her switch was not exactly missed by the Conservatives. Emerson on the other hand...  :rage:
 
recceguy said:
But it was all a big joke to the lieberals when it happened last time around eh?

Just a couple of differences.

1) Stronach at least sat as a Tory MP for a few months before deciding she didn't like the direction the party was going and jumping ship
2) Emerson ran as a Liberal just two weeks ago and after winning his riding announced that he was going to be
"Harper's worst nightmare." Apparently he liked the job offer from Harper.

Weren't the Tories crying that an MP should have to sit as an independant first before joining another party?

This is a very dumb move by the Tories, they've opened themselves up to major criticism the first day on the job.

Dumb.
 
Armymatters said:
Unlike Belinda, who did it on a matter of values, Emerson did it just for a cabinet post, and nothing else.  >:(

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH! HAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

You know, Armymatters, you're probably the funniest guy around, this time of year. Seriously. How can you say (type) that with a straight face? I know I definately couldn't.

Face it, the Grits screwed the Tories over, and then when the Tories got the chance, they returned the favor. Nothing more, nothing less. Like recceguy and Piper said, it seems like treason was fine when Belinda did it, but not when someone else does. That's gotta be one of those things that make sense to a Liberal, like the sponsorships, the gun registry, and Martin's boats.

Armymatters said:
Belinda was known as a 'Red Tory', meaning she was in general, to the left on the political scale than the rest of the Tories.

She's just a traitor who saw power and grabbed it with a death grip in her greedy little hands... I wouldn't be surprised if she tries to switch back to the Tories.

mz589 said:
Weren't the Tories crying that an MP should have to sit as an independant first before joining another party?

Weren't the Liberals saying the Tories' idea was stupid and didn't make sense?
 
I know that MPs from Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver are akin to being pearls without price but I do wish Mr. Harper had, at the very least, imposed some sort of ‘cooling off’ period, especially in Emerson’;s case where he is leaving one ministry to join another.

I would like to see a principle in which those who want to join the government are required to:

1. Leave their old (opposition party) and sit as an independent;

2. During the period, which should be weeks, not hours or days –

a. Secure an invitation from the governing caucus – that will, normally, be easy, and

b. Secure the support of the governing party’s riding association – which will give some indication that the changeling has the support of his constituents.

I do not think by-elections are required to change parties but I do not like the instant minister[ routine, it smacks of corruption and politics is already held in disrepute.

Off topic: I really would have preferred that Emerson had not joined the government as Trade Minister; I would have preferred that Trade and Industry (Emerson’s old department) were merged.
 
Piper said:
Oh oh, we got us a bitter Liberal.

How's it feel? As good as when Belinda came over on a bribe at a critical time?

I'd say Emmerson didn't want to be a member of a party that is corrupt to the bone, and made a 'values' call himself (just like Belinda  ::))

I don't care why he came over, I just care that the Libs are getting a lovely taste of their own medecine. Bittersweet ain't it Armymatters?

Although I'll say it as well, sit as an Independant for a while before you make the switch. Or have a by-election to determine if your riding agrees with you.

Even though it's fun watching the Lieberal party and it's voters getting a good one right up the behind.

Check again. I am a New Democrat (I hold a party membership for both provincial and federal parties, and make regular donations to both), not a stupid Liberal. I am more of a angry constituent than a bitter Liberal... I say we constituents of Vancouver-Kingsway recall this idiot and replace him in a by-election.
 
Piper said:
Oh, NDP, even better.

May I ask how you felt when Belinda left the Tories, allowing the Libs to stay in power (which I'm sure you cheered for and supported as opposed to a big evil Tory gov't)?

She was able to get the NDP budget of 2005 passed. Other than that, I don't care about Belinda.
 
Armymatters said:
She was able to get the NDP budget of 2005 passed. Other than that, I don't care about Belinda.

Lets see, a Conservative crosses the floor to become a Cabinet minister in a Liberal government to support an NDP budget? What sort of values are you imputing to her, or for that matter what sort of values are you letting us infer for yourself? Expediency isn't a value at all, and it would be difficult to imagine what sort of principles that could be erected on such a soft foundation.

For what it is worth, I would like to see the electoral landscape settle on a Conservative/NDP split in parliament, at least then the voters would have a clear idea of what the parties are supposed to represent. Behaviour like Belinda's or our "new" minister make the political landscape obscure; how can you vote on or for a principle when the people who are supposed to represent the principle make it quite obvious that they only represent themselves.

Crossing the floor should have some rules like Edward pointed out earlier; sit as an independent, get an invitation from the other caucus and so on. People do change their minds, this process will let the constituents better know the reasons for doing so, rather than sheer greed and self promotion.
 
Though I agree with the consensus that there should be better rules re MP's crossing the floor to sit with another party... I think D.E. felt he could better support his constituents in BC with regard to the upcoming Olympics, from the ruling party side.
 
Blue Max said:
Though I agree with the consensus that there should be better rules re MP's crossing the floor to sit with another party... I think D.E. felt he could better support his constituents in BC with regard to the upcoming Olympics, from the ruling party side.

That I have to agree upon. There should be rules regarding MP's that want to switch parties, and this behaviour is totally unacceptable. You can bet there is outrage from his constituents (including me), and we will probally try to force a by-election through a recall petition.

If Stronach was labelled as an opportunist by many, I can only imagine what they will say about Emerson.
 
Personally, I would have liked the prime minister, to have said, ' nope, sorry, we don't take applications from across the floor. We can talk at the next election.'

I do not think there should be any rules. Its all a game and unfortunately, the conservatives have just stumbled on the first hurdle in my books.
 
Anderson apparently mentioned in his press conference that he wants to donate the next two years to public service, so does that mean he won't run again in the next federal election?

 
Back
Top