Tory minority in jeopardy as opposition talks coalition. Will there be another election?

[Yrys]

I don't think military people will liked the last picture...

(But you can contadict me ...)

 

[Brad Sallows]

>Setting aside outright illegal acts, which these are not, morality and ethics are defined by the individual.

Whether to be moral and follow ethical rules is decided by the individual.  The rules aren't mutable, otherwise everything is always allowed and the limits are set by tyranny: the ruling class or majority forces people to behave certain ways.

The coalition is neither immoral nor unethical.  Ethics is introduced when we ask whether certain members of the coalition violated their prior given word, and ask to what extent politicians should be expected to follow through on their campaigns.

Criticizing Harper for being a poor PM is suddenly in vogue.  People should distinguish whether they refer to his character or his government.  I don't think Harper has been involved in any questionable aircraft or hotel deals.  Regarding the latter, many people have been lobbying very hard for the Conservatives to be thrown out by the opposition since the 2006 election.  It is always difficult to govern when a significant number of people can and do push back and pull in other directions at every step.

 

[GAP]

I don't think military people will liked the last picture...

(But you can contradict me ...)

consider yourself contradicted.....military people enjoy humor as much as anybody, especially black humor....

 

[Edward Campbell]

I don't think military people will liked the last picture...

(But you can contadict me ...)

By me, too.

The picture appears to be of the three amigos' heads juxtaposed onto the bodies of the members of some Latin American or Greek or Spanish military junta - very apt, in my view.

 

[armyvern]

>Setting aside outright illegal acts, which these are not, morality and ethics are defined by the individual.

Whether to be moral and follow ethical rules is decided by the individual.  The rules aren't mutable, otherwise everything is always allowed and the limits are set by tyranny: the ruling class or majority forces people to behave certain ways.

The coalition is neither immoral nor unethical.  Ethics is introduced when we ask whether certain members of the coalition violated their prior given word, and ask to what extent politicians should be expected to follow through on their campaigns.

Criticizing Harper for being a poor PM is suddenly in vogue.  People should distinguish whether they refer to his character or his government.  I don't think Harper has been involved in any questionable aircraft or hotel deals.  Regarding the latter, many people have been lobbying very hard for the Conservatives to be thrown out by the opposition since the 2006 election.  It is always difficult to govern when a significant number of people can and do push back and pull in other directions at every step.

With all that being said, I can only add my thoughts as a "normally centrist" individual and a card-carrying member of NO party. Both the Liberals and the Conservatives have been the beneficiaries of my votes in the past.

As it stands right now, and as it was on October 17th past, the Liberal Part does NOT represent my "centrist" mentality these days. The thought of actually "voting vibrant red left" (as that is what I would have been doing had I cast my vote for the Liberal candidate running in my riding) --- made my skin crawl; the thought of voting Conservative ... did NOT make my skin crawl. Ergo, PM Harper et al got my vote.

The thought of this bright red attempt at a coup d'etat - for that is exactly what it was an attempt at - makes my skin crawl once again. All this chaos over 1.95 per vote funding that the Conservatives were proposing to cut off. Make no mistake about it ... THAT is the factor that caused this little coup of a coalition deal. It wasn't about anything except those parties wanting to ensure their party funding by taxpayers remained intact for them to use/abuse as they forever deem necessary; not that any of those parties or leaders will ever admit that that was the factor all this hinged upon.

I am a centrist who voted Conservative because I had no other option - the Liberal Party having given up on any semblance (or perception) of "centrist" representation. Me, and many other Canadians, helped elect a MINORITY CONSERVATIVE government. NO Canadians elected a BRIGHT RED COALITION - not a single one.

Good job PM Harper. Canadians elected you to head a minority conservative government. That is your mandate. Certainly no party was given given a mandate to attempt a coup.


And, for the Liberal Party --- get your heads out of your collective asses. Get back to representing the Centre viewpoint where you belong and quit wallowing in the the bright red scum. It is not becomming ... and it has and will continue losing votes for you from people like me. And, as soon as your heads are upright again and the haze has cleared ... toss the big fella you've got up front - his sense of entitlement and narcissism does not bode well for your parties future.

 

[ModlrMike]

And, for the Liberal Party --- get your heads out of your collective asses. Get back to representing the Centre viewpoint where you belong and quit wallowing in the the bright red scum. It is not becomming ... and it has and will continue losing votes for you from people like me. And, as soon as your heads are upright again and the haze has cleared ... toss the big fella you've got up front - his sense of entitlement and narcissism does not bode well for your parties future.

With Bob Rae leading the call for the coalition, and steering the Liberal party on a hard left course, I'm not sure that's possible. It appears to me that the Liberals are conceding the middle ground to the Conservatives. Watch for a reasonably palatable budget and the inevitable outcome of a non-confidence motion. Layton has already staked his position, as has the Dion/Rae faction. The wild card will be the Bloc and Mr Ignatieff. It's worth remembering that as the Bloc didn't actually sign the instrument creating the coalition, their commitment to the coalition is worth the paper it's written on. Their support is implicit, not explicit. Mr Ignatieff might find his continued presence within the Liberal party untenable, but he has to weigh that against the likelihood of re-election as a Conservative or Independent.

He could, of course, absent himself and his supporters from any vote thereby leaving the government intact and the coalition in shambles.

 

[Edward Campbell]

...
And, for the Liberal Party --- get your heads out of your collective asses. Get back to representing the Centre viewpoint where you belong and quit wallowing in the the bright red scum. It is not becomming ... and it has and will continue losing votes for you from people like me. And, as soon as your heads are upright again and the haze has cleared ... toss the big fella you've got up front - his sense of entitlement and narcissism does not bode well for your parties future.

I had hoped, briefly, that John Manley would seek the Liberal leadership. If he were leader he might have satisfied enough of my sole precondition for voting Liberal again (that the party wring the (several) extreme vestiges of that pompous, petty, pseudo-intellectual poltroon Trudeau out of itself) so that I might have considered a Liberal candidate - as I used to do. He isn't standing so I cannot see a single prominent Liberal who can salvage this once proud and still important party.

I'll repeat what I've said elsewhere: the Conservatives will screw up, we will want to throw the rascals out and so we will need a competent, centrist 'government in waiting.' Taliban Jack is never going to offer us that. We need a 'good' Liberal Party of Canada - something we haven't had for 30 years.

 

[Zell_Dietrich]

Ergo, PM Harper et al got my vote.

.....

I am a centrist who voted Conservative because I had no other option - the Liberal Party having given up on any semblance (or perception) of "centrist" representation. Me, and many other Canadians, helped elect a MINORITY CONSERVATIVE government. NO Canadians elected a BRIGHT RED COALITION - not a single one.

I've heard quite a few people say things that shows they don't understand the parliamentary system)

There are allot of people who think "We elected Harper to be PM".  But when one votes,  one votes for a representative for your area (riding).  That is it. The Govener General then well set up a government (PM and every other minister) from the members of Parliament.  If the government she sets up can't pass a bill through Parliament,  she can ask others to form the government or she can ask for an election.

In practice the GG goes to the leader with the most seats and asks him who his wants in his cabinet.  This became the tradition for many reasons, but mostly because the party with the most seats SHOULD  be able to get their agenda through the house. 

Now that the Tories can't do that,  and since we just has an election and since there is a strong indication that the collation could survive a confidence vote it is another tradition that another party would be asked to form the government.

Now there is allot of people pointing out how the Liberals got fewer votes this time than last time.  Fair enough.  But please underand the conservatives were running against a guy who couldn't speak English that well while proposing increasing taxes and the Tories sill couldn't eek a majority. 

Now as for who we'd like to see for Liberal Leader,  John Manly woul;d be cool.  I'll toss out another name - Scott Brison.  I'm heading a call to return to the 'centre'  you can't get much more "blue liberal" than Mr Brison.  I'm told his french is just fine and he can raise money (kinda what they want now). 

 

[Old Sweat]

I may be speaking through my posterior, but I suspect we may have three federalist parties when all this shakes out. The Liberals may slide left and merge with the NDP, but this will position the combined party a bit too close to the centre for the real rabid leftists in the NDP. They well could break away to form an organization of 'true believers' which will gradually move the main group towards the centre. The Grits could also lose some centrist supporters to the Conservatives. The realignment will give us three parties, two near the centre which will have a legitimate prospect of forming a government, another on the far left which will be quite happy being the conscience of Canada, the Bloc and perhaps the Greens.

 

[Infanteer]

You're right Zell, but we must also acknowledge that the system you just described also has a Political Party system conventionally grafted on.  This system includes Party discipline, Party Campaigning, and the notion of a Party Leader.

This de facto system that most Canadians recognize as valid does not seem to really fit with the "layout" of Parliament - this is why we have so much fuss over this matter that is a de jure correct and constitutional measure.

Square pegs and round holes.  I'm willing to bet that there is enough frustrated Canadians right now to guarantee the passing of written changes to the Constitution Act 1982 that deal with things like the Senate, election timings, confidence motions, the role of the Governor General and all those other good things we like to chat about here.

 

[Infanteer]

The realignment will give us three parties, two near the centre which will have a legitimate prospect of forming a government, another on the far left which will be quite happy being the conscience of Canada, the Bloc and perhaps the Greens.

Let's call them Republicans, Democrats and Ralph Nader.... :rofl:

 

[ModlrMike]

Zell, you miss the point that most people are angry about. Both the Liberals and NDP campaigned on the promise of not forming a coalition with each other, and then immediately after the election, did just that. To that effect, they disenfranchised their supporters. Conservatives are angry about the action on the face of it, and Liberals because Dion gave his word and subsequently broke it. NPDers are giddy with joy.

I'm not arguing the legality of forming a coalition, but the ethics are suspect. I think we all expect our politicians to break a promise now and then, but to outright lie to your constituency... that's over the top.

 

[Kirkhill]

And to add to Modlrmike's comments Zell -

Infanteer is correct:  We have a de facto Party System, grafted on a de jure Representative System.

As much as I would like all parties to disappear so that we could have a true representative (not to mention libertarian) parliament, that is neither going to happen, nor is it what the public at large wants or expects.

They are comfortable with the party system and the notion of electing a Leader.

It has the value of simplicity.  It allows them to exercise their vote once every few years with minimal effort.

For the system to work as the laws are written then we wouldn't have general elections at all.  We would have a permanent cadre of representatives, elected locally on an intermittent basis as the representatives died, quit or lost the confidence of their electors, and that would be called to parliament occasionally to vote on Government proposals.

But that isn't the parliament that we have.

Just as the Prime Ministers from Pitt, through North, Gladstone & Disraeli, Lloyd George and MacKenzie King have progressively usurped the powers of the Monarch, with little formal acknowledgement of the fact, so have the parties usurped the legitimate powers of the Members of Parliament.

For good or ill.

I return to a continuing theme - life is not about laws.  Laws exist solely to manage conflict.  Sometimes the laws are inadequate to the conflict and a pragmatic solution is required. At that point the Anglo-Saxon system of pragmatism with precedence as a GUIDE is, IMHO, far superior to the Constitutionalist system that binds the participants within a rigid framework.

Right now, I am betting that many Liberals rather wish that their party was based on Pragmatism and Precedence as it is their Constitution that is preventing them from replacing their current incompetent leader with someone else.

 

[mjc_1812]

Harper has crushing poll lead on crisis

OTTAWA (Reuters) - Prime Minister Harper has mounted a crushing polling lead as the result of a political crisis in which an opposition coalition sought to take power, three polls released over the past two days showed.
ADVERTISEMENT

The surveys showed Harper's Conservatives would take well over the 40 percent needed to convert his minority in Parliament into a majority, and a lead of 20 percentage points over the main opposition Liberal Party.

The main opposition Liberals, the leftist New Democrats and the Bloc Quebecois, which wants to take Quebec out of Canada, signed a deal on Monday to try to replace Harper with a Liberal-NDP coalition supported by the Bloc.

They were upset with Harper's attempt, since withdrawn, to cut off direct subsidies of political parties and they also said he was not doing enough to boost the economy. During the election campaign, they had ruled out forming coalitions.

Harper mounted an attack on what he called a coalition driven by separatists and socialists, and public opinion swung his way at least for now, though pollsters say spikes in support can fade as crises fade.

A Strategic Counsel poll in Friday's Globe and Mail newspaper put the Conservatives ahead of the Liberals 45 to 24 percent, with the New Democrats trailing at 14 percent.

This compares with the October 14 electoral result of 37.6 percent for the Conservatives, 26.2 percent for the Liberals and 18.2 percent for the New Democrats.

An Ipsos Reid survey released on Friday in Canwest newspapers put the Conservatives at 46 percent, the Liberals at 23 percent and the New Democrats at 13 percent.

An Ekos poll released the night before showed a 20-point lead for the Conservatives.

Fifty-six percent of those polled by Ipsos Reid said they would rather go to another election, even though one was just held, rather than let the coalition govern.

Harper won seven weeks of breathing space on Thursday with the suspension of Parliament until late January, when he can present a budget with economic stimulus.

The coalition could try to bring him down then, though some Liberals are saying they should think hard before doing that.

(Reporting by Randall Palmer; editing by Doina Chiacu)

Interesting development. So if the G-G doesn't allow for a coalition government and dissolves parliament, it could make for an interesting election. So in essence, forming the coalition (which may not even happen anymore with the prorogue and Dion stepping down) could end up weakening the Liberals i nthe long run.

 

[vonGarvin]

I say that the Liberal Party and the NDP ought to make it official and form the "Liberal Democratic Party of Canada".  Canada is, after all, a liberal democratic nation, right?

It would be interesting to see the results of the previous election and how it would have turned out had the Liberal Candidate and the NDP candidate had combined votes.

 

[Edward Campbell]

...t this will position the combined party a bit too close to the centre for the real rabid leftists in the NDP. They well could break away to form an organization of 'true believers' ...

Ah, yes! I remember a young Jim Laxer and the Waffle; they almost tore apart the unnatural coalition of the CCF and the Canadian Labour Congress.

 

[Old Sweat]

I was thinking of the Waffle movement when I posted my remarks. Cripes, they were far to the left of Lenin.

 

[armyvern]

I've heard quite a few people say things that shows they don't understand the parliamentary system)

There are allot of people who think "We elected Harper to be PM".  But when one votes,  one votes for a representative for your area (riding).  That is it. The Govener General then well set up a government (PM and every other minister) from the members of Parliament.  If the government she sets up can't pass a bill through Parliament,  she can ask others to form the government or she can ask for an election.

In practice the GG goes to the leader with the most seats and asks him who his wants in his cabinet.  This became the tradition for many reasons, but mostly because the party with the most seats SHOULD  be able to get their agenda through the house. 

Now that the Tories can't do that,  and since we just has an election and since there is a strong indication that the collation could survive a confidence vote it is another tradition that another party would be asked to form the government.

Now there is allot of people pointing out how the Liberals got fewer votes this time than last time.  Fair enough.  But please underand the conservatives were running against a guy who couldn't speak English that well while proposing increasing taxes and the Tories sill couldn't eek a majority. 

Now as for who we'd like to see for Liberal Leader,  John Manly woul;d be cool.  I'll toss out another name - Scott Brison.  I'm heading a call to return to the 'centre'  you can't get much more "blue liberal" than Mr Brison.  I'm told his french is just fine and he can raise money (kinda what they want now). 

I've now seen you post quite a things that shows that there is a refusal to understand and read an etire post ... in essence to ignore the "bits" so that you can claim the other one is the "ignorant" one. My original post - all of it ... note the "bits" I certainly understand my parliamentary system.

With all that being said, I can only add my thoughts as a "normally centrist" individual and a card-carrying member of NO party. Both the Liberals and the Conservatives have been the beneficiaries of my votes in the past.

As it stands right now, and as it was on October 17th past, the Liberal Part does NOT represent my "centrist" mentality these days. The thought of actually "voting vibrant red left" (as that is what I would have been doing had I cast my vote for the Liberal candidate running in my riding) --- made my skin crawl; the thought of voting Conservative ... did NOT make my skin crawl. Ergo, PM Harper et al got my vote. (<---ie the Conservative candidate in my riding got my vote ... ergo up it went onto Harper - that is the way it works in 1st past the post)

The thought of this bright red attempt at a coup d'etat - for that is exactly what it was an attempt at - makes my skin crawl once again. All this chaos over 1.95 per vote funding that the Conservatives were proposing to cut off. Make no mistake about it ... THAT is the factor that caused this little coup of a coalition deal. It wasn't about anything except those parties wanting to ensure their party funding by taxpayers remained intact for them to use/abuse as they forever deem necessary; not that any of those parties or leaders will ever admit that that was the factor all this hinged upon.

I am a centrist who voted Conservative because I had no other option - the Liberal Party having given up on any semblance (or perception) of "centrist" representation. Me, and many other Canadians, helped elect a MINORITY CONSERVATIVE government. NO Canadians elected a BRIGHT RED COALITION - not a single one. That's right - every SINGLE Canadian who voted ... put a MINORITY Conservative government in power. Every ONE of their votes - for a lberal, a conservative, a green, whatever, resulted in Mr Harper becomming (again) the PM of a minority Conservative Government and it therefore became his mandate to govern Canada as the head of that minority.  You show me a single ONE Canadian that voted for a bright red "individual" that was to head up a coalition government. I'll ante up my last milion bucks to you when you do.  :

Good job PM Harper. Canadians elected you to head a minority conservative government. That is your mandate. Certainly no party was given given a mandate to attempt a coup. Remains true. No party was given a mandate to attempt a coup; and no man. Not Bob Rae (another narcissist) nor Stephane Dion - despite how damn good he and the rest of the stuffy shirts think they are "owed" it. They aren't owed shit. If they had of been, Canadians would have given it to them last election. Time for the Liberals to get off their ever-increasingly high rocking horses and get back to reality. The reality is ... their's a country out their who needs it politicians to work for it ... not for them to work for their own personal agendas.

And, for the Liberal Party --- get your heads out of your collective asses. Get back to representing the Centre viewpoint where you belong and quit wallowing in the the bright red scum. It is not becomming ... and it has and will continue losing votes for you from people like me. And, as soon as your heads are upright again and the haze has cleared ... toss the big fella you've got up front - his sense of entitlement and narcissism does not bode well for your parties future.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s Ottawa Sun is another view of the ongoing nonsense in Ottawa:

http://www.ottawasun.com/News/Columnists/Weston_Greg/2008/12/07/7657591.html

Merry Xmas, eh?
Ottawqa politicians deliver an early gift of chaos

By Greg Weston

A certain elderly lady well-versed in politics and tough enough to put up with me since birth says last week's game of chicken between Mr. Mean and the coalition of the witless made her physically nauseous.

Similarly, an ordinarily rock-calm colleague who has seen all manner of national idiocy in her journalism career, says she has been too angry to sleep, riled at the mere possibility of Stephane Dion becoming prime minister by jumping into bed with Jack Layton.

They're not alone. A national poll found last week's poisonous shenanigans on Parliament Hill left almost three quarters of Canadians surveyed "truly scared" for the future of the country.

As the politicians responsible for this disaster head back to their ridings for the holidays, they should be equally scared about the public reception that awaits them.

Rarely in modern Canadian history have our elected parliamentarians of all stripes so grossly displayed the depth of their shallowness.

With the country in economic crisis, the damage they have done to national stability, unity, and our democratic institutions belies all claims that they stand for anything but their own narrow self-interests.

More than anything, they have devalued themselves as elected representatives and desecrated the institution of Parliament.

Stephen Harper, for one, may be less than two months from walking the plank as both prime minister and Conservative party leader.

At a time that cries out for responsible leadership and conciliatory politics, the PM has once again shown himself a bullying partisan who cannot look an opponent in the eye without reaching for a sharp stick.

Harper's attempt to eliminate public funding of political parties was a deliberate and unnecessary act of provocation that left the Liberals to choose between bankruptcy and all-out war.

Lack of contrition

Harper's subsequent lack of contrition only confirmed the worst suspicions of Canadian voters who have refused to trust him with a majority government.

If the opposition coalition now succeeds in toppling the Conservatives and takes power without an election, Harper's back will be decorated with Tory cutlery faster than he can say, I quit.

Meanwhile, Stephane Dion is toast, his days as even interim leader about to be ended by his own party.

The peevish professor overwhelmingly rejected by voters two months ago, is now trying to get into 24 Sussex Dr. by the back door, selling out his party to a coalition with socialists and separatists.

Allowed to continue, Dion would likely finish what he started in the last election -- the complete decimation of Gritdom.

The latest polls show the Liberals already at their lowest popularity in more than 30 years -- if an election were held today, they would probably lose their status as official opposition to the separatist Bloc Quebecois.

Layton and the NDP would fare no better.

The NDP leader was the self-proclaimed architect of the coalition, apparently having started to secretly woo the separatists before the end of the last election.

If the coalition falls apart, colour Layton's leadership in big trouble.

The events of the past week have also shown some lamentable weakness in the leadership of Dion's likely successor.

At a moment when Michael Ignatieff could have demonstrated resolve and put the boots to a coalition he supposedly doesn't support, he instead retreated to the shadows, and played cute with the media.

Bob Rae, on the other hand, has become head cheerleader for the coalition with the NDP which, of course, he once led provincially.

If nothing else, the prospect of twin lefties Rae and Layton running a coalition government in an economic crisis should be enough to scare voters off both their parties.

Separatists win

The big winner in last week's mayhem, of course, were the separatists.

No longer can the federalist parties accuse the Bloc of being powerless in Parliament and a wasted vote for Quebecers.

Couple that with Harper's demonizing the opposition coalition as a deal with the separatists, and the Bloc's standing in Quebec probably hasn't been higher in years.

Hours after the Governor General agreed to shut down the Commons last week, the prime minister officially lit the Christmas lights on Parliament Hill.

In the heart of Canadian politics, let there be no doubt the lights are on but nobody's home.

Pretty much says it all; a serious tactical miscalculation by Harper brings forward a solution few Canadians find acceptable, and the separatists enjoy an outcome that is, ipso facto, bad for Canada.

 

[Zell_Dietrich]

I've now seen you post quite a things that shows that there is a refusal to understand and read an etire post ... in essence to ignore the "bits" so that you can claim the other one is the "ignorant" one. My original post - all of it ... note the "bits" I certainly understand my parliamentary system.

If I implied I though you were ignorant I apologise.  It certainly wasn't my intention. 

I do want to say that no one elected a government.  One only sends one person to Parliament for the riding.  The government is then formed from the elected members. The party that is able to get its agenda through is appointed to the ministries.  If the party with the most seats can't do it,  and another party, or alliance, can then our tradition says they get a kick at the can before we hold more elections.  We elected the people we elected,  Parliament and our MPs have the right and duty to persue the mandate they were sent to persue.

Minority governments mean no one party gets its way.  Compromise and deal making is the name of the game.  The Tories acted in a belligerent manner,  and consequently all three have united against them.  Now they'll be shut out while the other three decide amongst themselves what to do and then in Parliament vote as one.