http://gamingtrend.com
August 01, 2014, 10:07:28 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Everyone loves Stephen Harper!  (Read 1679 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Larraque
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2392


View Profile
« on: December 04, 2008, 05:50:34 PM »

http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idUSN0437510320081204?wehavecookies

Quote
Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper took the unprecedented step on Thursday of seeking the suspension of Parliament so he can avoid being ousted by the opposition next week.

Harper's gambit is the latest development in a constitutional crisis that erupted last week after he tried to cut public financing for political parties, a move that would have hit the opposition parties particularly hard.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/12/04/harper-jean.html

Quote
Gov. Gen. MichaŽlle Jean has granted a request from Stephen Harper to suspend Parliament until late next month, the prime minister announced on Thursday, a move that avoids a confidence vote set for Monday that could have toppled his minority government.

Very interesting times for the Canadian government, and an interesting read.
Logged
Scuzz
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1700



View Profile
« Reply #1 on: December 04, 2008, 06:43:51 PM »

Don't you love the parlimentary system.........
Logged
Larraque
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 2392


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: December 04, 2008, 09:26:06 PM »

Quote from: Scuzz on December 04, 2008, 06:43:51 PM

Don't you love the parlimentary system.........

All the other political parties, united in their hatred of not being the ruling party.

Really, I'm not sure how to feel about it. On one hand, I think they have a valid claim (no funding to political parties anymore from the government, which would move it towards the american system of funding from private entities). On the other hand, it can crush the other parties should they ever have a particularly bad election. IIRC (and it's been a long time and I'm too lazy to read about it) the parties get funding based on the # of votes they get. So if the NDP ever got a terribly low # of votes - or the Bloc - they could completely lose their funding.
Logged
Rowdy
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 722


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: December 05, 2008, 09:24:36 PM »

The move was part of the economic update responding to current conditions.  One way to curb government spending was not to give nearly $2 a vote from tax payers money to the political parties.  It makes sense to me - why should my federal tax dollars go to fund the NDP or Liberals, or worse, a separatist party?  I donate to the PC's, presumably they can raise their own funds in a similar fashion.

Obviously Harper was taking advantage of the poor financial condition of the other parties with the timing of this measure, there's no question of that, so I can understand why they freaked out.

Portraying this coalition though as some sort of response to poor government, as the coalition has done, is laughable.  Harper hasn't even had time to present a budget yet.  He hasn't had time to do any governing!  It was an attempt to disregard the election results and seize power.  The coalition saw an opportunity, and made a deal with the devil (the Bloc) to do so.  Hopefully this suspension of parliment however will put an end to it - the coalition is already making noises that they're not happy with each other.  Dion's amateur hour attempt to speak to the nation the other night only emphasized what an incompetent fool he is, for the NDP as well.  I'm reading now there's some bitter infighting going on.  I think Harper will come back in January with a budget containing all kinds of concessions, and the other parties will back down, since they missed their window.  If they don't, the GG is most likely to call for an election, rather than risk the ire of the country by choosing the government.  At the moment, that would be disaster for the Libs and NDP as most polls are showing the Conservatives at about 45 - 48% support, majority territory, and it would be worse if they showed themselves as to be so blockheaded as to vote non-confidence regardless of what the budget says.
« Last Edit: December 05, 2008, 09:27:08 PM by Rowdy » Logged
Fireball
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1603


View Profile WWW
« Reply #4 on: December 07, 2008, 06:22:42 PM »

The problem is that Harper is acting like he has a majority. He doesn't. A smarter politician would have been more deft than to try to ramrod through a piece of legislation designed to dramatically benefit his own party at the expense of the others when he's in a weak minority government position. If Dion can muster a majority of MPs to support him, he should have his chance to be PM. That's the democratic way to handle things.
Logged

Purge
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 18512


Thirty. Minutes.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #5 on: December 07, 2008, 10:44:45 PM »

It's more a stab at the Bloc than the other two parties; the Bloc is a speakerbox for the PQ. I don't object to NDP/Liberals strategy, it's just that they're relying on a group of separatists secessionists and I think it's fundementally wrong to have a party recognized as national even though they only serve the interests of one province and are bound and determined to try and pull this country apart.
Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson
pr0ner
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 5356


Go Flames go!


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: December 07, 2008, 11:17:51 PM »

Quote from: Fireball1244 on December 07, 2008, 06:22:42 PM

The problem is that Harper is acting like he has a majority. He doesn't. A smarter politician would have been more deft than to try to ramrod through a piece of legislation designed to dramatically benefit his own party at the expense of the others when he's in a weak minority government position. If Dion can muster a majority of MPs to support him, he should have his chance to be PM. That's the democratic way to handle things.

How is that democratic?  The people put more conservatives into parliament than any other party; even though they aren't in the majority compared to the rest of parliament, there should be a conservative PM, unless the governor general says otherwise.

Simply forming a coalition to take over government and get your man installed as PM?  Not democratic, at all.
Logged

XBox Live Gamertag: Pr0ner
Purge
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 18512


Thirty. Minutes.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #7 on: December 08, 2008, 02:10:02 AM »

Fireball, you say weak minority. He was very close to a majority government. I am not a Conservative (by any stretch) but the fact of the matter is we just went to the polls and told them we did NOT want Dion.
Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson
Fireball
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1603


View Profile WWW
« Reply #8 on: December 08, 2008, 04:47:15 AM »

Quote from: pr0ner on December 07, 2008, 11:17:51 PM

Quote from: Fireball1244 on December 07, 2008, 06:22:42 PM

The problem is that Harper is acting like he has a majority. He doesn't. A smarter politician would have been more deft than to try to ramrod through a piece of legislation designed to dramatically benefit his own party at the expense of the others when he's in a weak minority government position. If Dion can muster a majority of MPs to support him, he should have his chance to be PM. That's the democratic way to handle things.

How is that democratic?  The people put more conservatives into parliament than any other party; even though they aren't in the majority compared to the rest of parliament, there should be a conservative PM, unless the governor general says otherwise.

It is common in parliamentary systems for two smaller parties -- say, the second and third largest -- who actually can muster a majority of votes for their man to take the chancellorship/premiereship/prime ministership away from the plurality party. Different systems have slightly different rules, but it can happen, and it has happened, IIRC, in Canada before. And it is also Democratic -- more people voted for NDP and Liberal than voted for the Conservatives.
Logged

Fireball
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1603


View Profile WWW
« Reply #9 on: December 08, 2008, 04:48:46 AM »

Quote from: Purge on December 08, 2008, 02:10:02 AM

Fireball, you say weak minority. He was very close to a majority government. I am not a Conservative (by any stretch) but the fact of the matter is we just went to the polls and told them we did NOT want Dion.

But a majority also voted that they didn't want Harper. Coalition governments are a fact of life in parliamentary systems. It's, actually, one of the reasons I like parliamentary systems more than presidential systems.
Logged

kronovan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7903



View Profile
« Reply #10 on: December 08, 2008, 08:24:00 AM »

Quote from: Fireball1244 on December 08, 2008, 04:47:15 AM

It is common in parliamentary systems for two smaller parties -- say, the second and third largest -- who actually can muster a majority of votes for their man to take the chancellorship/premiereship/prime ministership away from the plurality party. Different systems have slightly different rules, but it can happen, and it has happened, IIRC, in Canada before. And it is also Democratic -- more people voted for NDP and Liberal than voted for the Conservatives.

Yes, and it's exactly what Trudeau did in 1972 when he lost to Stanfield's Conservatives. The Conservatives had more seats but still only a minority, so Trudeau joined forces with Tommy Douglas (NDP) to form a coalition. It only lasted about 2 years however and the Liberals trounced both the Conservatives and NDP next election. The difference with that situation is that the Liberals were the incumbent government.

I don't see how anyone thinks that the Conservatives have a healthy minority at all. Other than Saskatoon, Regina, Edmonton and Calgary they don't have a majority of the seats in any ubran centre. In a country where there's a serious divide between rural vs urban, it's foolish to think that you can govern with a business-as-usual majority government approach. I on the other hand don't wish to see a Liberal-NDP-Bloc coalition. It might work under ideal circumstances, but IMHO Dion is definitely not a leader that could effectively lead such a government. I'd much rather see Harper and the Conservatives forced into a position closer to the political center.
Logged
Fireball
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1603


View Profile WWW
« Reply #11 on: December 08, 2008, 09:05:12 AM »

Isn't Dion on his way out? I thought the Libs had elected a new leader, who was to take the reigns of the party shortly?
Logged

Purge
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 18512


Thirty. Minutes.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #12 on: December 08, 2008, 12:57:07 PM »

Quote from: Fireball1244 on December 08, 2008, 09:05:12 AM

Isn't Dion on his way out? I thought the Libs had elected a new leader, who was to take the reigns of the party shortly?

See, the comment about more lib/ndp is wrong. They have way less. Counting Bloc votes isn't counting Canadians; it's counting people who don't want to be a part of Canada. That's where the imbalance lies. Fact of the matter is that what they are doing is legal and allowed; so was Mister Mulroney's adding 7 people to the senate to get his GST bill passed.

It feels like someone is acting within the letter of the law, but not it's spirit.

And Dion is slated to be replaced in May; this may happen sooner as there was no vote of confidence yet and the last thing the liberals want is to go into another election with him at the helm.

Last thing: both Leyton and Dion have effectively said they reject his budget, and will not sign *any* budget proposals even though it's not even out yet. There is an unwillingness to work with Conservatives just as much as our PM has been effectively inefficient at running a minority government.
Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson
Fireball
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 1603


View Profile WWW
« Reply #13 on: December 08, 2008, 03:38:55 PM »

Quote from: Purge on December 08, 2008, 12:57:07 PM

Quote from: Fireball1244 on December 08, 2008, 09:05:12 AM

Isn't Dion on his way out? I thought the Libs had elected a new leader, who was to take the reigns of the party shortly?

See, the comment about more lib/ndp is wrong. They have way less. Counting Bloc votes isn't counting Canadians; it's counting people who don't want to be a part of Canada.

Almost 1,000,000 more people voted for Lib + NDP than voted for the Conservatives. I was talking actual votes, not votes within the Parliament.

Quote
It feels like someone is acting within the letter of the law, but not it's spirit.

Except that it is both within the letter and spirit, as the ability of smaller parties that can muster a majority to form the government is an intentional feature of Parliamentary systems.
Logged

Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: December 08, 2008, 03:57:23 PM »

As for which of these groups is acting in a more democratic fashion:

One side is calling for a vote of no confidence - you know, with voting.

The other side has just convinced the unelected Governor General to suspend parliament in order to prevent voting.
Logged
kronovan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7903



View Profile
« Reply #15 on: December 08, 2008, 06:00:10 PM »

Quote from: Brendan on December 08, 2008, 03:57:23 PM

As for which of these groups is acting in a more democratic fashion:

One side is calling for a vote of no confidence - you know, with voting.

The other side has just convinced the unelected Governor General to suspend parliament in order to prevent voting.

I agree that it doesn't sound democratic, but it's not an uncommon practice amongst Commonwealth countries; happened on a number of occasions in both Australia and New Zealand. It's really more uncommon for a Governor General to accept requests form parties with less seats to form coalitions.

As to others comments on past bureaucratic use of the Senate; "Canadian Senate" is a bad term in my vocabulary. Honestly make it electable or toss it the hell out! Since Harper and his Tory colleagues from the previous reform-alliance stew promised to make it electable, but haven't done a bloody thing to achieve that after 2 years... well there's an issue they deserve to fall for IMO.
Logged
Brendan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 3841


two oh sickness


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: December 08, 2008, 06:04:14 PM »

Quote from: kronovan on December 08, 2008, 06:00:10 PM

Quote from: Brendan on December 08, 2008, 03:57:23 PM

As for which of these groups is acting in a more democratic fashion:

One side is calling for a vote of no confidence - you know, with voting.

The other side has just convinced the unelected Governor General to suspend parliament in order to prevent voting.

I agree that it doesn't sound democratic, but it's not an uncommon practice amongst Commonwealth countries; happened on a number of occasions in both Australia and New Zealand. It's really more uncommon for a Governor General to accept requests form parties with less seats to form coalitions.

I get that it's not uncommon, but it's certainly undemocratic. slywink  It's a strange legacy that Commonwealth countries have - a nominal tie back to Mother England that takes on an inflated importance in a crisis.  I guess it's like your appendix - useless from a practical situation, and you don't care about it until it bursts.  If it didn't have such expensive consequences, I'd think the whole situation hilarious.  (In truth, it's still sort of funny.)
Logged
Purge
Gaming Trend Staff
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 18512


Thirty. Minutes.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #17 on: December 08, 2008, 06:53:00 PM »

Quote from: Fireball1244 on December 08, 2008, 03:38:55 PM

Quote from: Purge on December 08, 2008, 12:57:07 PM

Quote from: Fireball1244 on December 08, 2008, 09:05:12 AM

Isn't Dion on his way out? I thought the Libs had elected a new leader, who was to take the reigns of the party shortly?

See, the comment about more lib/ndp is wrong. They have way less. Counting Bloc votes isn't counting Canadians; it's counting people who don't want to be a part of Canada.

Almost 1,000,000 more people voted for Lib + NDP than voted for the Conservatives. I was talking actual votes, not votes within the Parliament.

Quote
It feels like someone is acting within the letter of the law, but not it's spirit.

Except that it is both within the letter and spirit, as the ability of smaller parties that can muster a majority to form the government is an intentional feature of Parliamentary systems.

To say you refuse the government on non-confidence vote based on something that hasn't even been called upon yet is not within the spirit; it's obstructionist and we have clearly stated who is to be in and for ALL THREE parties to play nice.

As for voting, the Green Party had over 4 million votes and no political representation. Go Canada!
Logged

"If it weren't for Philo T. Farnsworth, inventor of television, we'd still be eating frozen radio dinners." - Johnny Carson
kronovan
Gaming Trend Senior Member

Offline Offline

Posts: 7903



View Profile
« Reply #18 on: December 08, 2008, 07:09:44 PM »

Quote from: Brendan on December 08, 2008, 06:04:14 PM

Quote from: kronovan on December 08, 2008, 06:00:10 PM

Quote from: Brendan on December 08, 2008, 03:57:23 PM

As for which of these groups is acting in a more democratic fashion:

One side is calling for a vote of no confidence - you know, with voting.

The other side has just convinced the unelected Governor General to suspend parliament in order to prevent voting.

I agree that it doesn't sound democratic, but it's not an uncommon practice amongst Commonwealth countries; happened on a number of occasions in both Australia and New Zealand. It's really more uncommon for a Governor General to accept requests form parties with less seats to form coalitions.

I get that it's not uncommon, but it's certainly undemocratic. slywink  It's a strange legacy that Commonwealth countries have - a nominal tie back to Mother England that takes on an inflated importance in a crisis.  I guess it's like your appendix - useless from a practical situation, and you don't care about it until it bursts.  If it didn't have such expensive consequences, I'd think the whole situation hilarious.  (In truth, it's still sort of funny.)

Yeah the ties there, but if pushed the British Crown will refuse to get involved. That's what happened with Australia in 1975; the worst parliamentary crisis in a Commonwealth country to date. When the Governor General appealed to Queen Elisabeth for an opinion/ruling on the crisis, good Ol Liz diplomatically told him to piss off and that he was on his own.

IMHO Canada should sever the connection with the Crown, but remain in the Commonwealth. I've heard the argument from both sides for many years and I no longer see where maintaining the link to the English monarch is valid. And 20 million is a good chunk of change to be paying for something that is really unnecessary.
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.137 seconds with 60 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.031s, 2q)