Canpol: Election Imminent?

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Wezil
No, the Canadian public is hung up on this "fear" thing. Listen to what the 'man on the street' is saying. It is all to common to hear them talking about how they "fear" Conservative policies and that they find Harper "scary". Explain it to them, not me. I have no fear of a theocracy being formed or any kind of irreversible damage being done (unlike that being caused by the Liberals - see integrity, national unity, etc).

You're out of touch.

If someone says that they want to destroy the things that I value then it is reasonable to fear that they will get elected and to work to prevent them from getting elected.

The Conservatives want to do many things that a majority Canadians don't want done so it is natural for Canadians to oppose the Conservatives.

The fact that Conservatives don't understand this simple concept is quite puzzling.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Kontiki
Just a damn Liberal plot to make them seem more socially conservative. And the stupid voters will buy it. Stupid, stupid voters.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Kontiki
You're really hung up on this "fear" thing, aren't you? You seem to think people like me are of the opinion that if the Conservatives are elected, they'll immediately turn the country into a fundamentalist theocracy. That there's this massive, unfounded paranoia out there. But you know what? I DO think that there should be gay marriage, and I DON'T think that abortion should even enter the debate (funny - I remember Harper saying during the election that the abortion issue has been settled and isn't even a point of discussion. Apparently his party disagrees with him). Is the evil Liberal media lying when they report that the CPC voted against gay marriage and had a vigorous debate about abortion? 'Cause if not, I'm not sure why my "fears" would be unfounded.

OK, but what about the rest of the campaign of fear?

During the recent anxiousness over the budget, we were told that both the money for Atlantic provinces and money for municipalities would be in jeopardy if the government fell. Were the people warning us of the dire consequences of the budget being rejected aware that both of those measures were Conservative policies coopted by the Liberals?

[notyoueither]

As for social conservatism...

The policy of the CPC is to allow all MPs a free vote on social legislation. The party is officially in favour of marriage legislation that defines marriage as between one man and one woman (as is a majority of Canadians, damned extremist bunch that they are) but none of their MPs are obliged to vote that way. In fact, Conservatives have voted against the party line on this issue and felt no recriminations.

On abortion, party policy is that 'a Conservative Government will not support any legislation to regulate abortion.' I admit it. I peeked. I informed myself as to what their actual policy was before I shot my mouth off about it. My bad.

Still, it's strange that the only people in recent memory who have brought abortion to Parliament have been Liberal back benchers.

But of course the proponents of fear are correct. Canada has everything to fear from Conservatives who will be unable to enforce party discipline on MPs to enact social legislation, and has nothing to fear from a Liberal party that currently possesses millions of tax payers dollars, kicked back into their treasury, and who embarass us before the world by declaring that 'we' will be the example that will lead all to the promised land of how a country should really be run.

Perhaps the good people of Ontario wish to borrow a page from Nero. They can fiddle while Canada burns.

[notyoueither]

But hey, go ahead, re-elect the Liberals next time out. Ontario does have the power. There is no denying it.

Just don't be surprised when the seperatists in Quebec ride that election to an independent country.

Don't act shocked when Western seperatism explodes and you are facing votes at both ends of the country to see who can be the first to get on the life boats and away from the stinking edifice of corruption that Ottawa would be confirmed as being for all to see.

Go ahead. Be afraid. Vote Liberal.

The world is watching to see how big a joke Canadian democracy can make itself by returning thieves to power when their theft is admitted.

People in some provinces are watching to see if this nation deserves the allegiance that so many have given it.

What is it we should be fearing?

[Odin]

Ooo, civil war... *grabs popcorn*

[notyoueither]

Civil war? This is how we fight elections.

[KrazyHorse]

yup. fukcing yanks ahve no clue what ereal politics is.

[Kontiki]

Latest update:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20050606.wobrien30606/BNStory/National/

O'Brien leaves Liberals over same-sex bill
By SCOTT DEVEAU

Monday, June 6, 2005 Updated at 12:32 PM EDT

Globe and Mail Update

Liberal MP Pat O'Brien announced Monday he would be leaving the Liberal caucus to sit as an independent, saying Prime Minister Paul Martin had gone back on his promise to give adequate public consultation on same-sex marriage legislation.

“They're determined to move forward on this issue, and you can see how and what a rush they are [in] to do that,” Mr. O'Brien said at a morning press conference on Monday.

“I can't accept that in good conscience, so I leave the party with some regret, but my objective remains (to) defeat Bill C-38. Hopefully I can be more successful as an independent than I was as a Liberal.”

Mr. O'Brien, who represents the Ontario riding of London–Fanshawe, had threatened to jump ship in April if public consultation were not sought by the legislative committee studying the same-sex marriage bill.

Prime Minister Paul Martin, who was facing an impending confidence motion at the time, was quick to agree to Mr. O'Brien's demands and encouraged the committee to consider holding more public hearings.

Mr. O'Brien said Monday that he feels that the Prime Minister went back on his word and that the process to legislate same-sex marriage was “unfolding to be a farce.”

Witnesses are given too short a notice to testify, he said, and then, when they appear, they are berated and lectured by MPs on both sides of the table. He called the committee's June 16 deadline to report back an artificial timeline and said there is not need to rush.

Liberal House Leader Tony Valeri said he does not agree with Mr. O'Brien's assessment and noted that the committee had heard from more than 600 witnesses.

Mr. Valeri said it was his understanding that Mr. O'Brien was not interested in toppling the government, and could not see what he had to gain from the move.

“(Mr. O'Brien's) certainly been very vocal on this issue, and so I don't see any difference in what he will be able to do as an independent on C-38, as what he had been able to as a member of caucus,” Mr. Valeri said Monday.

Even with the defection, Mr. Valeri said, the government plans to push ahead with both budget bills, the same-sex legislation and two other pieces of legislation – the do-not-call legislation and amendments to the child protection act – before the House dissolves for summer.

“My focus, and my intention and hope," he said, "is to pass those budget bills and to get as much legislation through by the 23rd, but if we don't, we will be prepared to sit through the summer.”

The controversy around the same-sex legislation last flared up at the end of May, when the Liberals were forced to back off a move to end debate on the same-sex marriage bill early, when they were faced with a possible Conservative filibuster.

Mr. O'Brien stopped short of saying he would vote against the government in a confidence motion. He said he and the other 34 Liberal MPs who voted against the legislation are in discussions about how they could stop the bill without toppling the government. But O'Brien said he would use any democratic means possible to stop the same-sex legislation from passing.

“This is about defeating Bill C-38. I tried my best to, as part of the Liberal caucus, achieve my objectives. I now find that I can't do that any more,” Mr. O'Brien said. “I just find I'm not being listened to in the Liberal caucus to the degree I want to be on this issue.”

Although Mr. O'Brien admitted to having talked with senior officials from the Conservative Party, he said does not plan to join the party at this time.

He said he had entertained those discussions only because the Conservative position is much closer to his own than the Liberals' is.

“In the end, I felt that that was not enough for me to move to the Conservative Party,” Mr. O'Brien said, adding he had no immediate plans to meet with the Conservatives in the coming weeks.

As it stands, there are 132 liberals, 98 Conservatives, 54 Bloc, 19 NDP, and four independents in the House. The second reading of the bill passed 164-137. At the time, only 35 Liberal members voted against the bill, which was supported by both the Bloc and the NDP.

If Mr. O'Brien wanted to defeat the bill in the House, he would have to muster nearly 30 more MPs to win. Failing that, Mr. O'Brien could only hope to force a confidence motion or hope that Mr. Martin retracted the bill.

Mr. O'Brien said he favours the latter.

“You know what I hope happens, quite frankly, and I've said this directly to the Prime Minister – I don't feel he has any mandate. Where is the mandate from the Canadian people to move on this legislation?”

In an interview after the press conference, he said: “Suddenly we have this legislation and it's being fast tracked. There's no mandate. I think democratic and courageous thing to do by the Prime Minister would be to withdraw this legislation and, when he goes to the polls, let the Canadian people reflect on same-sex marriage and on the various other issues of the day and then pronounce when they cast their ballot. So that's what I hope will happen.”

[KrazyHorse]

New latest update.

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/06/06/grewal050606.html

Grewal goes on stress leave
Last Updated Mon, 06 Jun 2005 21:43:11 EDT
CBC News

Conservative Leader Stephen Harper issued a statement Monday saying Gurmant Grewal has been feeling "significant personal pressure" and for that reason the MP is going on stress leave.

* INDEPTH: Transcript excerpts

Stephen Harper (CP photo)
"I have spoken with Gurmant," said Harper in a statement on the Conservative party web site.

"I have been aware that for some days now he has been feeling significant personal pressure. As a result, he and I agreed that he should take a temporary stress leave from his parliamentary responsibilities."

Grewal recently released tapes he secretly recorded of conversations between himself, federal Health Minister Ujjal Dosanjh and Tim Murphy, the prime minister's chief of staff.

Grewal alleges the Liberals offered him political favours in exchange for his support in a confidence vote in the House of Commons.

But doubts were cast on the tapes after several independent audio experts, including one hired by CBC News, said the tapes had been altered.
Gurmant Grewal

The federal ethics commissioner is investigating the incident.

It was also announced on Monday that Grewal is under investigation by Air Canada.

The MP is alleged to have approached passengers at Vancouver Airport asking them to take a package to Ottawa.

Yeah. I really trust this dude's word.

He's slow to release tapes, and when he does experts say that they've been altered. Now he's taking a leave of absence for "stress".

Maybe it's because he's a lying sack of ****.

[KrazyHorse]

He has no business taking stress leave and stranding his constituents without representation. He didn't get cancer or something. He brought the spotlight on himself and is evidently unable to stand up to its glare.

Resign and let them call a by-election, you *****.

[notyoueither]

Did the Chief of Staff of the PMO have discussions with a member of the opposition about positions after a defection or not?

Their story is they said 'no'. For how many hours did they need to talk to repeat 'no'?

And you're upset with Grewal, and he's the lying sack of ****?

[KrazyHorse]

What, they're going to slam the door on him? Maybe they were trying to convince him to defect on terms that were not obviously unethical and illegal.

If I was pissed off about this based on political motives I'd be happy with his leave of absence (I'm assuming that he comes from a safe seat; might be wrong)

[KrazyHorse]

Talk about ****ing opportunists.

He asks for a bribe to switch parties (illegal act #1)
He's refused (according to the Liberals, and given the fact that he hasn't yet produced untainted evidence to support his allegations, I'm beginning to suspect that they're telling the truth)
He's secretly recording conversations (may or may not be illegal act #2; illegal in some jurisdictions, AFAIK)
He comes out with allegations accusing the Liberals of trying to bribe him, while painting himself as an angel
When asked for evidence he provides falsified audio tapes to the police (illegal act #3)
He takes a leave of absence for "stress"

Yeah, right.

What an utter piece of ****.

He almost had me believing him for a while.

[notyoueither]

Taping a conversation is not in the least bit illegal, and you are assuming they are falsified tapes. When did the Tories get a machine capable of putting Murphy's and Dosanjh's voices on tape?