CanPol: Throne Speech

[Wezil]

Originally posted by snoopy369
Does this "confidence" label come from the conservatives or the liberals (or is it default from some element of it, like budget or something)?

Excellent question. There is actually some debate about this. Traditionally (and accepted) confidence (majority of commons) is required for any "money bill", that is anything that has a price tag attached to it (budgetsbeing the classic example). Harper is now (apparently) planning to announce that major pieces of legislation are "confidence" matters even if not money matters. There is some debate if he can do this...

Sounds like a silly way to run things to me ... constantly running elections any time a significant bill fails (thus encouraging this dilemma).

It isn't always like this. This is a political "perfect storm". We have a minority government on the cusp of a majority and the only other party capable of forming a national government is absolutely crippled by a loss of support in their strongest province (and elsehwere), a leader that is a dud, a lack of political direction within the party, and a party membership with almost open sores from recent political infighting. Add to this their financial woes and you have a party in trouble. Normally a Minority government would be more inclined to work with the opposition to avoid a fall of the government but in this case the Conservatives have the opposition exactly where they want them. They are just daring Dion to pull the plug.

[Wezil]

Originally posted by snoopy369
In the US system, the leading party in the house is forced to work with the minority party to get something passed, or else it will simply stop the government entirely, which looks quite poor to the voting public.

That is at play here as well. Neither party wants to be seen as overtly "causing" an election. Harper was careful not to put a "poison pill" in tonights throne speech for just that reason.

[snoopy369]

Hmm... interesting. Certainly more interesting than our boring two party system

[Wezil]

Our system has problems but yes, I prefer our way of doing things as well.

[Wezil]

I don't understand what makes it inherently impossible for a 3rd party in your system though. I realise the power of the big two but our smaller parties face that here as well.

[Ben Kenobi]

Why is this a bad idea? The cap & trade?

If it's correctly implemented it can be a pretty good system.

I have my doubts that it will be correctly implemented.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Wezil
Our system has problems but yes, I prefer our way of doing things as well.

I prefer ours for the distribution of power.

[snoopy369]

Originally posted by Wezil
I don't understand what makes it inherently impossible for a 3rd party in your system though. I realise the power of the big two but our smaller parties face that here as well.

Power, basically, and the fact that people naturally see things in black and white. Part of it was probably McCarthyism also ...

[Omni Rex Draconis]

Our Government believes that Canada is not well served by the Senate in its current form.

It is now widely understood that, because of inaction on greenhouse gases over the last decade, Canada’s emissions cannot be brought to the level required under the Kyoto Protocol

Just two passages I enjoyed. I think I would like to be a political speech writer.

People do tend to see things in black and white, but are Americans more prone to this simple view than Canadians or other nations are? I am no political wiz - just how many parties does the average democracy support?

[Wezil]

Originally posted by Omni Rex Draconis
Just two passages I enjoyed. I think I would like to be a political speech writer.

Both a kick in the pants to Dion and the Liberals.

People do tend to see things in black and white, but are Americans more prone to this simple view than Canadians or other nations are? I am no political wiz - just how many parties does the average democracy support?

Good question. We have about a dozen federal parties but only 4 with seats in the Commons.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by Wezil
I don't understand what makes it inherently impossible for a 3rd party in your system though. I realise the power of the big two but our smaller parties face that here as well.

Usually, with a Parlimentary system, there's enough parties to split the vote into many sections, so a coalition of them is needed to rule.

With the U.S.'s two-party system, the coalitions are internalized. So no overall coalition is needed to rule.

We do have some tiny third parties (the leftist Peace & Freedom Party, the rightist American Independant Party, the Green Party, and others), and they can sometimes get one of their members on a school board or city council, but they don't have enough clout to get someone elected to the House of Representatives or the Senate.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by snoopy369
Does this "confidence" label come from the conservatives or the liberals (or is it default from some element of it, like budget or something)?

Sounds like a silly way to run things to me ... constantly running elections any time a significant bill fails (thus encouraging this dilemma).

Budgets and the Speech from the Throne are confidence issues by convention.

[Victor Galis]

Originally posted by Wezil
I don't understand what makes it inherently impossible for a 3rd party in your system though. I realise the power of the big two but our smaller parties face that here as well.

The more I look at it, the more I think it's because the provinces are so different that some of the major parties are unelectable in some parts of those provinces. Hmm... I'm wondering if our spectrum is broader than the American one, or if the national parties are more like parties and less like coalitions.

The major parties in the US are older and more entrenched. It's actually an interesting question.

I learned in poli sci class in the US that winner take all system = 2 party system, but that seems not to be the case in Canada and the UK (other countries too, I'm sure).

[Kuciwalker]

I suspect Quebec is at least part of the reason, in Canada. The US doesn't have any region with quite so distinct interests.

[Victor Galis]

That explains the Bloc but not the NDP.