British Posters...

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


Technically, the G-G holds the reserve power to select a PM of his own choosing "on the advice of" the Canadian government.

I'm not sure this matter would be on the advice of the government.

[DaShi]

Re: Re: British Posters...

Originally posted by Asher


You're killing Red Caps in Iraq?

This is what I was thinking. I mean, I could see why he'd want to brag about it, but there's a time and a place.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by notyoueither


I'm not sure this matter would be on the advice of the government.

UK 1964(?)ish

[notyoueither]

That applies for naming a successor, but what about when it is dismissing a government or choosing a PM in a King-Byng sort of affair?

[KrazyHorse]

I don't know. One of those things it would be interesting to watch.

[KrazyHorse]

By the way, the government exists even without a head (PM). It's called Parliament. The G-G would almost certainly meet with the leaders of various factions and "on their advice" (whatever that means) decide what to do.

[notyoueither]

We nearly had a replay recently. If the NDs/Liberals had won more seats and the rumblings about anything to prevent Harper continuing as PM came true.

In any event, the way I think of them the reserve powers would be the last vestiges of monarchial autonomy. They may choose to listen to a government, current or outgoing, but these would be the matters where they have some latitude and there are good reasons for them to have these residual powers.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
By the way, the government exists even without a head (PM). It's called Parliament. The G-G would almost certainly meet with the leaders of various factions and "on their advice" (whatever that means) decide what to do.

Parliament is not the government.

[KrazyHorse]

It is the largest piece of it.

[notyoueither]

No. It's a pair of legislative bodies.

The government is usually a subset of it, or more particularly one chamber of it. Usually. The PM and members of cabinet do not have to sit in the Commons, or even in Parliament at all.

The PM and cabinet form the government, especially in the terms of this discussion.

It is fuzzy language that extends the term government to all the members of the Commons of the governing party. The term is totally meaningless in the context of this thread when extended to the entire House of Commons and Senate.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by notyoueither
No. It's a pair of legislative bodies.

The government is usually a subset of it, or more particularly one chamber of it. Usually. The PM and members of cabinet do not have to sit in the Commons, or even in Parliament at all.

That is one sense of the term "government". There is a much broader sense.

[KrazyHorse]

There is no neat separation of the executive and legislature in Canada. The "government" in the restrictive sense you're using sits at the pleasure of one chamber of the legislature. It is not at all clear to me that separating the chamber and the Cabinet+PMO (your "government") is a reasonable distinction when asking who the G-G seeks advice from. When the PM is in firm control of the Commons the distinction is unimportant. When he is not, I think it is overly restrictive to limit the scope of the G-G's input to a single faction.

[notyoueither]

I'll come back tomorrow.

Right now the Oilers suck mightily and I am sacrificing barley in copious amounts at a rapid pace in the hopes that the hockey gods will relent and give the team back it's jam.

If objective one is not attained, objective two, I am no longer concsious and caring, will be.

[KrazyHorse]

Good luck

[SlowwHand]

You're going to need it.