Canada's Opposition Parties Vow to Bring Down Government, 1 month into its term...

[Wezil]

Originally posted by Asher

To make the request, it is.

But no governor general will ever agree to it, no matter what your wet dreams may indicate.

We'll see if the proposal is made and what the GG does with it. You have said "never" (with provisos). I intend to hold you to that.

I'm curious, why do you have a hate-on for Harper to call for an election after a couple years (to give VOTERS the opportunity to rethink who they want in power), but then you turn around and defend the blatant subversion of democracy where the opposition parties try to steal a mandate that the voters -- just a month ago -- did not give them.

As embalmer alluded to - I favour PR. I am not uneasy with the idea of agreement among the majority of MP's to form a government. Too bad Harper didn't think of it.

It seems to me you are perhaps least consistent and most partisan of anyone in this thread. Which is curious considering you have no party, you're just a bitter Harper-hater...

I'm in the unfortunate position of being on the right of the political spectrum but being pushed away by the ideas of Harper, the Conservatives, and their supporters. Remove the control freak from leadership and ditch the Harris refugees from cabinet (particularly maggots like Flaherty and Clement) and I may just vote for the party again.

[Wezil]

Originally posted by Asher

Which tape and how is it relevant to governing this country and avoiding political bickering?

I warn you, if this is the usual tabloid **** you obsess over I've got a lot of vitriol for you.

Alright. Never mind then. It was to help your argument but I'll let you sort it out yourself.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Wezil


Alright. Never mind then. It was to help your argument but I'll let you sort it out yourself.

I intentionally avoid the articles that talk about politics for the sake of politics. I saw some threads on something about the Liberals hating a tape or some kind, and I responded "who the **** cares". We've got bigger fish to fry.

[Wezil]

It will be raised by someone. You were on the spot so I figured you would take it.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Wezil
It will be raised by someone. You were on the spot so I figured you would take it.

I just read the article and consider it a complete waste of time. Soap opera politics.

Conservatives taped the conversation between the opposition parties who -- SHOCKER -- say this was in the works for a "long time" and also indicate they simply want Harper out and power for a long time.

SHOCK. SHOCCCCK.

[embalmer42]

I believe Wezil is referring to this tape. Read the last paragraph.

Originally posted by embalmer42
And on it goes.....

http://www.torontosun.com/news/canada/2008/11/30/7585391.html

News Canada
Tories to unveil budget Jan. 27
By KATHLEEN HARRIS, Sun Media

Last Updated: 30th November 2008, 5:00pm
Email Story Print Size A A A Report Typo Share with:
Facebook Digg Del.icio.us Google Stumble Upon Newsvine Reddit Technorati Feed Me Yahoo Ma.gnolia Simpy Squidoo Spurl Blogmarks Netvouz Scuttle Co.mments Sitejot + What are these? OTTAWA - The Conservative government is rushing to table a federal budget and promising new measures to stimulate the economy in a bid to help the economy and avert a constitutional crisis.

And one day after the Tories reversed a contentious plan to kill tax subsidies for political parties, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty also announced Sunday that the government won't proceed with a temporary ban on strikes for public sector unions.

In a teleconference with reporters, Flaherty confirmed he will table a federal budget Jan. 27 — the earliest date "in modern times." Without offering specifics, he also said a stimulus package is on the way.

"There will be further stimulus to the economy — that's an inevitable given the continuing challenges that we're facing in the economy. We're going to deal with the automotive issue, obviously," he said.

The Conservative government is facing a crisis of confidence in the House of Commons and could fall as early as Dec. 8. Opposition parties say they have no faith in the government's ability to steer the economy after it delivered an economic update that failed to offer an action plan and aid for struggling sectors like auto manufacturing.

Flaherty said financial aid is on the way, but the government won't throw "tens of billions" across the board.

"We are not going to take the American approach, and if the opposition parties want to use a shotgun approach, spraying money across the economy and hope that something works somewhere, we have a good example this year in the Unted States of that not working except in one quarter," he said.

Flaherty reiterated permanent measures already taken to stir the economy, including tax reductions and plans to accelerate infrastructure spending. He hinted aid could soon flow to the auto sector, noting Friday is a deadline for submissions.

But Flaherty's concessions and plans don't appear to be affecting moves by opposition parties to topple the government and form a coalition of power.

"The Conservative government's continued panic-mode governing further undermines Canadians' confidence in its ability to manage our economy in a time of crisis," said Liberal House Leader Ralph Goodale. "Canadians are facing a serious economic crisis, and the Conservatives are governing on the fly. (Saturday), they reversed their position on political financing, and today they're announcing they'll move up the budget date. How can Canadians trust this government to get our economy back on track when it's all over the map?"

Meanwhile, CTV News is reporting that NDP Leader Jack Layton had a "secret deal" with the Bloc Quebecois Leader Gilles Duceppe to defeat the Conservative government and replace it with a Liberal-NDP coalition long before the Tories delivered their economic statement. CTV said it has a tape of Layton speaking to his caucus and saying the deal with the Bloc was locked in a long time ago.

[Asher]

It starts to crumble already:

http://www.nationalpost.com/most_popular/story.html?id=1016753

Ignatieff balks at joining NDP, Bloc

Liberal leadership candidate Michael Ignatieff is unlikely to support the coalition deal being negotiated by lame duck leader Stephane Dion -- a decision that would doom the opposition parties' attempt to bring down the government next week in a vote of no-confidence in the House of Commons.

A person close to Mr. Ignatieff said that any deal with the Bloc Quebecois and NDP struck by Mr. Dion would be a "poison chalice" for the next leader.

He said that Mr. Ignatieff has the support of more than 50 of the 77 Liberal MPs, so the success or failure of a coalition proposition will depend on how the leadership candidate views any deal.

Although Mr. Ignatieff has publicly maintained the official Liberal line that the government should fall over its handling of the economy, his supporters say any coalition deal with the left-wing NDP and separatist Bloc is fraught with risk. It would only take nine Liberals to be absent from the House next Monday for the government to survive, and the source said he fully expects a number of no-shows.

Liberal attempts to reach a deal with the NDP face a number of hurdles, not least of which is the New Democrats' insistence on a senior economic portfolio such as industry for leader Jack Layton.

The Liberals are equally determined that those economic jobs should be held exclusively by them. But one senior Grit confided that the internal leadership dynamic creates even bigger obstacles to an agreement than negotiations with the New Democrats.

The source in the Ignatieff camp said Mr. Dion is making all the decisions on coalition talks with the NDP and the Bloc Quebecois, and is not consulting with leadership candidates, Mr. Ignatieff, Bob Rae or Dominic LeBlanc.

"Dion is like Frankenstein's monster -- he's on the slab and just had a jolt of life injected into him. He's going full tilt ahead with this coalition but his caucus isn't going with him," the source said.

Mr. Ignatieff's supporters are aware that a coalition would be shaky, and probably short-lived. The Conservatives opened their war room yesterday, just in case the country is plunged into an election next week, and are already preparing to hammer the Liberals for striking a deal with the sovereigntist Bloc. "Ignatieff knows he will probably be leader next May, so why not do it cleanly and properly? What's in it for him to be part of this power grab?" asked one Conservative, who said he was also hearing from sources that Mr. Ignatieff does not want to be part of any deal.

Despite the increased likelihood that the government will survive the confidence vote, the coming week is still likely to be full of high drama.

Yesterday, the government continued its attempts to remove the irritants that provoked the crisis. The proposed ban on strikes for the public service was ditched, following the remarkable U-turn on the public funding of political parties issue on Saturday. Jim Flaherty, the Finance Minister, said yesterday that he will bring down a Budget on Jan. 27, although he stopped short of promising the kind of stimulus package the opposition parties have been demanding.

Scott Brison, the Liberal finance critic, said that the government's moves mean nothing. "We can't trust anything this government says anymore. We have no faith in this Prime Minister," he said.

The Conservatives hope that the focus of media coverage will now shift to the potential coalition partners and what the some Tories have been calling their " coup d'etat."

The allegation that NDP leader Jack Layton and the Bloc Quebecois' Gilles Duceppe held conversations about a coalition long before the current crisis offered the Conservatives the chance to hit back after days of being pounded over the political funding issue. They charged that the confidence vote is not about the handling of the economy or the government's fall update, "[It] is merely a trigger to execute a long-standing secret deal between the NDP and the Quebec separatists."

The Conservatives have alleged that the moves by the opposition parties to offer themselves up to the Governor-General as a viable alternative, should the government fall, are undemocratic. However, the Liberals retaliated by saying that Mr. Harper, Mr. Layton and Mr. Duceppe presented precisely the same proposal to former Governor-General, Adrienne Clarkson, in 2005.

The only certainty amidst the drama is that Stephen Harper has been wounded by his miscalculation. His reputation for strategic brilliance is in tatters and many Conservatives have started speculating about leadership challenges.

[Wezil]

I like the last line of the article.

[embalmer42]

Originally posted by Wezil
Coalition governments are entirely within the rules of a Parliamentary system embalmer.

Ah, that is the game we are playing, is it? My bad then, I shall be more specific and not assume you will connect your own dots.

Just as a side question (since your political memory is much better then mine ): when was the last coalition government which did not include the party that had won the most seats?

[Wezil]

If we can take partisan politics out of the discussion for a moment...

The article Asher posted reveals an interesting dilemma for the Liberals. Who leads them?

Dion was trashed in the vote and has little personal credibility.
Rae is unacceptable to the NDP (period).
Ignatieff is the leadership frontrunner however placing him in charge will virtually gaurantee he wins the Lib leadership nomination in May (hence not acceptable to Rae).

Rae claims he wants the caucus to decide which strikes me as strange since the caucus overwhelmingly supports Iggy (50 of 70+ members is the number I heard).

[Wezil]

edit - dp

[Wezil]

Originally posted by embalmer42

Just as a side question (since your political memory is much better then mine ): when was the last coalition government which did not include the party that had won the most seats?

Never to the best of my knowledge. Unusual doesn't mean it isn't allowed.

edit - It has happened provincially - Look to Miller winning most seats but Rae and Peterson governing.

[Asher]

Originally posted by Wezil


Never to the best of my knowledge. Unusual doesn't mean it isn't allowed.

edit - It has happened provincially - Look to Miller winning most seats but Rae and Peterson governing.

And look what happened there.

[Wezil]

It wasn't my type of government to be sure (although Miller was a dolt that needed removing - see harper) although you can't argue they weren't politically successfull. They held together for two years.

From wiki:

Peterson was able to re-energize his party and lead them back into office. The Liberal-NDP coalition of 1985-1987 worked very well with David Peterson at the helm as Premier. In exchange for supporting certain Liberal policies and not defeating Peterson's government in the Legislature, the Liberals agreed to pass certain NDP policies to which Miller had been unwilling to agree.

[Sharpe]

Just as a side question (since your political memory is much better then mine ): when was the last coalition government which did not include the party that had won the most seats?

1925 Federal Election

Conservatives 115 seats
Liberals 100
Progressives 22

and yet King the leader of the Liberals (who had been PM from 1921-25) formed an alliance with the Progressives to retain power as the Prime Minister. (Also King lost his seat and got one of his Liberals to resign their seat and won that one in an by-election).

King only managed to hold onto power for about a year, when his government got into a scandal.

Anticipating a defeat in the Commons - King asked the Governor General, Baron Byng, to call an election. The Governor General refused, and King resigned. Then Byng asked the Conservative leader to form a government - it lasted only 3 days then was defeated, which led to an election.

This is the "Byng precedent" that may result in an election not being called if the Conservatives are defeated if there is another party that can try to win the confidence of the House of Commons to become the government.