Canada's coup d'etat: Opposition parties join to overthrow gov't (Part 2)

[KrazyHorse]

The relevant Dion numbers are "I am comfortable with Dion as PM"

25% agree
64% disagree
10% not sure

which means that the support for the statement "I am uncomfortable with Dion as PM" would be somewhere south of 64% agree (this is a standard result of survey phrasing)

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by notyoueither


No. It really wouldn't.

I invite you to go looking for those precedents. Have a closer look at the names and places Boris posted earlier.

Already did, son. You're living in a dream world, but I'm pretty tired of discussing that issue with you.

[Asher]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse
The relevant Dion numbers are "I am comfortable with Dion as PM"

25% agree
64% disagree
10% not sure

which means that the support for the statement "I am uncomfortable with Dion as PM" would be somewhere south of 64% agree (this is a standard result of survey phrasing)

In any case, it's clear that Canada does not want Dion as PM. So when is he going to stop pretending that he's helping Canada here?

[KrazyHorse]

No. It makes it an act that leads to an election.

Yes, and elections kill the current Commons and start a new one.

If my boss had to resign and reapply for his job when he wanted to fire me then what do you think would happen to his willingness to fire me?

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


Already did, son. You're living in a dream world, but I'm pretty tired of discussing that issue with you.

And you did not note anything unusual about Tallion being premier while the opposition had a majority?

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Asher


In any case, it's clear that Canada does not want Dion as PM. So when is he going to stop pretending that he's helping Canada here?

I'm not pretending that. Even if Canada was begging for Dion this is precisely the wrong moment in history to have that man as our PM (especially in coalition with the NDP and the BQ)

EDIT: misread what you wrote. The man is an egoist. There is no reason to believe that he will stop pretending at any point

And with that, I'm off to bed.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse

No. It makes it an act that leads to an election.

Yes, and elections kill the current Commons and start a new one.

If my boss had to resign and reapply for his job when he wanted to fire me then what do you think would happen to his willingness to fire me?

Your boss does not work for the people of Canada.

If your boss did not like elections, I would suggest he was in the wrong line of work in trying to become an MP or the PM.

[notyoueither]

We're nutty people that way.

Major issues come up, we have an election.

Free trade, missiles, gas taxes, seperatists in government (essentially).

Call us crazy! I'm proud to be one of those wild and crazy people.

[notyoueither]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20081203.CONSTITUTION03/TPStory/National

Prof. Franks and other constitutional experts dismissed as irrelevant a 1968 Manual of Official Procedure of the Government of Canada, which states: "The Governor-General does not retain any discretion in the matter of summoning or proroguing Parliament, but acts directly on the advice of the Prime Minister."

An adviser to the government on constitutional issues provided CTV News with the manual as justification for a prorogation request.

But Prof. Franks said that, at best, the manual is a guideline. The Governor-General's reserve powers or royal prerogatives cannot be constitutionally limited but are defined - and always will be defined - by the situation she faces, he said.

University of Saskatchewan constitutional scholar David Smith agreed. "The exercise of the prerogative [by the Governor-General] is surely fact-specific," he said.

...

CORRECTION
In 1985, Ontario premier Frank Miller considered asking lieutenant-governor John Aird to dissolve the legislature after his government was defeated on a confidence motion. Instead, he resigned, and Mr. Aird asked Liberal leader David Peterson to form a government. Incorrect information appeared yesterday.

[Asher]

The GG just prorogued.

[Victor Galis]

Originally posted by Asher


In any case, it's clear that Canada does not want Dion as PM. So when is he going to stop pretending that he's helping Canada here?

And he'll be gone in May. A more relevant question is: what do the numbers look like for Liberal Leadership candidates? Or possibly, why hasn't he stepped down and appointed a more confidence-inspiring interim leader?

The GG just prorogued.

Does this mean we resume part III of this thread in January?

[Asher]

Originally posted by Victor Galis


And he'll be gone in May. A more relevant question is: what do the numbers look like for Liberal Leadership candidates? Or possibly, why hasn't he stepped down and appointed a more confidence-inspiring interim leader?

Because he's putting himself on the grenade. This is political suicide for the leader of the Liberal party who goes through with this. Dion takes the blow now and the fallout the first few months, then someone else takes over.

Now it's starting to make sense why Dion was staying on as a lame duck til May...I'm thinking they planned this all along. It probably stems from the coalition talks they had pre-election that didn't work out. "If we don't win the election, we'll form a coalition".

[Asher]

The Economist chimes in:

http://www.economist.com/world/americas/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12725018&fsrc=rss

A most un-Canadian caper

Dec 4th 2008 | OTTAWA
From The Economist print edition
Stephen Harper’s sudden stumble prompts the opposition to unite and could cause a change of government, a constitutional crisis—or both

THERE are no tanks in the streets or protesters occupying the airport, but Canada is in the midst of political turmoil the like of which this normally placid country has rarely seen. Only seven weeks ago Stephen Harper, the prime minister, won a second term for his Conservative government, but once again without winning a parliamentary majority. Now the three disparate opposition parties—the centrist Liberals, the socialist New Democrats (NDP) and the separatist Bloc Québécois—have ganged up in order to oust the Conservatives and replace them with a centre-left coalition. That left Mr Harper scrabbling for survival. As The Economist went to press, he was expected to ask Michaëlle Jean, who as governor-general acts as Canada’s head of state, to suspend Parliament for a month—though he might instead seek its dissolution and a fresh election.

Since the opposition parties hold a combined 163 of the 308 seats in the House of Commons, if they stick together they would easily win a confidence vote against the government (which holds 143 seats) if this went ahead as scheduled on December 8th. Their alliance is an unlikely one. Stéphane Dion, the Liberal leader, is an academic from Quebec who came into politics a decade ago expressly to oppose the French-speaking province’s separatists, represented by Gilles Duceppe and his Bloc Québécois. Jack Layton, the NDP leader, has spent his career savaging previous Liberal governments.

Yet on December 1st the three leaders wrote to the governor-general offering to form a Liberal-NDP coalition government. The Bloc will not join in but its 49 MPs will back it for the next 18 months. The letter prompted Ms Jean, a former refugee from Haiti, to cut short a trip to Europe to rush back to Ottawa. Under the constitution, it is the governor-general’s prerogative to invite a party leader to form a government, with or without an election.

This sudden decision to stage a political coup was prompted by a government economic statement on November 27th. The ostensible reason for opposition outrage was that Jim Flaherty, the finance minister, offered no new measures to stimulate the economy. But that smacks of a pretext: despite alarmist headlines, for now the economy remains in relatively good shape, growing at an annual rate of 1.3% in the third quarter of 2008. Unemployment is still low. Even the gloomiest forecasters so far see only a modest contraction in 2009. The government has promised help for Ontario’s car industry. Mr Flaherty insisted that previously announced measures, including tax cuts, would suffice until the budget due on January 27th.

What really provoked the opposition parties was that, having said there was no need for extraordinary measures, Mr Flaherty threw in some highly partisan ones: a big cut in public funding for political parties (which provides 60% of opposition revenues but less than 40% for the Conservatives); a ban on strikes by public-service unions; and making it harder for women civil servants to complain if they are not paid the same as their male colleagues.

A joke doing the rounds in Ottawa holds that Mr Harper, credited with having united two feuding right-of-centre parties to form the Conservatives in 2003, has now done what was thought impossible and united the left too. Inserting the cuts in political financing into the financial update was an “appallingly dumb decision”, says Roger Gibbins of the Canada West Foundation, an Alberta-based think-tank. The government quickly dropped the measures on political funding and the right to strike. But it was too late to stop the opposition’s plans to seize power.

The opposition’s putative coalition is beset with flaws. Its problems start with its leader. Mr Dion piloted the Liberals to their worst-ever showing in the election. He is due to be replaced as Liberal leader at a party convention in May. Then there is policy, which has required some difficult compromises. Mr Dion has agreed to drop his unpopular carbon tax (he now backs a cap-and-trade system for carbon emissions). Mr Layton has dropped his previous opposition to cuts in corporate taxes. A further awkwardness concerns reliance on the votes of the Bloc, whose raison d’être is the break-up of Canada.

All this means that Mr Harper may yet manage to cling to power. He has defiantly raised the political temperature. He has accused the Liberals of selling out the country to separatists (in fact, in his first term he sometimes relied on separatist votes and when in opposition the Conservatives similarly offered to replace a Liberal minority government with help from the Bloc and the NDP). The Conservatives are repeating that message in a blitz of radio and television advertising, as well as planning rallies across the country. He has vowed to “use all legal means to resist this undemocratic seizure of power”.

Nevertheless, the prime minister is damaged. Some pundits have suggested that the Conservative government will survive only if Mr Harper steps down. A control freak who does not allow ministers to speak publicly without his approval, he can hardly blame others for his misfortune. Although there is no open revolt in Conservative ranks, several ministers pointedly failed to applaud the prime minister in the House of Commons this week.

But Mr Harper shows no sign of contrition. “The highest principle of Canadian democracy is that you get your mandate from the Canadian people,” Mr Harper told the House of Commons. Suspending Parliament for a month would buy time—and might cool the opposition’s ardour for unity. But it might also allow the Liberals to bring forward their leadership vote and replace the lacklustre Mr Dion. And it was not certain that Ms Jean would agree to suspend Parliament to enable Mr Harper to dodge the confidence vote.

Whatever happens, this week’s events may change Canadian politics for ever. Only the Liberals or Conservatives have governed in Ottawa since 1926, but Canada now has four significant parties (a fifth, the Greens, won nearly 7% of the vote but no seats). Coalition politics may be inevitable. Are Canadians ready for it? An opinion poll this week by Angus Reid Strategies found that 35% of respondents wanted the Conservatives to stay in power, and 40% favoured change. Only 32% wanted a fresh election, which would be the fourth in less than five years. Even so, Canadians have little idea who might be governing them after Christmas.

[Victor Galis]

Yes, the NY Times finally took notice too. This was on the front page of nytimes.com.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/05/world/americas/05canada.html?_r=1&hp

Canadian Parliament Closed in Bid to Keep Prime Minister in Power
E-MAIL
PRINT
REPRINTS
SAVE
SHARE

By IAN AUSTEN
Published: December 4, 2008
OTTAWA — Canada’s formal head of state allowed the Parliament to be closed down until Jan. 26, granting an unprecedented request from Prime Minister Stephen Harper who sought to forestall a no-confidence vote he was sure to lose.

Related
Head of State Tackles Crisis in Canada (December 3, 2008)

Times Topics: Stephen Harper

Mr. Harper’s move comes less than two months after he won re-election. Had his request been rejected by the governor general, Queen Elizabeth II’s representative — the prime minister would have had two choices: step down or face the no-confidence vote on Monday.

The past several days have been filled with political turmoil, as two rival parties, the Liberals and New Democrats, worked together on a plan to form a coalition to defeat Mr. Harper’s Conservative-led government without needing an election, another unprecedented move in Canadian politics.

The news of the parliamentary suspension came after a two-and-a-half hour long meeting in Ottawa between Mr. Harper and Michaëlle Jean, the governor general. Harper, speaking to reporters during snow flurries outside of Rideau Hall, the governor general’s official residence, said: “The public is very frustrated by the current situation in Parliament and we are all responsible for it.”

“Today’s decision will give us an opportunity—and I’m talking about all the parties—to focus on the economy and work together.”

In the last election, Mr. Harper’s Conservative Party failed to win a majority in the House of Commons. Since then, the Liberal and New Democratic parties and the Bloc Québécois, a Quebec separatist group, have joined ranks to dislodge the Conservatives.

In contrast to the relative indifference to the elections two months ago, the current situation has provoked a passionate debate in the country online, in public and through radio call-in shows.

The issue has also inflamed old regional tensions. In Western Canada, the main base of support for the Conservatives, political commentators are arguing that the coalition is an attempt by more populous Ontario and Quebec to deny political influence to the West.

At the same time, many Quebecers, particularly French speakers, have been offended by Conservative suggestions that they have no interest in remaining a part of Canada. In the House of Commons, where debate is not always temperate, the political rhetoric has been particularly heated.

Some Conservative members are now suggesting that the coalition members are near-traitors.

“That is as close to treason and sedition as I can imagine,” Bob Dechert, a Conservative member said on Wednesday, echoing a refrain widely heard from callers to radio programs in Mr. Harper’s home province of Alberta.

Ms. Jean cut short a trip to Europe on Wednesday and flew back to Ottawa in an effort to deal with the growing political crisis. Her meeting with Mr. Harper began at 9:30 a.m.

Ms. Jean received a letter on Dec. 1 from Stéphane Dion, the Liberal Party leader and head of the opposition. In the letter, Mr. Dion urged Ms. Jean to turn down Mr. Harper’s request.

“A prime minister cannot request that the Parliament be prorogued to avoid a confidence vote,” he said, using the formal term the Canadian government uses to indicate the discontinuation of a parliamentary session. “It would be an abuse of power on the part of the executive branch without precedent in the history of Parliament.”

[Naked Gents Rut]

The Governor General has overstepped her bounds. Time to string the Queen up and make Canada a republic.