CanPOW - Torture Edition

[Asher]

"sabotaging democracy"

We have a Constitution Asher.

Again, I understand you don't like it.

Our constitution doesn't make us a democracy. It never has.

[Asher]

I notice you don't condemn the C's for sabotaging democracy when they thwart committee work and shut down inquiries.

Elected officials doing what they're elected to do is not undemocratic. Committees are not democratic, what the hell are you talking about?

I'm talking about unelected people appointed for their loyalty to politicians sabotaging the legislation that the ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES OF CANADA have passed.

Make no mistake Asher, this has nothing to do with "bills not being passed" and everything to do with the government not wanting to face any more tough questions about the detainee issue. They have been caught in their lies. Defaming a public servant didn't work so now they will shut down all discussion.

This doesn't make any sense no matter how much journalists repeat it. Polls show the issue is INSIGNIFICANT for Canadians, and it's TRUE. There's no reason to shut it down for this reason because it's not causing any reasonable damage. It's an issue both the Liberals and Conservatives are guilty in in various degrees, but the truth of the matter is NO ONE CARES. Look at the ferocious debate this thread of yours has had on the issue.

Make no mistake -- the fact that you haven't cited any significant legislation passing in the past couple months tells me more than anything else you've said. The Liberals are focusing on the detainee issue to draw focus away from the fact that unelected Liberal senators are preventing the passage of bills that the elected representatives of Canada passed. The Liberal's plan of action seems to be to sabotage the government so nothing gets done until they finally pick an electable leader.

[Wezil]

This PM feels the need to hide from the House (our elected representatives Asher) when things get hot.

[Wezil]

Asher's ideal world:

No House
No committeees
Just run it all out of the PMO

[Wezil]

Make no mistake -- the fact that you haven't cited any significant legislation passing in the past couple months tells me more than anything else you've said.

I didn't cite because the claim is complete and utter BS (I won't go down your rabbit hole again).

How about the repeal of Gun Control? Significant enough for you?

[Wezil]

They passed a budget. I think that counts...

[Asher]

Asher's ideal world:

No House
No committeees
Just run it all out of the PMO

This is nonsense and frankly, offensively stupid. I expect much better from you.

As any long-time posters here will tell you, I've REPEATEDLY railed against how much power the PM gets in this country. It's essentially a dictatorship.

I'm pro-democracy. I'm a massive advocate of an ELECTED SENATE, the senate we have now us UNDEMOCRATIC to its core.

I do NOT want to get rid of the House (even in this thread I've been extolling it as representing the will of the people -- where did you pull that **** from?).

Committees I see as less than productive because they're more about politics than answers, and they always have been. I don't want to ban them or anything like that, but pretending that committees are a pillar of democracy is a joke.

The core problem that you continue to avoid is the current government is useless so long as the senate continues to refuse to pass any legislation. There's no point in continuing the theatre of parliament when there's nothing that can be done.

Additionally, the proroguing only actually affects 1.5 months or so of sitting time?

[Asher]

They passed a budget. I think that counts...

Only because if they didn't pass it, it'd trigger an election and the opposition can't have that currently. You know this, don't be disingenuous...

[Asher]

I didn't cite because the claim is complete and utter BS (I won't go down your rabbit hole again).

How about the repeal of Gun Control? Significant enough for you?

Did that actually get past the Senate?

Last I heard only the House voted for it, which isn't the issue...

[Wezil]

Committees I see as less than productive because they're more about politics than answers, and they always have been. I don't want to ban them or anything like that, but pretending that committees are a pillar of democracy is a joke.

Committees do the lion's share of the work in Parliament. The House does not have time to properly consider the myriad of legislation/issues coming before them.

The core problem that you continue to avoid is the current government is useless so long as the senate continues to refuse to pass any legislation. There's no point in continuing the theatre of parliament when there's nothing that can be done.

I'm no fan of the unelected Senate but claiming they refuse to pass "any" legislation is BS. They don't pass all legislation - sometimes they seek amendments from the House. THIS IS THEIR ROLE. The biggest problems Harper has had with the Senate has been over Senate issues. Most people believe Constitutional reform is needed to reform the Senate - Harper disagrees.

Additionally, the proroguing only actually affects 1.5 months or so of sitting time?

And kills many Bills that weren't sufficiently through the system putting them back to square one. Isn't it Harper and his fans that are claiming they can't get stuff done.

[Asher]

I'm no fan of the unelected Senate but claiming they refuse to pass "any" legislation is BS. They don't pass all legislation

Aren't you clever, playing with semantics.

sometimes they seek amendments from the House. THIS IS THEIR ROLE. The biggest problems Harper has had with the Senate has been over Senate issues. Most people believe Constitutional reform is needed to reform the Senate - Harper disagrees.

I understand the role, but I also understand what they've done recently. Seriously. Look at what they've done in the past months.

ALL they do is stall and waste as much time as possible.

And kills many Bills that weren't sufficiently through the system putting them back to square one. Isn't it Harper and his fans that are claiming they can't get stuff done.

Why does it matter if the bills are killed if the Senate won't actually ratify/pass/finalize/approve the bill? That's the problem with the current government.

The bills (and there are NOT 'many', don't be dramatic) can be reintroduced in march. No big deal. It affects the Tories more than anyone else, last I checked.

[Wezil]

Aren't you clever, playing with semantics.

You used an absolute. You were wrong. Deal with it.

I understand the role, but I also understand what they've done recently. Seriously. Look at what they've done in the past months.

ALL they do is stall and waste as much time as possible.

I recall the kazoo playing as well. They are actually well behaved these days. We can talk about the specific legislation you are referring to if you like but I've seen nothing overly unreasonable from them lately.

Why does it matter if the bills are killed if the Senate won't actually ratify/pass/finalize/approve the bill? That's the problem with the current government.

You are going to need to show an example of the Senate unreasonably refusing to pass something "as is". The Senate numbers are actually quite close at the moment. The C's aren't losing all Senate votes.

[Wezil]

Gloria Galloway

Prime Minister Stephen Harper said in an interview Tuesday night with the CBC’s Peter Mansbridge that the Liberal-dominated Senate has been blocking Conservative government legislation.

“We obviously can’t get our legislation through,” Mr. Harper responded when asked why he has reversed his decision not to appoint Senators. “What the Senate is blocking isn't just government crime legislation, it's blocking Senate reform legislation.”

Well, no.

The Senate may be blocking Senate reform legislation – that’s a matter for debate. But it is not blocking crime legislation.

An auto-theft bill was dispatched to the Senate legal and constitutional affairs committee where it languished until prorogation. And a bill that would impose harsher sentences for drug crimes was amended and sent back to the House of Commons.

But the government’s organized crime bill? That was passed by the Senate. And the act that stopped criminals from getting extra credit for the time they spent in jail before sentencing? That was passed by the Senate.

Meanwhile, 17 other bills that aim, directly or indirectly, to get tough with criminals died on the order paper when Mr. Harper decided to prorogue.

They include the bill that would repeal the faint hope clause, the bill that would restrict the use of conditional sentences for property offences, the bill that would crack down on white-collar crime, the bill that would tighten rules around parole, the bill that would require the reporting of child pornography on the internet and the bill that would end what the government calls “discount” sentences for multiple murders.

A couple of those bills passed in the House of Commons and went on to the Senate with the support of Liberal MPs who are afraid to be labeled soft on crime. But senators have not yet had the time to deal with them.

Most have simple not been passed by the House.

On the other hand, Anthony Doob, who teaches at the University of Toronto and is one of the country’s foremost criminologists, says the fact that all of those proposed bills are off the table – at least until they can be reintroduced in a new session – is not a bad thing.

“I would say it would be a good thing,” Prof. Doob said. “None of them deals with crime. I mean that in a serious way. They are not going to make anything safer. Largely they deal with how punishments are handed down and how punishments are administered.”

The government has never actually taken a look at the way in which they want the system to work, he said.

For instance, the bill that would limit access to early parole means that criminals, when they are eventually released, go back into society without the benefit of extended supervision, Prof. Doob explained.

“Good supervised release is important to keep people from committing offences after they are released from prison,” he said.

“I would rather that the government do something about crime and by calling these crime bills, they are pretending that they are doing something about crime and they are not.”

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/bureau-blog/senate-hardly-the-biggest-obstacle-to-tory-crime-bills/article1420573/

[Asher]

You used an absolute. You were wrong. Deal with it.

I'm referring to general ideas of the Senate rubber-stamping the legislation. I don't know or care for the technical term, and introducing that to the conversation is just distracting because you clearly knew what was being said.

I recall the kazoo playing as well. They are actually well behaved these days. We can talk about the specific legislation you are referring to if you like but I've seen nothing overly unreasonable from them lately.

You can't be serious?

I have just unequivocally pointed to EVERYTHING they've done over the past two months. EVERYTHING. Is that enough examples?

[Asher]

Great article, Wezil.

I like the spin they gave.

The senate had given the rubber stamp to 2 of the many crime bills sent their way. They "didn't have time" to get to most of the others (read: THEY WERE STALLING). They only had 1.5 months to get to them left, and given that they wasted the previous 3-4 months doing **** all, what are you honestly expecting?

The House didn't pass the others because The House has been fixated on the detainee issue even though the Canadian public doesn't give a ****. Why? Stall tactics again by the Liberals.

Bottom line is, as even your article subtly indicates, **** all has been done in government in recent months.