Who else enjoys the opposition making an ass of themselves?

[Flybabe]

...Polls have just been released that should put the final nail in the coffin of this delusional pipe dream Dion and Layton have over enjoying public support for their coalition.

Well, should but probably haven't.

There are rallies all over Canada tomorrow, I hope those of you that can, ATTEND a rally near you. I can't, I have to work

Rally for Canada

I will say niss, I like the way you talk. However, I (and a HUGE majority of Canadians, according to the polls) disagree with a coalition government being forced on the people of Canada. Maybe it could work, likely not - but the people must elect a coalition as stated on a ballot, not by force. The basic fact is, they don't like Harper (and they don't HAVE to). If Harper tables an amazing budget and they STILL attempt to destroy government, they show their true colours as power hungry wolves that smell blood and will do anything possible to get it.

Also: does a PM have to have a few scandals under his belt before he's noted as a leader who has "done something" for this country????

[Sheila]

Exactly! We want Stephen Harper for Prime Minister.

Sign the petition here http://www.canadians4democracy.ca/index.php?lang=e

[Siddley Hawker]

If Harper tables an amazing budget and they STILL attempt to destroy government, they show their true colours as power hungry wolves that smell blood and will do anything possible to get it.

Does this answer your question Flybabe?
http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/548866

[Rockie]

The danger here is that Layton will suggest (scratch that, he will demand) his usual unworkable and obscenely expensive public expenditures, the kind that keep Canadians from electing those morons as the government, and Harper will feel compelled to include them in the budget. I hope he doesn't throw sound economic management out the window to appease Layton. I would rather a good budget defeated by the opposition and followed by an election than implementing any NDP plan.

[Dust Devil]

If Harper tables an amazing budget and they STILL attempt to destroy government, they show their true colours as power hungry wolves that smell blood and will do anything possible to get it.

Does this answer your question Flybabe?
http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/548866

The Conservatives and NDP are on totally different wave lengths on every issue and because of that the NDP will always vote against the government

[Sheila]

If Harper tables an amazing budget and they STILL attempt to destroy government, they show their true colours as power hungry wolves that smell blood and will do anything possible to get it.

Does this answer your question Flybabe?
http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/548866

The Conservatives and NDP are on totally different wave lengths on every issue and because of that the NDP will always vote against the government

The NDPs budget was ignored, like Rex Murphy said this week, this is partisan politics not canadian politics.

[2R]

Will Bob Rae recant and re-join the NDP and replace Jack ?
That would let his old college roomie Iggi lead the liberals towards another election defeat.
Or maybe they would marry the two parties together in an unholy alliance/coalition to be the first openly happy leaders to lead the country towards a pink future ?
Dion was only supposed to keep the seat warm until justin was ready to take over ,not burn the seat ,dumb is as dumb does

[Morav]

The liberals are in a real pickle

[Icebound]

I've never voted for a back bencher. I look at who I want to be Prime Minister and vote for whatever lackey wears the banner that particular election. I think that's what most people do. Hopefully there are enough smart lackey's to form a competent cabinet.

....then I suggest that you and those "most people" should review how Parliamentary Democracy works:

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/features/pa ... -practices

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/features/co ... nts-canada

In the final analysis:

.....under Canada's system of responsible government, the Prime Minister and Cabinet must have the support the majority of MPs in the House of Commons.

... and if your lackey does not have it, then:

In the event this happens, the Prime Minister usually submit his/her resignation to the Governor General, who, typically, calls for an election or, in rare cases, asks another Member of Parliament (customarily the Leader of the Opposition Party with the greatest number of sitting members) to try to form a government that will have the confidence of the House.

Whether this particular coalition is a "good idea" or not, is not relevant. Parliamentary tradition is very clear that when the prime minister no longer has confidence of the majority of members of the house, a coalition of other members can try to govern.

Circumventing democratic rules and tradition is how despotic dictatorships are born.


...

[just another pilot]

The Governor General has two choiced after a vote of non confidence: ask the opposition majority if they can successfully govern (that IS the question) or call an election. It is important to remember that in the Canadain parliamentary system no one has the "right" to govern; they are ask to form a "functional" government by the Governor General after an election. It is very difficult to govern in Canada with a minority, and an opposition(s) with separate agendas.
What has not been addressed by the Coalition are the concerns of Western Canadians, specifically Alberta; who stand to lose 27 of 28 seats. The very first Liberal - J.A. Macdonald would be proud; the coalition's plan to prop up the manufacturing industries in Quebec and Ontario at the expence of the rest of the colonies (I mean Provinces) is similar to his National Policy.

[Icebound]

It is very difficult to govern in Canada with a minority, and an opposition(s) with separate agendas.

What has not been addressed by the Coalition are the concerns of Western Canadians, specifically Alberta;

The coalition's concern is ALL of Canada, and that includes Alberta, Ontario, Quebec, and even PEI and BC.

As should be Harper's.


Whether they would be successful at it or not is not the question at this point. If they are not successful, they too will lose the confidence of the house and/or get turfed in the next election.

The point TODAY is simply that Harper has lost the confidence of the majority of members of the house and parliamentary tradition allows for an opposition coalition to try to gain it and govern.

Oh... and turning John A. into a Liberal is quite a rewrite of history... ???


...

[MZUNGO]

so let me get this all straight. the opposition is pissed at Harper for trying to reduce thier funding by killing the funds they recieve from each ballot. 2 questions about that: 1 doesnt the conservative party also benefit from the ballot funds as well? 2 there was also alot of other cuts like a government wage freeze. why arent the opposition parties sniveling about all that other stuff?
the opposition was looking for a fight and this is thier excuse. so now they are screwing up the country during the worst financial crisis in the lats 70 years or so. did we not just spend $600 million to re-elect the tories? that election was called because the liberals were threatening a no confidence vote back in the summer.
so we are probably going to have to foot the bill for yet another election which will most likely end up in a conservative majority. most canadians are smart enough to see what the opposition are doing and the rest dont want to side with either the bloc or ndp.
i dont believe in partisan politics, anyone who does is an idiot. i voted against Brian Mulroney's conservatives in the early 90's and against the liberal party a few years ago.
whatever happens this will not end well for Canada
M

[Flybabe]

What has not been addressed by the Coalition are the concerns of Western Canadians, specifically Alberta; who stand to lose 27 of 28 seats.

Where do you think they plan on their money coming from??

[Rockie]

Icebound said:
....then I suggest that you and those "most people" should review how Parliamentary Democracy works:

Gee, I never knew how we went about electing a government before...thanks.

Are you trying to tell me you vote for your local MP based on his character without any consideration given to the party he represents or the Prime Minister that will be elected? Really?


Icebound also said:
Whether this particular coalition is a "good idea" or not, is not relevant.

Which is why this country is so screwed unless somebody starts thinking it is relevant. Fortunately for us the GG did.

[Dust Devil]

I've never voted for a back bencher. I look at who I want to be Prime Minister and vote for whatever lackey wears the banner that particular election. I think that's what most people do. Hopefully there are enough smart lackey's to form a competent cabinet.

....then I suggest that you and those "most people" should review how Parliamentary Democracy works:

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/features/pa ... -practices

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/features/co ... nts-canada

In the final analysis:

.....under Canada's system of responsible government, the Prime Minister and Cabinet must have the support the majority of MPs in the House of Commons.

... and if your lackey does not have it, then:

In the event this happens, the Prime Minister usually submit his/her resignation to the Governor General, who, typically, calls for an election or, in rare cases, asks another Member of Parliament (customarily the Leader of the Opposition Party with the greatest number of sitting members) to try to form a government that will have the confidence of the House.

Whether this particular coalition is a "good idea" or not, is not relevant. Parliamentary tradition is very clear that when the prime minister no longer has confidence of the majority of members of the house, a coalition of other members can try to govern.

Circumventing democratic rules and tradition is how despotic dictatorships are born.


...

So what happens when the population loses confidence in the MP's which is clearly the case here.

[costermonger]

What has not been addressed by the Coalition are the concerns of Western Canadians, specifically Alberta; who stand to lose 27 of 28 seats.

There's no requirement for any sort of regional representation in our government. It would, of course, be wise for any would-be government to make sure they represent all regions to at least some degree, but any single province's representatives can be completely locked out of government given the right circumstances.

Obviously this is more of an issue for some provinces than others, and I'm not advocating raping the national resources of a region too small to weild political power in it's defense (as some would argue was the result of the NEP).

But all that said, considering the amount of times I've heard the Coalition decried as undemocratic in the past week, why the hell should anybody care that Alberta's in a position of having 27 of 28 of it's elected MPs going from government to opposition? Considering it's population, Alberta's under-represented in parliament by about 5 MPs - and fixing that is something I'd get behind in a second (Ontario's about 15 short). But the exact composition of those seats isn't of any interest to the rest of the country or the prospective government. In an ideal world, we make sure that since Alberta's got slightly more than 10% of the populace, they'd have 10% of the representation in the House of Commons - voting power equivalent to population. If that's satisfied, no more consideration for the people of Alberta is warranted. Apply that to any province or territory in the country.

Realizing the bag of worms this post could open, all I'm saying is that I can't see a deocratic rationalization for considering the will of a province when enacting the will of the country.

[bornagain1340]

One thing is for sure. The leaders of the opposition parties knew exactly what they were going to do while they were watching their shitty results roll in during the last election.
I'm getting a little tired of watching (supposedly) grown men fighting like kids in a sandbox over who gets to play with the dumptruck while our countrie's health and welfare go down the toilet.
Even if this goat f%#k of a coalition gets the keys to parlaiment, we'll be back at the polls in a month anyway...throw another 300 mil on the taxpayer's tab while you're supposedly worried about the working class and this economic crisis. Give me a break
They all deserve what's about to happen to them.

[CD]

Are you trying to tell me you vote for your local MP based on his character without any consideration given to the party he represents or the Prime Minister that will be elected? Really?

In my particular case, that is exactly how I conduct myself. I tend to take an interest in the local candidates during an election campaign, attend local debates, ask questions, review their "resume" and determine on that basis who would be the best candidate for the job. After they are elected, I continue to observe their job performance and will provide positive feedback when I feel that the individual is doing a good job representing the riding and questions when I think that our needs are not being adequately met.

If someone would like a say on who a particular party leader might be (who may become Prime Minister), there are only really two effective ways to do that. The first is if the candidate is running in your particular riding. The other is to become a party member and to provide your support from within the party machination. The result is that a very, very small number of Canadians actually have the ability to directly support a potential Prime Minister. I believe a better system would be one that permits the public at large to vote for the PM, as I personally don't care for any of Canada's current crop of "leaders" ... and yet, there are individual MPs I feel would do a stellar job, but the party-system keeps them in check.

[Rockie]

I admit to liking your idea about voting for a Prime Minister CD, which is what I do when I vote. But to have a formal political system like that is getting closer to the American system where there is an executive branch (PM/President's office) and a legislative branch (Congress/House of Commons). On balance I think I like our system better. But you have to know that if your particular local MP is a backbencher, then they are only there to provide a vote in favour of the government's agenda and deal with minor little local issues. They have no influence at all over the government, and even cabinet ministers have little influence over larger government directon under a PM like Chretien or Harper. That's why I vote for who the PM will be. If I agree with whatever they want to do then I vote for them. My local MP is just the means with which the PM gets into office and drives their agenda.

[BibleMonkey]

So....too early to predict who the PM will be in February? I'd say ( my wild guess is as good as anybodies ) like it or lump it-it'll be a Harper majority. Canadians are all spooked now-when the election rolls around in February -we're more likely to be worse off economically; this last time was the worst voter turn out ( ever? )-BUT 75% of people over 45 voted.

I'm guessing generally there's a higher Conservative vote among grey hairs -and , just before the election, ( assuming Feb ) is when we'll hear how much the Canada Pension Plan lost in '08.

I think right now the CPP lost over 25 Billion-the figures will spook people when they're released.

They'll blame the Liberals -Paul Martin-for putting so much of it into the stock market.

Middle of 08, Canada Pension Plan had $127.7 billion in assets, $79.2 billion of that was in equities-when the TSX was over 14,000. What's the TSX now-eight-something?

Click through this little baby:
http://www.cppib.ca/

http://www.cppib.ca/Investments/Equities/default.html

http://www.cppib.ca/files/PDF/CDN_Equit ... 08_ENG.pdf

http://www.cppib.ca/Results/Financial_H ... quity.html

The release of the information ( the usual reporting time ) of how much the CPP lost , will rile and scare the older folk, and it'll help the Conservatives, I think.

===============

If I was Prime Minister, I'd sneak out to 'Vegas one night-put the whole 130 Billion on "Black" on one spin of the roulette wheel. Come back to Canada-
either get tarred and feathered-or -Big Hero : " Okay, everybody, you can retire when yer fifty, now "