constitutional crisis in Canada

[Dave Nelson]

For the non-Canadians who are wondring what is going on in Canada:
-We just had an election, the existing party and Prime Minister was re-elected.
-Two of the defeated parties that lost the election put a backroom deal together, and decided to defeat the existing goverment in a non-confidence vote, that is, they approach the Governor General of Canada, and say they have no confidence in the newly elected goverment.
-problem is, they also need the support of the Parti-Quebecois to form an "alliance" which they hope will be appointed to replace the existing goverment. The Parti-Quebecois is a political party whose sole agenda is to have the Province of Quebec secede from Canada, just as the Southern States wanted to in the 1800s.
-This alliance is using the existing economic crisis to foster fear, using it as a tool to take power in Canada after being soundly defeated in a recent election.
I did NOT vote for the new Prime Minister, but, since he was re-elected by the people of Canada, he is still the leader of this country, and deserves the full support of Canadians accross the country.
-The other parties who signed a power sharing deal with a separatist party in a bid to reverse the election and the will of the Canadian people at a time of economic uncertainty are parasites and leeches who use opportunistic means to find loopholes in the constitution to further their own agenda's while the crisis deepens the economic one. A sad day for Canada, and any country who thinks their leaders should be chosen by the people in an election.

[For-Life]

Not very accurate and pretty bias. Let me see if I can do better:

- On October 14, 2008 Canadians had a Federal Election.

- During that election, the Conservative Party of Canada won a Minority Government with 143 seats. The other parties had a total combined 163 seats. This means that the Conservatives would run parliament, but if the other parties get together, they can have a vote of non-confidence and either replace the Conservatives with a party that has the confidence of the house (basically enough votes) or have another election.

- Last Wednesday, the Conservatives had a throne speech where he introduced major cut backs affecting pay equity, unions, and the funding system for political parties. He also did not introduce an economic stimulus for the recession. The point of the cut backs were to maintain a surplus. The opposition, who represents the majority of parliament, did not like what he put on the table. Every single representative party was very against his option. They asked him to reconsider.

- At this point, the option had two options. They could vote for the speech or against it. The problem is, because this is a money bill, if they vote against it, the result will be a vote of non-confidence, which could mean another election. If they vote for it, they are going against what they were elected to do.

- The opposition asked the Conservatives to reconsider and work out a compromise. He refused.

- Two of the opposition parties then began talking and decided to form a coalition. If the Conservatives wanted to work with them, then they would not move forth with it. But if they did not, then the parties had a fallback plan. Only problem is, these two parties would not have enough seat to represent parliament. Therefore, the Bloc Quebecois, as separatist party that has supported all parties at different points in minority situations, said that they would vote with the Liberal-NDP coalition for two budgets and one crown speech. They would be able to vote freely on other options. There was no deal with the Bloc or the Coalition of what would be in those budgets. The Bloc would have no say.

- The Conservative Party decided that it did not want to alter its plans and compromise, so it decided to suspend Parliament until the end of January, when it presents its budget. This meant that we would not have Parliament or decisions could be made for 2 months.

- The decision rested on the shoulder of the Governor General. She could have either agreed with the Prime Minister and suspend Parliament or allow a vote of non-confidence. In the event of the vote of non-confidence succeeding, she could either hold another election or appoint a party that has the confidence of the house (the coalition).

- The Governor General decided to suspend parliament at the request of the Prime Minister. Mostly because her position is symbolic and over time it has become one where they have to follow the instructions of the Prime Minister.

[For-Life]

Now, those were the facts. Here is my opinion. Stephan Harper of the Conservatives got greedy and power hungry last week. He did not think that coming back from an election, that either party would challenge him. So he released a plan to use the crisis as a scapegoat to harm the opposition. He offered no economic stimulus when Canadians needed it most. Most of all, he refused to develop a plan that the majority of Parliament could even find feasible.

So what could they do? There is no way in hell that they could have voted for that plan. It was ridiculous, partisan, and pigheaded. So they started talking to find a solution. They found common ground and created the coalition with the hopes that Harper would wake up.

Then instead of the guy saying, okay, you guys do not like that, lets find a common ground, he ran to the media with attack ads calling them communists and socialists. Harper did not and has not called on leader of any Canadian political party to try to work out a compromise. Well guess what? He is in a minority position. YOU HAVE TO WORK TOGETHER.

Now he has suspended parliament, and will probably produce a budget with all of the things the opposition has been asking for, thus saving his ***. But why did he not do that this week???? This is 99% his fault for trying to run parliament like he has a majority.

[rbaker]

For the non-Canadians who are wondring what is going on in Canada:

What makes you think that anyone other than a Canadian gives a rats *** about what is going on in Canada. Most of us have enough problems of our own.

[For-Life]

What makes you think that anyone other than a Canadian gives a rats *** about what is going on in Canada. Most of us have enough problems of our own.

Grow up

A lot of people care about what is going on in the world.

[Jacqui]

Grow up

A lot of people care about what is going on in the world.

I agree, but then I live very close to Canada and have some personal interest.

[LabOni]

I agree, but then I live very close to Canada and have some personal interest.

While I don't live close to Canada I do have a lot of people there I care about and care about what happens to them . So this is IMPORTANT to me, But I guess every forum has to have their @#$# people and as much as I hate to admit it even they are allowed their opinions . I just wish they would not talk like they speak for everyone.

[Dave Nelson]

I'm not sure what provoked Dick's response, the post was directed to those who are wondering what was going on in Canada, not those who apparently don't give a rats butt. It wasn't directed specifically to the US, but surely some Americans would be concerned about a crisis of this magnitude affecting their largest trading partner at a time of economic crisis. We are indeed a global village, the economic downturn is worldwide, and there are many who do give a rats butt what goes on in Canada, and the post was, as stated, directed at those who are interested in world affairs.
For life:
you are quite correct, my post was biased, and admittedly written hastily without a lot of detail. I made no effort to conceal my opinion, calling the coalition leeches.Your more detailed summary is considerably more accurate, although not without bias as well.

[Jacqui]

For life:
you are quite correct, my post was biased, and admittedly written hastily without a lot of detail. I made no effort to conceal my opinion, calling the coalition leeches.Your more detailed summary is considerably more accurate, although not without bias as well.

I haven't met a Canadian yet that wasn't biased to one side or the other. :D

So what do you think of Harper suspending Parliment?? Why doesn't the Governor General do something besides acting like someone's puppet??

[Steve Machol]

What makes you think that anyone other than a Canadian gives a rats *** about what is going on in Canada. Most of us have enough problems of our own.

Honestly this was uncalled for. If you personally don't care, then please just refrain from posting in this thread. Problem solved. :)

[rbaker]

I was trying to inject a little humorous sarcasm a-la George Carlin but apparently I misjudged my audience.

[Steve Machol]

I was trying to inject a little humorous sarcasm a-la George Carlin but apparently I misjudged my audience.

Ahhh, totally missed that. :)

[For-Life]

I haven't met a Canadian yet that wasn't biased to one side or the other. :D

So what do you think of Harper suspending Parliment?? Why doesn't the Governor General do something besides acting like someone's puppet??

we are all bias. I am bias to the Liberals. But I will say that I prefer the coalition not to happen. However, I blame it on Harper. The opposition did not have a choice.

As for the Governor General, I think she made the right call. Now please, do not confuse that with the right call being made. Imo, through Canadian history, the GG's job is to do what the PM tells her. She is not to take orders from the opposition. Right now, there has been no vote of non-confidence, because Harper will not allow it. Until that vote happens, Harper technically has the confidence of the house.

With that said, I do not think Harper should have suspended parliament. We need action, not nothing. He is wasting taxpayers money through doing this and not helping the economy when needed. He should have came out with a real throne speech last week. But he didn't. So he should have compromised. But he didn't. So he just cancelled parliament.

Well guess what, as people continue to lose their jobs, they can be happy that Harper thinks these political games are more important than their jobs.

[Dave Nelson]

Harper will not hand the leadership of this country over to a coalition of people who lost the election.
Harper's government has run this country, for better or worse, for years, and the re-election of this same goverment is the re-affirmation of the people of Canada that they trust the leadership. It is difficult to believe that the opposition has actually lost faith in a leader who was re-elected just weeks ago, and actually looking for support from a party whose mandate is the destruction and division of this country is reprehensible, but does clearly reveal the motive for the coalition is to gain power at any cost.
I believe that the coalition arranged a backroom deal to try and seize power using any excuse they could, while using the economic downturn as a convenient vehicle to carry out the plan. there is ample evidence to support this. The entire fiasco is perfectly legal, but highly immoral.
I believe Canadians numbering in the millions will send a clear message to this coalition, that we will not tolerate abuses to the democratic process.

[For-Life]

Harper will not hand the leadership of this country over to a coalition of people who lost the election.
Harper's government has run this country, for better or worse, for years, and the re-election of this same goverment is the re-affirmation of the people of Canada that they trust the leadership. It is difficult to believe that the opposition has actually lost faith in a leader who was re-elected just weeks ago, and actually looking for support from a party whose mandate is the destruction and division of this country is reprehensible, but does clearly reveal the motive for the coalition is to gain power at any cost.
I believe that the coalition arranged a backroom deal to try and seize power using any excuse they could, while using the economic downturn as a convenient vehicle to carry out the plan. there is ample evidence to support this. The entire fiasco is perfectly legal, but highly immoral.
I believe Canadians numbering in the millions will send a clear message to this coalition, that we will not tolerate abuses to the democratic process.

the coalition expected, like everyone else, that Harper would provide a stimulus package and would not try to pull the politics he did last week.

If Harper does not want to hand the controls of the house to the opposition, then work with them. Quebec has nothing to gain from a coalition, but can gain if the nation is doing better. Dion was leaving, so he had nothing to gain from the coalition.

60% of Canadians did not vote for the Conservatives. We wanted to put a check on him.

I bet if you ask most who voted for Harper, they would say that they did it because they thought he would be the best leader.

At the same time, if you asked those who voted for another party, they would probably say that they knew Harper would win, but wanted to keep a check on him.

This week, Harper did not satisfy the reason to vote for him, because he acted like a horrible leader. The opposition did what was asked by them to keep his excesses in check.

[Leo Hadley Jr]

Very Important Questions.......

Sadly, I dont really understand your political process up there, ours is mind boggling enough. I just need to know two things.

1. Will the political situation in Canada in any way shape or form hurt the game of Hockey?
2. Will you guys let me across the border when I head to the Yukon after the US dollar is worth 4 Canadian pennies? (coming soon)

[For-Life]

So Michael Ignatiff (former Harvard and Oxford Political Sciences Professor) is now the Liberal Leader. Not my ideal pick, but probably the best option out there. I like a guy like Gerard Kennedy, but with him supporting Dion and being a little left, it would not have been a good pick. Bob Rae, no matter how potentially good he can be, would have been a horrible pick, because no person from Ontario would vote for him. I think a good 8 years with Ignatiff will usher in the next bright candidate.

For the Conservatives, Harper does not look strong. He will get through the budget and no coalition will come to power, but I think his time is coming. I think if he does fall soon (whether by the conservatives, by an election or by a coalition) he will be replaced by Jim Prentice, who I regard as far better.