Monday December 8

[Never Compromised]

Apparently Harper will go to the GG and ask that the House be prorogued on Monday.

The GG will deny the request.

The GG has received advice that she should not take a side either way. So no coalition, despite the constitutional validity of one.

The House is disolved.

Back to the campaign hustings.

 

[dcbogey]

source?

 

[james t kirk]

An election would be the best course of action.

Preferably with Peter McKay vs. Michael Ignatief.

It avoids the bs associated with any seldom seen or used "coalition"

 

[lookingforitallthetime]

I hope you're right compromised.

 

[dcbogey]

These experts seem to disagree.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081128.wGG29/BNStory/politics/

 

[james t kirk]

ANOTHER $300 mill ................... Great.

I agree.

And you can blame 1 guy and hopefully that one moron resigns on Monday after meeting with the GG.

 

[LancsLad]

I hope you're right compromised.

When we get the majority this time, we will finally be able to do what needs to be done.


Some might call Harper vindictive, I just think he has a good memory and is thorough.




.

 

[someone]

Compromised, I am hoping that you are right about points 3, 4 and 5. In many ways the current situation is different than 1926 and to the extent it is the same, the precedents need updating. I would be very interested in your source, if you could provide a link.

 

[train]

I agree.

And you can blame 1 guy and hopefully that one moron resigns on Monday after meeting with the GG.

Actually you can blame 4 guys.

 

[Never Compromised]

source?

Neither the media, nor the GG's office. "Word on the street" is that both the Liberals and the Conservatives have hired constitutional experts and are prepared to go to the Supreme Court.

 

[red]

I agree.

And you can blame 1 guy and hopefully that one moron resigns on Monday after meeting with the GG.

I think harper should have to pay for this election.

 

[oldjones]

Well someone seems to have an inside line to Ms Jean and her thinking. The only thing clear to most people is that she suddenly gets to exercise more decision-making power than most GGs. But it's entirely her power.

Harper can ask her to progogue, but she need not accede. If she doesn't, he has to meet the House and it'll be only a short time before he loses a vote which demonstrates he cannot govern.

Of course, if Ms Jean refuses to prorogue he could right then and there ask her to call an election, but that's her decision to make.

Likewise, if he's defeated in the House, and asks for an election, she need not grant his request if she believes there's a better option than another $300 million dollar election likely as indecisive as the last.

Technically, it's her government, and she has a responsibility to ensure there are ministers in place who represent most of the people to do the business of the country.

It's entirely up to her whether the interests of the country would be better served by calling on the NDP/Liberal coalition which has a written agreement with the party representing Quebec, and thereby commands a real majority of the people's elected representatives. Presumably she'll weigh the understandable unhappiness of those who feel the election was decisive and this is somehow moving the goalposts—it wasn't, and it isn't—against the understandable unhappiness of an electorate that just wants the job to be done, not to vote for the fourth time in as many years.

One would hope the Supreme Court would realize that no good purpose would be served by a further delay while the case is argued back and forth and nobody's actually governing. How the difficult decision would be any less unhappy made by nine judges I cannot see.

Entirely legally and properly, the options are an election no one* wants; a coalition government no one expected, or an impotent government on life support no one can afford. We should all be praying for Ms Jean.

*Of course there's the MiniMe Machiavelli Scenario: Unable to win a majority legitimately after three tries, in spite of destroying the Liberal leader and crippling his party, Harper has come up with a way to paint himself and the Conservatives as victims of bullying by those big bad NDP and Liberal bullies, with the Evil Separatists (most of whom have been MPs longer than the Conservatives) piling on. Hopefully "defeated by this cabal before we could save the country" or at worst having to ask for an election, he hopes to finally get his majority on spurious accusations that his elected members are somehow more democratically entitled than those on the other side. Whether he can succeed in this slander, we'll have to see

 

[fuji]

But it's entirely her power.

Moreover her duty. Most Canadian constitutional experts see the primary function of a Governor General as being to crack down on ruthless Prime Ministers who refuse to yield power when they ought to, or who attempt dirty tricks like calling unnecessary elections, or refusing to call a necessary election, or who suspend Parliament just to avoid a confidence vote.

She will judge whether Harper has overstepped his bounds and rule accordingly.

She is the ultimate check on a Prime Minister attempting to become a dictator by ignoring the traditions of our democracy. If Harper does not obey our democratic traditions she has the power to dismiss him.

 

[slowpoke]

The GG won't be able to take her cue from the public opinion polls. According to the morning news, 55% are against Harper being ousted and 45% want him to walk the plank. I'm not sure about the polling company or the methodology but a 5% difference is hardly compelling - especially since the coalition has quite a few more seats than Harper.

Harper already prorogued parliament once about a year ago so the GG has got to be wondering about Harper's penchant for parliamentary gymnastics. Harper has already used up his mulligan and the GG may be questioning his high maintenance tendencies.

In 2004 Harper was in cahoots with the NDP & Bloc and signed on to do exactly what the Liberals, NDP & Bloc are doing now. The fact that Harper was willing to do this himself lends legitimacy to the coalition's argument now.

Given the urgency of our economic situation, the GG will probably want an immediate solution - like asking the 3 amigos to seek the confidence of the house and get on with it. We just had an election and we can't afford another lengthy delay.

It's still a tough call for her but, IMHO, she will see more reasons to let the coaltion form a gov't than she will to call an election. She may prorogue parliament for a while but that also wastes valuable time and won't necessarily change the outcome.

 

[lookingforitallthetime]

She is the ultimate check on a Prime Minister attempting to become a dictator by ignoring the traditions of our democracy. If Harper does not obey our democratic traditions she has the power to dismiss him.

Please keep in mind I'm not disputing your understanding of the GG duties and responsibilities. The fact that you are correct is further proof we need to reform our system. It's time these undemocratic "traditions of our democracy" were thrown out with the trash.

There is something terribly wrong with a democracy that gives one appointed official this much authority. It should be voters and not an appointed official that determines if Harper's actions are worthy of dismissal.

The Governor General is the Queen's representative, not ours.

 

[chiller_boy]

Hopefully we do get an election... and a Conservative majority


If there is an election... who will lead the LIEberals???

I think Harper has just given us a hint of what a conservative majority would mean. If you think that returning to special interest funding, cutting back on any cultural support, eliminating the publics right to strike, ignoring a global economic crisis, and god knows what else are the right ways of governing than a conservative majority is for you. I only hope that if there is an election we put all the cards on the table and each party specifies what their plan is. I didn't hear anything in the last campaign about eliminating public funding of elections, did you??

 

[danmand]

There is something terribly wrong with a democracy that gives one appointed official this much authority. It should be voters and not an appointed official that determines if Harper's actions are worthy of dismissal.

If you will allow me to comment on your post, I think the problem is that canadian
parliamentary tradition has evolved with essentially a two party system.

Today, however there are 5 parties with substantial voter support. Countries
with proportional representation voting systems have a rich tradition for
dealing with many parties.

Let me give you an example from the land of herrings:

The queen calls in all the party leaders, one by one, and asks her who they
prefer to form the government. If someone is pointed to by a majority of
mp's, she asks him/her to form the government. If nobody emerges with a
majority, she calls in the party leaders again, one by one, and asks them,
who they prefer to form the government, etc etc etc. The queen has no
discressionary powers, acts effectively as a calculating machine.

 

[slowpoke]

Please keep in mind I'm not disputing your understanding of the GG duties and responsibilities. The fact that you are correct is further proof we need to reform our system. It's time these undemocratic "traditions of our democracy" were thrown out with the trash.

There is something terribly wrong with a democracy that gives one appointed official this much authority. It should be voters and not an appointed official that determines if Harper's actions are worthy of dismissal.

I think you're ignoring the fact that Harper has already received his democratic message from the electorate. So have the other parties. In a minority situation like this, there is nothing undemocratic about having an impartial referee like the GG. Her job is clear - to make sure the house isn't frozen by some minority quack who can't get his shit together but won't get out of the way so other democratically elected people can take care of the nation's business.

 

[lookingforitallthetime]

If you will allow me to comment on your post, I think the problem is that canadian
parliamentary tradition has evolved with essentially a two party system.

Today, however there are 5 parties with substantial voter support.

I agree with you 100%. I've been saying all along our parliamentary system is not working.

This is why we nead an overhaul.

 

[lookingforitallthetime]

I think you're ignoring the fact that Harper has already received his democratic message from the electorate. So have the other parties. In a minority situation like this, there is nothing undemocratic about having an impartial referee like the GG. Her job is clear - to make sure the house isn't frozen by some minority quack who can't get his shit together but won't get out of the way so other democratically elected people can take care of the nation's business.

You keep making the same tired argument.

Harper's party recieved more seats than any other party. In a parliamentary system this means he gets to form the government. The "democratic message from the electorate" was Harper should form the government with a minority. In this scenario the opposition parties have the power to force him out.

I have no problem with that provided the next step is an election.