Save Democracy! Save Canada!

[lookingforitallthetime]

Your comment re Dion is merely partisan nonsense.

It would be if I was partisan.

My concerns about Dion come from a history of good judgement and common sense.

We'll see if I was wrong about him soon enough.

 

[danmand]

It would be if I was partisan.

You have become as partisan as your buddy Lancs the last few days.
Snap out of it, before it becomes a habit.

 

[red]

It would be if I was partisan.

My concerns about Dion come from a history of good judgement and common sense.

We'll see if I was wrong about him soon enough.

I will take you at your word, but I would believe it more if you used his correct name.

 

[lookingforitallthetime]

I will take you at your word, but I would believe it more if you used his correct name.

Fair enough.

 

[Bear669]

Thats not what its about.

save democracy by keeping Stephen Harper in power. That's rich

Thanks for the laugh

Call the election with EVERYONE'S cards on the table. If Stephen loses, so be it.

Many reasons I do not like SH, and he was a jerk and fool. But no reason the rest of should be stuck with the coalition.

Among other issues, those in the other 9 provinces- that sucking sound is your $ going to Quebec!

 

[landscaper]

The GG can in fact tell the parties to go and play nice, the question being will they? The question of the loss of confidence in the house is a major one, it basically says that the NLIBLOC will not agree to anything the govt as to say , that is probably not the bigest surprise of the week.

If she decides that the NLIBLOC is not viable she can send us to the pols

She can at the request of the P.M> prorouge parliment for a time to cool off

or she can give the NLIBLOC a chance to govern.

Any of the above is possible, I would bet on prorouging the parliment myself this will give her some breathing room before setting off a constitutional crisis as well as possibly lower the tempurature.

 

[red]

.

Among other issues, those in the other 9 provinces- that sucking sound is your $ going to Quebec!

unfortunately that won't change no matter who is in power. just remember how much payments to quebec increased under harper.

 

[fuji]

The GG is appointed by the PM, so the break from england is there already.

You are only half right; but right in spirit.

The GG is not appointed by the PM. The GG is appointed by the Queen of Canada on advice from the PM. The Queen of Canada has traditionally always accepted the advice of the PM in appointing her GG.

Note that I said "Queen of Canada" so you are right in spirit, there is a legal break from England. The fact that the Queen of Canada happens to be the same person at this moment in time as the Queen of England has the legal status of a coincidence.

Yes it's true that Canada has exactly the same rules for succession for the Queen of Canada as England has for the Queen of England. As a result we will independently pick the same person to be King of Canada as England will pick to be King there after QE2 moves on.

However it is a real legal break because the Privy Council of Canada has the power to change those rules of succession and if they exercise that power we would wind up with a different person being King/Queen of Canada than the individual who is King/Queen of England.

 

[fuji]

bet on prorouging the parliment

If the C's ask for Parliament to be Prorogued I imagine the opposition throws a giant party and gleefully prepares to fight an election the basis of which is that the Conservatives are desperately, selfishly trying to cling to power by any means possible, including suspending Parliament to preserve their own power at a moment in time when Canadians desperately needed action from Parliament.

I would imagine there could be no greater Christmas gift from Harper to whoever takes the Liberal leadership than such an act of selfishly clinging to power at the expense of Canada's well being.

If you hadn't noticed we are in the middle of an economic crisis, a time when Canadians NEED Parliament to be sitting down and getting to work--suspending all work just so you can selfishly cling to power should be electoral suicide.

 

[The Cunning Linguist]

Nope. He lacks the constitutional power to call elections. It is up to Michaelle Jean, our Governor General, to decide if and when we will have an election. The best Harper can do is plead with her to call an election. However she is essentially required to follow precedent, and precedent dictates that rather than call an election she must give the Opposition a chance to form a government.



Wrong. It is up the Members of Parliament to determine who will govern the country. It is up to us to elect MP's that will make sensible decisions on our behalf.

fuji...there's been a lot of replies insulting you, and other posts, but I do believe you were being deliberately obtuse, as you knew exactly what I was suggesting.

Unless you can provide an example, I don't believe there has ever been a case in the modern era where the GG refused the PM's request to call an election. She basically is just a rubber stamp.

As for electing MP's that will make sensible decisions on our behalf, it's never really been that way for Canadians. IMO, you make your choice locally on whether you favour the leader, the party, or the individual MP.

 

[Cinema Face]

This discussion proves one thing to me. The lefties on this board only support democracy when they get the outcome they want. Otherwise, it can go to hell. A coalition of Lieberal, NDP and separatist is a match made in hell. Anyone who thinks that is a better alternative to the party in power is a complete idiot.

A coalition of the loser parties, the ones that Canada didn’t vote for is a total travesty of democracy. Furthermore it will have no chance of survival with all these squabbling loons, separatists with the agenda of destroying confederation and a really pissed off conservative party with only 9 seats short of a majority will certainly do everything possible to force an election.

 

[fuji]

fuji...there's been a lot of replies insulting you, and other posts, but I do believe you were being deliberately obtuse, as you knew exactly what I was suggesting.

Unless you can provide an example, I don't believe there has ever been a case in the modern era where the GG refused the PM's request to call an election. She basically is just a rubber stamp.

In 1926 the GG refused Mackenzie King's request to dissolve Parliament and turned over the government to the opposition. The rules have not changed since.

Note that in 2004 Harper wrote to the GG and said that in his opinion the GG had a constitutional obligation to consult with the opposition rather than calling an election on request from the PM.

So Stephen Harper disagrees with you and there is a historical precedent to the contrary...

 

[fuji]

A coalition of Lieberal, NDP and separatist is a match made in hell. Anyone who thinks that is a better alternative to the party in power is a complete idiot.

Unless you can think of a compelling reason why a Conservative, NDP, and separatist coalition is a match any less made in hell then you can add Stephen harper to your list of complete idiots.

In 2004 Harper wrote to the GG saying that the three opposition parties were in close consultation, represented a majority of seats, and should be given an opportunity to form the government if the PM requested an election. His letter was co-signed by his erstwhile coalition partners Jack Layton and Gilles Duceppe.

What I find amazing is that having tried to do the EXACT SAME thing himself in 2004 he can turn around with a straight face and call it unconstitutional now.

Maybe you lot are more comfortable with hypocrisy than I am.

 

[RandyAndy2]

Harper does not have the power to do away with the GG. If anythign the GG has the power to do away with Parliament.

Seriously.

The GG hs far more "reserve power" than most peope realize and could easily precipitate a massive constitutional crisis were she/he ever to use it.

For example the GG can unilaterally declare war and order the Canadian army into the field, without any regard to how Parliament feels about it.

At any rate Harper by hismelf does not have the power to change Canada from a Dominion to a Republic. That would take massive multi-party co-operation and the support of a majority of the provinces.

Fuji, I've agreed with most of what you've said, including that looking conceded the debate. However, I'm sure you'd agree that the "reserve power" that you speak of is theoretical, rather than practical. I've never heard that the GG could declare war unilaterally, and I'm not buying it unless you can support the point. It makes sense to me that Parliament would have to pass a declaration of war, as it did against Germany in WW2.

One thing I'm wondering about with respect to the GG is, suppose Harper asks the GG to prorogue or dissolve Parliament and the GG refused. At that point couldn't Harper recommend to the Queen that the GG be replaced (likely with someone more "friendly" to the Cons) so that he can get the answer he wants? I'm sure that would be throwing gasoline on the fire of the situation, but I'm not sure that there's anything that I would believe that Harper wouldn't do to retain power. Just a thought.

 

[Aardvark154]

Very good Historical Constiutional points Fuji.

That still doesn't change the fact that I hate this!

 

[nottyboi]

It's far more complicated than that. While we may physically put an X next to an MP's name, a myriad of factors go into making the decision who that MP will be. Many Canadians vote strategically and considering how close Harper came to a majority it would be completely ridiculous to dismiss the very real possibility that a lot of those Lib X'es would have gone to the conservatives MP's had those voters known about this unholy alliance with the NDP and the Bloc.

How many of those X's would have gone to Libs if Harper said he planned to do nothing about the crisis, planned to attack pay equity and was going to wipe out funding for political parties?

 

[nottyboi]

Very good Historical Constiutional points Fuji.

That still doesn't change the fact that I hate this!

Really? 'cos I am LOVING this!!!

 

[fuji]

However, I'm sure you'd agree that the "reserve power" that you speak of is theoretical, rather than practical.

Let's hope so. It would spawn one hell of a constitutional crisis were the GG or the Queen ever to exercise it.

I've never heard that the GG could declare war unilaterally, and I'm not buying it unless you can support the point.

The GG is the head of the state and the commander in chief of the army and in theory exercises all of the powers of the Queen. The Queen is sovereign and in theory incarnates the state and commands the entire executive.

We have evolved into a system where the Queen never exercises those powers except on request from the Prime Minister, this is called "constitutional monarchy" but the whole thing depends in part on the Queen (and her representatives) playing along their role--nothing strictly requires them to.

What we would do if the Monarchy ever decided to exercise its theoretical powers, as it used to just a few hundred years ago, I don't know. It's be a bloody mess. I imagine some way would be found to hold some sort of referndum or other mechanism to declare Canada a republic--but it would be a complete mess.

suppose Harper asks the GG to prorogue or dissolve Parliament and the GG refused. At that point couldn't Harper recommend to the Queen that the GG be replaced

He might, but QE2 might not comply.

As it is customary in all Westminister Parliaments for the Prime Minister to resign under such circumstances she would be receiving a request from a man who is obstinately refusing to resign a post he should no longer hold.

She might use precedent from around the commonwealth in making her decision. She would probably note the case in 1975 in which her GG in Australia dismissed the Prime Minister and appointed the Leader of the Opposition to the post of Prime Minister.

 

[lookingforitallthetime]

Fuji, I've agreed with most of what you've said, including that looking conceded the debate.

lol....funny.

Scroll through the thread randy, fuji and I didn't debate anything. Since there was no debate, how could I possibly concede?

I simply pointed out the fact fuji is a pompous ass. It looks like other people agree with me.

 

[fuji]

I didn't debate anything.

Sure you did. So it wasn't on this thread, it was on the others that were on this topic. You were on about Canada having a written constitution, the coalition being unelected, etc.