Who else enjoys the opposition making an ass of themselves?

[Icebound]

..


Prorogueing parliament to hide from a non-confidence vote, is an undemocratic precedent that is going to cause huge problems in the future.



...

[Sulako]

from http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ ... tory/Front

"The heat is on Governor-General Michaëlle Jean – and it's coming from a former governor-general.

Ed Schreyer said in an interview yesterday that granting a wish for the prorogation of Parliament at this point would constitute an evasion of the process of Parliament and should not be done.

“I'll put it this way and I will make this a plain-spoken sentence. Nothing should be done to aid and abet the evasion of submitting to the will of Parliament. I think one can stop there. It's about as basic as that.”

With a new Parliament having just opened, the only circumstances to justify prorogation, Mr. Schreyer said, would be a genuine emergency. “The only emergency seems to be a desire [of the Harper government] to avoid facing Parliament. That is not an emergency.”

[Rockie]

from http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ ... tory/Front

"The heat is on Governor-General Michaëlle Jean – and it's coming from a former governor-general.

With a new Parliament having just opened, the only circumstances to justify prorogation, Mr. Schreyer said, would be a genuine emergency. “The only emergency seems to be a desire [of the Harper government] to avoid facing Parliament. That is not an emergency.”

Apparently Mr. Schreyer hasn't been reading the economic news in the last few months. While Canada has the best economy in the world right now thanks in large part to the Conservatives, handing the reins over to the coalition of clowns and pretenders would sink us to the bottom of the barrel in record time. Thankfully the current Governor General is more intelligent than Mr. Schreyer, and has given all party's concerned a chance to screw their heads on correctly before they do real permanent damage.

[Hedley]

undemocratic

You seem to be assuming that Canada is a functioning
democracy. I wish I shared your youthful optimism!

[iflyforpie]

Hedley, you keep on dumping on Canada that it is a 'Banana republic' and a 'People's Republic' and is not a functioning democracy. I will admit that it is a very inefficient system, but it still functions. We have one of the highest human development indexes in the world and if I had a choice of where I would live in the world, Canada is it.

I wonder just how many other countries you've seen that have a better system for the majority of the people? If you think this country has given you a hard time, you've seen nothing compared to what some of these real 'banana republics' and 'peoples republics' can dish out.

[Morav]

How come news stations haven't been showing any polls which they have put up on their websites? Polls regarding public support for or against the coalition.
The ones I've seen showed 70% of the public against the Coalition.

Looks like the Liberal party is in for some hard times.

[BibleMonkey]

Hedley, you keep on dumping on Canada that it is a 'Banana republic' and a 'People's Republic' and is not a functioning democracy. I will admit that it is a very inefficient system, but it still functions. We have one of the highest human development indexes in the world and if I had a choice of where I would live in the world, Canada is it.

I wonder just how many other countries you've seen that have a better system for the majority of the people? If you think this country has given you a hard time, you've seen nothing compared to what some of these real 'banana republics' and 'peoples republics' can dish out.

We have one of the highest human development indexes in the world..

The Human development index is an evil abstraction invented by a man working for an organization responsible for more deaths than al Queda.

Iceland has the "highest"-human development index.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... ment_Index



yet:
Terror as Iceland faces economic collapse

I agree with you that Canada is a nice place to live-although arguably so is the United States, whose citizens still have $6400 a year more in disposable income-and at the root of it-do not rely on a political system which , as we have just witnessed, chooses leaders from a philosophy inarguably grounded in leadership by genetic superiority.

No matter which sock puppet we are cheering for-a representative of better, royal blood has chosen for us.

[lucky37]

I don't understand why everyone keeps bringing up the argument that the Conservatives received less than 50% support in the election, and therefore don't deserve to be in power. It happens to be the way our FPTP system works, so maybe the better question to be asking instead of trying to form a coalition would be if Canada should change to proportional representation?

Chretien got a MAJORITY in 1997 with 38.5% of the vote (1% more than Harper got to win a minority this year), but that is never brought up. Instead the anti-Harper crowd uses every excuse they can, no matter how incorrect it may be.

Everyone keeps bringing up the fact that the Conservatives received less than 50% support in the election because they did. They received 37% of the votes cast. This is not directly related to the number of MPs elected in the end. Nobody is forgetting that a majority by Chretien happened with less than 50% of the votes cast, and nobody is incorrect in saying that the CONs only got 37% of the vote. If you add up all the numbers of MPs in parliament in the opposition, they outnumber the CONs. Likewise, the % of voters who voted for the opposition also outnumber the CONs. No lies here...

As for Harper, he reminds me of Big Brother from 1984.. if you tell a lie long enough people start to believe it....

These lies on top of other lies, who can trust him? The problem is, these lies are absorbed into the Canadian public and the truth is lost. Though people rally against the lies and discount the lies in an attempt to spread the truth, the lies are the first thing heard by the public and they are what is remembered. Nobody assumes the PM would boldly lie to the public time and time again...

I don't like the idea of a coalition under these circumstances and this instability, but Harper has to go. Replace him as leader with somebody willing to cooperate, not dictate, and I'd be a happy person.

[Cat Driver]

These lies on top of other lies, who can trust him?

Of course he is a liar, how many politicians can you name who are not?

[Icebound]

...

You seem to be assuming that Canada is a functioning
democracy. I wish I shared your youthful optimism!

It would be nice if some "politicians", whose job is supposed to be "functioning democracy".... would be more interested in restoring it.... rather than circumventing whatever is left of it.

That, alone, disqualifies Harper for the job.


...

[Driving Rain]

I hope they all choke on their perogies of parliament.

[Rockie]

I have an idea. Let's have an election, and the parties that get the lowest amount of votes get to combine and add up their votes until they exceed the highest vote earning party. Then those parties get to form the national government even though they can't agree on anything and one of them is bent on destroying the country.

How could that possibly fail?

[Hedley]

I find it curious that people criticize me, for stating
my opinion that Canada is not a functioning democracy.

This criticism is frankly bizarre in the context of
recent current events.

It's funny how people react, when you criticize a
obviously flawed and coarse-grained "democracy"
such as Canada, where we elect a de facto dictator
every 5 years, who is given powers only dreamed
of by banana republic politicians.

Here is some constructive criticism, and a proposed
solution:

the people who want power are exactly the wrong
people who should be given it

To that end, I propose that every 4 years, we have
a nationally televised event called "Election Night
In Canada". What happens is that 300 names are
drawn out of a virtual hat, which contains the names
of all Canadian citizens over the age of 18. Some of
the citizens will be dead, or infirm. Fair enough, it
leaves you with 200.

These lucky citizen are now faced with a choice: they
can either spend the next 4 years in jail, or Ottawa.

If they chose Ottawa (not necessarily the best choice)
they are given barracks-style lodging and food, and
at the end of the 4 years, $1M tax free.

Their job for the next four years is to form the next
Parliament, and govern the country as they see fit
for the next 4 years.

They would owe absolutely nothing to anyone, so
they could do the best job they could, and at the
end of the 4 years, your name is taken out of the
hat for the next draw.

Jury duty folks. If a bunch of citizens are supposed
to be smart enough to figure out whether or not
someone is a murderer, they can probably figure
out how to run Canada better than the donkeys
we have now.

This is not a democratic system. I think it would
work FAR better than what we have now. It would
be a government OF the people.

Of course, this could never happen. What politican
would voluntarily relinquish power (guffaw).

Anyways, you asked, and here's the answer. The
People's Republic of Canada is not a functioning
democracy.

[Dust Devil]

Canada has a functioning democracy it's just that 50% of the people choose not to participate

[niss]

I have an idea. Let's have an election, and the parties that get the lowest amount of votes get to combine and add up their votes until they exceed the highest vote earning party. Then those parties get to form the national government even though they can't agree on anything and one of them is bent on destroying the country.

How could that possibly fail?

This is hardly a fair point. Harpers party was elected by 38% of the voters. The other MPs who are not part of his party whom were put there because their electors trusted them to speak for them in parliment are not happy with him for one reason or another.

This is part of the game.

To take a page out of a few of the other threads "This is how things work in OUR country....if you don't like it.....Fit in or @#$! off!"

[Cat Driver]

To take a page out of a few of the other threads "This is how things work in OUR country....if you don't like it.....Fit in or @#$! off!"

Has it occurred to you niss that those of us who do not agree with the way "OUR " country is run may be just a little annoyed by you telling to fit in or @#$! off?

[niss]

Cat, I have no problem with people not liking the way its run.

I am simply pointing out that this is not undemocratic, this is not treason, and this is not illegal. This is part of our political process. And for those who don't like it, perhaps they should find a country with a different process. After all, this system was in place alot longer than any of us.

[pilotbzh]

gang rules... if you running the bigest gang of criminel, it's a matter of time until the other criminal gang up on you.... so unless you have a clear monopoly, play nice with the other boys.

[Cat Driver]

O.K. niss I see where you are coming from....what they are doing is not illegal.....neither is it illegal for them to lie like hell and never have to answer for being dishonest, therefore they deserve to be held in contempt for the sleasy pricks they are..

...tell you what niss I prefer true corrupt countries at least with some money you can get things done.

[Icebound]

I hope they all choke on their perogies of parliament.

They are meant to be BOILED, not fried.


...

[Rockie]

I have an idea. Let's have an election, and the parties that get the lowest amount of votes get to combine and add up their votes until they exceed the highest vote earning party. Then those parties get to form the national government even though they can't agree on anything and one of them is bent on destroying the country.

How could that possibly fail?

This is hardly a fair point. Harpers party was elected by 38% of the voters. The other MPs who are not part of his party whom were put there because their electors trusted them to speak for them in parliment are not happy with him for one reason or another.

This is part of the game.

To take a page out of a few of the other threads "This is how things work in OUR country....if you don't like it.....Fit in or @#$! off!"

Stop talking nonsense Niss, this is exactly the point. These clowns were not elected to govern the country and no amount of spin is going to make it that way. If they want to have another election and try and get elected again then I'm all for it. But they know they don't have a hope in hell of that happening so they hide behind procedural rules and take power anyway they can except ethically. Was there a coalition choice on the last ballot? I didn't think so. Did you vote for the Bloc? I didn't think so. Did you vote for both the other guys? I didn't think so. You voted for one party if you bothered to vote at all.

I have news for you, this is my country too.

[niss]

I have an idea. Let's have an election, and the parties that get the lowest amount of votes get to combine and add up their votes until they exceed the highest vote earning party. Then those parties get to form the national government even though they can't agree on anything and one of them is bent on destroying the country.

How could that possibly fail?

This is hardly a fair point. Harpers party was elected by 38% of the voters. The other MPs who are not part of his party whom were put there because their electors trusted them to speak for them in parliment are not happy with him for one reason or another.

This is part of the game.

To take a page out of a few of the other threads "This is how things work in OUR country....if you don't like it.....Fit in or @#$! off!"

Stop talking nonsense Niss, this is exactly the point. These clowns were not elected to govern the country and no amount of spin is going to make it that way. If they want to have another election and try and get elected again then I'm all for it. But they know they don't have a hope in hell of that happening so they hide behind procedural rules and take power anyway they can except ethically. Was there a coalition choice on the last ballot? I didn't think so. Did you vote for the Bloc? I didn't think so. Did you vote for both the other guys? I didn't think so. You voted for one party if you bothered to vote at all.

I have news for you, this is my country too.

This is your country too. And its political system has been here longer than you.

Actually the other parties were elected to govern the country, thats why their party was voted. They may not have recieved the mandate but that is what they were elected for.

You simply don't like this because the team you were rooting for is loosing.

I have no stakes in this, I chose to abstain from voting. That said I am trying to correct people when they use the typical conservative rhetoric of calling this illegal and a nationalistic issue.

What would you have said if Harper did this in '04?

[Dust Devil]

This is your country too. And its political system has been here longer than you.

What does the length of time the political system has been around have to do with anything? The beauty thing about political systems in democracies is they can be changed to suit the will of the people. If the will of the people is to not allow the coalition then that is the way it should be regardless of constitutional law. As a citizen and active voter I am well within my rights to voice my opinion on any issue in this country. I also expect any government regardless of political affiliation to take my concerns seriously as should every citizen.

And as I've stated before had Harper succeeded in 04 it would have been equally wrong.

[Topspin]

Yeah, it sure is nice to live in a dictatorship where a party that got 38% of the vote can hold the other 62% hostage.

As far as I can tell, the NDP and Libs represent more of the people than the Conservatives, so I'm not sure what the conservative definition of 'democracy' is. The NDP and Libs weren't breaking any laws, and in fact they were working within the framework of parliament when they set up this deal. It's the Conservatives who are disregarding the will of the people, but that's hardly anything new.

It's called undemocratic, because, what is the poll average?? 70% of Canadians don't support the coalition? And Dianne has the nerve to go on TV and say this is what Canadian's want? Idiocracy.

[C23flyer]

As I understand it, whether you want to characterize him as running or otherwise, Harper is also playing within in the rules of parliament. As mentioned earlier, he takes the next month to demonstrate to the public that he will do anything to compromise and make the minority work, the opposition votes non-confidence in January, a third election is called and Harper wins his majority. Why? Because the public only recognizes and has available to them, one process for punishing our elected officials, and they can only punish one party at a time. So, whoever is seen as the biggest offender, will get the biggest boot. I'm not an odds-maker, but if anyone wants to set up a pool to predict the outcome I pick "Conservative majority by non-confidence and re-election."

Con Maj (NC RE) - 2:1
Con Min (NC RE) - 5:1
Con Min (C SQ) - 8:1
Lib Min (NC CLTN) - 15:1
Lib Min (NC E) - 30:1
Lib Maj (NC E) - 50:1
TDEGHRCP - 10,000,000:1

NC - non-confidence vote, C - budget passes, RE - re-elected, SQ - status quo, CLTN - coalition, E -elected, TDEGHRCP - truly democratically elected government of honest representatives of the Canadian people