First off, I hope that everyone had a happy Christmas and that you are all looking forward to the New Year :)
I'm currently listening to an interview between Stephen Harper and CTV's Steve Murphy (found here, http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids.individual&videoid=48407586) in which he says (among a lot of other things that will be discussed) "there's a lot of attention these days to the shenanigans on Parliament Hill" which I thought was a very good term for all the nonsense he's created by suspending parliament... except I believe he's probably talking about the proposed coalition government again.
Harper's Tories unleashed a smear campaign after the suspension of parliament accusing the proposal of being "undemocratic", that the coalition would "overturn the results of the election" (said again in his interview), that the Liberals and the NDP were aligned with the separatist Bloc Quebecois [insinuating that the BQ and the separatists in Quebec will win in the end] and that the opposition was secretly aligned with Satan. Okay, the last one was my own creation, but Harper did set out to demonize the opposition and turn support away from them. It didn't help the Liberals that the leader they had was probably the most unpopular leader they've had in the past... forever... and that he's better off forgotten (what was his name again?)
But I've gotten off topic. Let's go back to Harper's position on this coalition government.
Harper said on December 1st, before suspending parliament, that "[The Conservative] party will never consider a coalition with the Bloc Québecois". (http://www.liberal.ca/story_15511_e.aspx) Strong words, right?
I find it very interesting that the Prime Minister is so dead set against this coalition, since he's supported coalitions in the past. Surprised? Disbelieving? Let's go back to 2004, when Stevie wrote a certain letter to then Governor-General, Adrienne Clarkson, insinuating that the opposition was willing to make a coalition to replace then Prime Minister Paul Martin. Remember that? Well, I don't, since I was very young then, but I've read a lot about it, which is almost as good...
Let's take a look at the letter:
_________________________________________________________________
September 9, 2004
Her Excellency the Right Honourable Adrienne Clarkson,
C.C., C.M.M., C.O.M., C.D.
Governor General
Rideau Hall
1 Sussex Drive
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A1
Excellency,
As leaders of the opposition parties, we are well aware that, given the Liberal minority government, you could be asked by the Prime Minister to dissolve the 38th Parliament at any time should the House of Commons fail to support some part of the government’s program.
We respectfully point out that the opposition parties, who together constitute a majority in the House [emphasis mine], have been in close consultation. We believe that, should a request for dissolution arise this should give you cause, as constitutional practice has determined [emphasis mine], to consult the opposition leaders and consider all of your options before exercising your constitutional authority [emphasis mine].
Your attention to this matter is appreciated.
Sincerely,
Hon. Stephen Harper, P.C., M.P.
Leader of the Opposition
Leader of the Conservative Party of Canada
Gilles Duceppe, M.P. Leader of the Bloc Quebecois
Jack Layton, M.P. Leader of the New Democratic Party
___________________________________________________________________
(This letter can be found here:http://www.liberal.ca/story_15511_e.aspx or pretty much anywhere else on the net devoted to politics. I encourage you to look it up.)
Now, let's consider the points of emphasis that I have italicized, and look at their applications today, shall we?
"[The opposition parties] who together constitute a majority in the House [of Commons]"
The same is true today; the opposition parties (the Liberals, the NDP, and the Bloc Quebecois) constitute together a majority in the House of Commons. From this point of view, the transfer of power from a minority Conservative government to a majority of the House of Commons is hardly undemocratic, but is rather a sound democratic move.
"...This should give you cause, as constitutional practice has determined, to consult the opposition leaders and consider all your options before exercising your constitutional authority"
Here, Stevie reminds the Governor General that, in the event of a dissolution of Parliament, she is allowed to meet with the opposition leaders and ask if they are capable of forming a coalition government. This is a perfectly legal move and is allowed by Canada's supreme law, the constitution. Here, he isn't talking about a coalition being undemocratic; he's proposing one himself!
Any of this making any sense or ringing any bells?
Let's take another look at that smear campaign now. Harper's letter makes much of what he is saying sound like major hypocrisy, no? After all, things haven't changed (from a constitutional perspective, anyway) from 2004. Coalition government is still legal.
The fact of the matter is, Harper is setting out to try and scare Canadians. He and his supporters are using what I like to call "power words" to shock the public. "Power words" in my use of the term are words that any individual can use to inflate an issue and divert attention from the message of another individual. In this case, it's on a much grander scale. We're being bamboozled. Here are a few of those power words: Coup, undemocratic, overthrow, separatist, backdoor, unfair. The "power words" concept can be applied to sentences too, as in: "they are trying to overturn the election", which is one I've heard a lot recently out of the mouths of Conservatives.
What are they trying to divert attention from?
They are trying to divert attention from the controversy of their proposed "fall economic update" which would have eliminated public funding for political parties and prevented public workers from going on strike. I won't go into detail about the update, that topic is discussed at length in one of my earlier notes (Parliament Makes Me Angry, or, my first note found at the bottom of the page) but let's consider this: Prime Minister Harper knew that the entire world was going into a recession. He knew that all the other G8 nations were trying to head off the crisis and were injecting billions of dollars into their economies in the form of economic stimulus packages. He knew that many countries would run deficits due to the fact they would be injecting additional money into spending on projects such as road building and infrastructure work, which aim at providing their citizens with jobs and putting money into the economy and also working on projects that need attention. Knowing all this, he still failed to present any kind of effective aid for the Canadian economy or our major industries; he instead proposed to eliminate his opposition and ban public workers from striking.
Doesn't that strike you as somewhat undemocratic?
But according to Stevie, we want this.
The fact of the matter, the fact that Stephen Harper is desperately trying to divert your attention from, is this one: He has failed the people of Canada, he has failed to do anything to try and lessen the impact of the recession that we are now in, and he has failed to address the issues by instead attacking his opposition and causing a major controversy that is founded on flawed logic, bogus arguments, and political paradoxes that he himself has created.Leadership is about responsibility and being Prime Minister should be about being honest and open. These attacks on the coalition government calling them undemocratic are lies and contradict what is legal and deemed democratic in our constitution. Harper is not above the constitution.
It's important to remember this.
All that being said, I'd like to announce that so far, the United Steel Workers of Canada and UNITE HERE are co-operating a great deal with us on our planned rally on January the 18th. We are hopefully going to have anywhere between 1,000 to 2,000 people so far thanks to effective co-operation with our friends in these unions. The rally will be held at 1 in the afternoon and... we're not sure when it will end yet. If you are as outraged as I am, if you feel, as I do, that Canadians are being wronged by the Harper government, if you would like to be a voice of change for the betterment of Canada and would like to show your support, I would ask you to stand and march with us on that day. More information will be forthcoming for all of us.
Take your stand, Canada. These issues and their outcomes are going to make (or break) Canada in the coming few years. It's up to us to ensure that we as a nation pull through this crisis in the most democratic fashion there is.
Sunday, December 28, 2008
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
The View of the National Horizon Sucks From Here
We're now 15 days into the suspension of parliament.
Every day, we hear about further job losses and corporate woes as the worldwide recession worsens.
The Prime Minister has said that Canada is facing the possibility of a depression, (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081216.wflaherty16/BNStory/politics/home?cid=al_gam_mostemail) not just a recession. Not sure what a depression is? We had a pretty Great one back in the '20s. Still not ringing a bell? Google it. See all the destitute workers? Notice how many there are? That's a depression. Not pretty, right?
I find it extremely angering to think that, had it not been for foolish partisan politics and less-than-benign policy proposals, something might have been done to try and prevent job losses. I may not be much of an economist, but I do know that if your bleeding, and you put a band-aid on the cut, it closes over and heals faster. If I can carry that analogy one step further, I'll point out that something like 71,000 jobs bled out nationwide last month alone. Don't believe that number? I wish I was lying. I didn't believe it myself. But it's found HERE (http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1866360,00.html) HERE (http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idUSN0525370520081205) and HERE (http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/calgarybusiness/story.html?id=43455d98-9ee9-440c-b049-a0aa05960b31) I still haven't seen even a feeble band-aid applied. Where's the government?! Why won't they DO something?!?!?!
Oh, wait, that's right. Stevie & Pals suspended the government. Well, that was a brilliant move, wasn't it?
I can't wait to see the Tory budget. Really, I'm interested in seeing just how much the rotten buggers will spend. I remember in November, when Steve said "it may well be necessary to take unprecedented fiscal stimulus." (Steven Harper on the economy, Nov. 23)
What was his idea of stimulus?
Budget cuts. Remember those? Oh, also, how about that proposed ban on public workers going on strike, hmm? Remember those issues now? The ones that kicked off the political crisis?
The ones proposed by Mr. Harper's government?!
This guy is great, isn't he? I'm so glad he was elected. He's doing wonders for us now. Just as long, that is, as your civil liberties aren't important to you. Oh, or the economic well-being of the nation. If you ignore those two issues things are just... rosy.
This government really isn't as astute as I figured it to be. I used to have faith in the Conservative Party. Mr. Flaherty's apparent ineptitude to see the coming economic crisis coupled with Harper's partisan stance and refusal to apologize for damn near anything, actually, pretty much everything I've been seeing from Team Harper lately, has forced me to reconsider. That's why a coalition government continues to look like a very good idea to myself. Remember in 1993, when former Liberal Finance Minister Paul Martin basically erased that 42 billion dollar deficit? Well, I don't, I was only one at the time, but, hey, I read about it, which is, well, almost the same...
Anyways, point is, bring the Liberals back. They got rid of that silly leader they had (what was his name again? He failed to make much of an impression on me) and what the NDP and the Liberal Party are proposing as a coalition government is an awful lot more democratic then banning strikes, right?
This whole situation would be almost comedic if it wasn't for all the jobs of our Canadian workers being on the line. Let's consider some more numbers for a minute. Let's assume you wake up tomorrow to the horrifying news that the Big Three (GM, Ford, and Chrysler) have all gone out of business overnight. Right away, Canada has just lost 323,000 jobs. (stat from Reuters, http://uk.reuters.com/article/consumerProducts/idUKN16359520081217) fast forward five years, and 582,000 Canadians are out of work (again, Reuters stat. See above URL).
Thanks to Harper and the Governer-General, "Her Excellency" Michaelle Jean, we're stuck with a paralyzed house of commons right when we go into a recession that is possibly the worst we've seen since the Great Depression in The Dirty Thirties, and who loses, in the end? Not the government! Not our MPs! They're salaries are paid from our tax dollars! The ultimate losers are the rest of us: the average hardworking Canadian, the GM/Ford/Chrysler worker who's been laid off, the lumberjack who's out of work, the tar sands people out in Alberta, the teens that can't find work either, the families that have to rely on welfare and unemployment insurance, or the poor souls who are turned out into the streets because they can't find money to pay rent or a mortgage, all of us. The working folk.
I, for one, seriously doubt that Michaelle Jean would have suspended anything had her job or her hubbie's job depended on the economy staying strong. But that's the advantage of the top job. It tends to disconnect you from the needs of the rest of the country, but hey, what does she care, right?
Mme Jean, Your "Excellency", by suspending parliament per Stephen Harper's request, you have not done anything good to prevent this crisis from occuring. You ought to be ashamed of yourself for having failed the Canadian people in such a way.
Oh, that's right, your appointed. You don't answer to us. So my opinion, in all likelihood, means nothing to you, oui?
I continue to advocate support for a coalition government. Steven Harper's government had a chance to head off this crisis, and to act in Canada's interests, instead, they have not only failed us, they have suspended parliament with the help of our embarrassing, clueless, uncaring, and aloof head of state, which prevents any action from being taken, and they have fanned the flames of separatism through their constant attacks on the BQ and Quebec as a whole in an attempt at saving their worthless hides. These men are criminals for doing such injustice to our people. It's time they were replaced. They can obviously not be trusted, it's time to find more suitable candidates for the job. Canada, it's up to you to voice your opinions. Email your local MPs. Write angry blogs like yours truly. Make your voice heard. Inspire change for the better, not change for the betterment of Stephen Harper, but change for the betterment of Canada.
It's up to you.
Every day, we hear about further job losses and corporate woes as the worldwide recession worsens.
The Prime Minister has said that Canada is facing the possibility of a depression, (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081216.wflaherty16/BNStory/politics/home?cid=al_gam_mostemail) not just a recession. Not sure what a depression is? We had a pretty Great one back in the '20s. Still not ringing a bell? Google it. See all the destitute workers? Notice how many there are? That's a depression. Not pretty, right?
I find it extremely angering to think that, had it not been for foolish partisan politics and less-than-benign policy proposals, something might have been done to try and prevent job losses. I may not be much of an economist, but I do know that if your bleeding, and you put a band-aid on the cut, it closes over and heals faster. If I can carry that analogy one step further, I'll point out that something like 71,000 jobs bled out nationwide last month alone. Don't believe that number? I wish I was lying. I didn't believe it myself. But it's found HERE (http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1866360,00.html) HERE (http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idUSN0525370520081205) and HERE (http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/calgarybusiness/story.html?id=43455d98-9ee9-440c-b049-a0aa05960b31) I still haven't seen even a feeble band-aid applied. Where's the government?! Why won't they DO something?!?!?!
Oh, wait, that's right. Stevie & Pals suspended the government. Well, that was a brilliant move, wasn't it?
I can't wait to see the Tory budget. Really, I'm interested in seeing just how much the rotten buggers will spend. I remember in November, when Steve said "it may well be necessary to take unprecedented fiscal stimulus." (Steven Harper on the economy, Nov. 23)
What was his idea of stimulus?
Budget cuts. Remember those? Oh, also, how about that proposed ban on public workers going on strike, hmm? Remember those issues now? The ones that kicked off the political crisis?
The ones proposed by Mr. Harper's government?!
This guy is great, isn't he? I'm so glad he was elected. He's doing wonders for us now. Just as long, that is, as your civil liberties aren't important to you. Oh, or the economic well-being of the nation. If you ignore those two issues things are just... rosy.
This government really isn't as astute as I figured it to be. I used to have faith in the Conservative Party. Mr. Flaherty's apparent ineptitude to see the coming economic crisis coupled with Harper's partisan stance and refusal to apologize for damn near anything, actually, pretty much everything I've been seeing from Team Harper lately, has forced me to reconsider. That's why a coalition government continues to look like a very good idea to myself. Remember in 1993, when former Liberal Finance Minister Paul Martin basically erased that 42 billion dollar deficit? Well, I don't, I was only one at the time, but, hey, I read about it, which is, well, almost the same...
Anyways, point is, bring the Liberals back. They got rid of that silly leader they had (what was his name again? He failed to make much of an impression on me) and what the NDP and the Liberal Party are proposing as a coalition government is an awful lot more democratic then banning strikes, right?
This whole situation would be almost comedic if it wasn't for all the jobs of our Canadian workers being on the line. Let's consider some more numbers for a minute. Let's assume you wake up tomorrow to the horrifying news that the Big Three (GM, Ford, and Chrysler) have all gone out of business overnight. Right away, Canada has just lost 323,000 jobs. (stat from Reuters, http://uk.reuters.com/article/consumerProducts/idUKN16359520081217) fast forward five years, and 582,000 Canadians are out of work (again, Reuters stat. See above URL).
Thanks to Harper and the Governer-General, "Her Excellency" Michaelle Jean, we're stuck with a paralyzed house of commons right when we go into a recession that is possibly the worst we've seen since the Great Depression in The Dirty Thirties, and who loses, in the end? Not the government! Not our MPs! They're salaries are paid from our tax dollars! The ultimate losers are the rest of us: the average hardworking Canadian, the GM/Ford/Chrysler worker who's been laid off, the lumberjack who's out of work, the tar sands people out in Alberta, the teens that can't find work either, the families that have to rely on welfare and unemployment insurance, or the poor souls who are turned out into the streets because they can't find money to pay rent or a mortgage, all of us. The working folk.
I, for one, seriously doubt that Michaelle Jean would have suspended anything had her job or her hubbie's job depended on the economy staying strong. But that's the advantage of the top job. It tends to disconnect you from the needs of the rest of the country, but hey, what does she care, right?
Mme Jean, Your "Excellency", by suspending parliament per Stephen Harper's request, you have not done anything good to prevent this crisis from occuring. You ought to be ashamed of yourself for having failed the Canadian people in such a way.
Oh, that's right, your appointed. You don't answer to us. So my opinion, in all likelihood, means nothing to you, oui?
I continue to advocate support for a coalition government. Steven Harper's government had a chance to head off this crisis, and to act in Canada's interests, instead, they have not only failed us, they have suspended parliament with the help of our embarrassing, clueless, uncaring, and aloof head of state, which prevents any action from being taken, and they have fanned the flames of separatism through their constant attacks on the BQ and Quebec as a whole in an attempt at saving their worthless hides. These men are criminals for doing such injustice to our people. It's time they were replaced. They can obviously not be trusted, it's time to find more suitable candidates for the job. Canada, it's up to you to voice your opinions. Email your local MPs. Write angry blogs like yours truly. Make your voice heard. Inspire change for the better, not change for the betterment of Stephen Harper, but change for the betterment of Canada.
It's up to you.
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Are You A Resident Of Niagara Falls?
If you are, then I suggest you pay extra special attention to this message:
There is a rally being planned for sometime in the near future, after the New Year. Although not a lot of information is available now (since we're in the works of planning it) if your interested, contact me via email for more information, and I'll do my best to keep you up to speed on the latest happenings.
PS. If your interested in helping me organize, that would also be very much appreciated.
contact me here: cushman_360@hotmail.com
The only way to effect change in anything is to bring large numbers of people together. Niagara Region, it's about high time that we got together and showed our support for freedom and liberty in Canada. I hope to see you out there beside me.
There is a rally being planned for sometime in the near future, after the New Year. Although not a lot of information is available now (since we're in the works of planning it) if your interested, contact me via email for more information, and I'll do my best to keep you up to speed on the latest happenings.
PS. If your interested in helping me organize, that would also be very much appreciated.
contact me here: cushman_360@hotmail.com
The only way to effect change in anything is to bring large numbers of people together. Niagara Region, it's about high time that we got together and showed our support for freedom and liberty in Canada. I hope to see you out there beside me.
Monday, December 8, 2008
Attack Ads, Stephane Dion (or, why the Liberal Party has gone to Hell in a handbasket) and the overall tragicomedy of the political scene in Ottawa
“The Governor General does not have to follow the prime minister’s wishes… She must ensure that [Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin] has the House’s confidence, that’s all.” - Stephen Harper, September 10th, 2004
“It is the Parliament that’s supposed to run the country, not just the largest party and the single leader of that party.” - Stephen Harper, September 30th, 2004
These were statements made by Stephen Harper to Adrienne Clarkson, our former Governor-General, during the turbulent times that Paul Martin was Prime Minister of Canada. He also made the following statement:
“The reality is that [Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin] is in a minority situation, and his government has to create a functional majority (in Parliament).”
Now, bearing this in mind, let's go over some of the things that have been said about the current proposed coalition, shall we?
Actually, I've got a bright idea. I'll quote verbatim from an ad I'm watching on YouTube right now, and you guys can follow along with the following URL! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfjPV7vGDhw&feature=related)
"In the last election, just a few weeks ago, Canadians overwhelmingly said NO to Stephane Dion as Prime Minister. Now, just a few weeks later, Stephane Dion is trying to overturn the election he lost, and take power through the BACK DOOR. Except this time, it wouldn't just be Stephane Dion. This time, the balance of power would be in the hands of the SEPERATIST BLOC.
Stephane Dion and the SEPERATIST BLOC. Shouldn't YOU get to decide?"
Wow. Now, I'm confused... I thought Harper once said coalitions were okay? Let's rewind and take a look at this again to see, shall we?
“The Governor General does not have to follow the prime minister’s wishes… She must ensure that [Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin] has the House’s confidence, that’s all.”
(just a note: these sources are from the following site: http://www.nowpublic.com/world/2-faces-or-3-amigos-welcome-canadian-politics, where the excerpts are sourced and credited properly.)
...
Now, though it's difficult for me to do so, let's put sarcasm aside for the moment. Harper said in 2004 that he was more then willing to make Parliament function through the use of a coalition government. He even went as far as to include the Bloc Quebecois in a potential coalition. Now, 4 years later, he is declaring that to do so would be unconstitutional, and insinuating through various ads that to work with the Bloc like this would be treasonous. Folks, let's be completely honest with ourselves here: the only difference between then and now is that our pal Stevie is on the inside of fort government now, rather then being the one outside looking in. Other then that, there is no difference. Oh, pardon me, there is one slight difference, a complication, you could say: we're in an economic crisis now.
A crisis, I don't think I need to remind anyone, that Mr. Harper's government has already failed to address once. Not only has he failed to address it once, but in proroguing parliament, he has halted ANY chance that the government had at putting a stop to this crisis before it got out of control. He has put thousands, no, sorry, HUNDREDS of thousands of jobs on the line, all to save his hide. Is anyone else out there mad about this? We're talking about average Canadians here! Lots of them! All sacrificed, because they don't matter to Mr. Harper in the great game of the House at this point. Hopefully in the next election they prove otherwise.
Now, all this talk of economy is making me remember something from our most recent election... I seem to recall that, during the election, when Mr. Dion promised that (if elected) he would tour the country and interview the top 100 economists in the country to come up with the best method of combatting the crisis (which was developing even then.) Mr. Harper then scoffed and said that Dion had no plan for the economy. However, he has presented us little more then a charades act for his own economic plans. Instead of going through with Mr. Dion's plan and going right to the experts (the CANADIAN experts, I might add... not a bunch of foreign economists, but guys who are actually on the ground here and could come up with reasonable means of addressing the crisis in a manner best suitable for Canada) he insults our people by putting forward a ridiculous bill that contains nothing, other then the means to destroy his political opponents and pave the way for his party to become the sole party in the House of Commons.
Whew. Glad I got that out of my system. Still with me, everyone? Okay. Let's get back to it, then.
Now, on to the headlines of the day. Dion has stepped down as Liberal leader. (isn't it deliciously ironic that today would have been the day he would have become our defacto prime minister?)They finally realized that having a man who spoke oddly like Yoda as the leader of the national party probably wasn't the greatest move they've ever made. I mean, really, guys. Oh well. I personally hope he doesn't go back to being a prof of Political Science, I'd like to see him stick around in cabinet... he did a helluva job on the Clarity Act (http://www.canadianlawsite.ca/clarity-act.htm) and with the Three Letters, and just generally at keeping Quebec in line. But I'm getting off topic again (gee, I'm really bad at that, aren't I?)
His resignation has left the guys vying for his job in a bit of a pickle. See, they were expecting to have a vote to replace him ages from now, in May. There are two candidates left to replace him: Mr. Michael Ignatieff and Mr. Bob Rae. What's that? All the adult Ontarians just cringed a little when I said "Bob Rae"... hey! You did it again!
I'm personally rooting for Mr. Rae. Maybe it's because I'm not old enough to remember what life was like under Rae. I'm supporting him because he's for eliminating Harper's government as soon as parliament resumes. Since Harper poses a threat to democracy, it's my personal belief that his government needs to be brought down at the first opportunity. However, on the other side of that coin, Mr. Ignatieff is for continuing to use the threat of Coalition to extract concessions from the Tories and keep Stevie on the hop.
The dilemma could put a big rift in the liberal party. As outlined in the Liberal Party's constitution, the Party President now has to pick an interim leader with the approval of the Liberal Caucus (senators and MPs) it's widely expected that Mr. Ignatieff would take the crown should the caucus appoint the leader, but wait... Rae has been calling this method out as "undemocratic" saying:
"I don't think that coronations are generally very successful in political parties. I think most people believe that it's better to have a contest, it's better to have a choice." (http://www.610cktb.com/news/14/840699)
He's got a point... it's not a very smart move of the Liberals to simply nominate a leader. They ought to be electing one based on the entire party's approval. Granted, there's hardly time now for the pomp and mind-blowingly ridiculous expense of a full party leadership convention, but the Libs are going to need to find a way to get the ENTIRE party's say on who is going to lead them. Otherwise, things could turn nasty, as Rae has said he would be unhappy (http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=1049552) if the caucus simpy nominated the leader (I'm sure he wouldn't be fighting so hard for the party if he were the frontrunner... but that, I suppose, is neither here nor there, right, Bobby?)
Long story short, there's a power vacuum that's been left behind by one of the most unpopular opposition leaders in Canadian history. Let's give Dion a hand, eh? Just when we thought he'd beat the odds and actually manage to deal a smashing defeat to Harper (at long last!) he (once again) snatched defeat from the jaws of victory in his usual manner by bungling his national address to the Canadian public on that national address of his. Brilliant.
The whole tragicomedy that has been presented to us in the past week is pathetic, really. These people are supposed to be running the country, and instead it's all about egos and sinister moves. I think if things keep up like this I might as well run for Prime Minister next go-round. It certainely wouldn't be as ridiculous as what's been happening lately.
One thing that people should be comforted with is this: when (I mean, if) the Libs manage to get their act together by January 26th, we'll be able to do one of two things:
-Approve a nice budget full of (belated) assistance to our beleaguered industries that might be able to provide some damage control for our tottering economy.
or,
- Topple Harper and his little band of cronies now, before they put us through another massive screw up and suspend parliament again. (I think this is the more likely of the two... with all the attack ads coming out of Harper's camp this past week, I haven't heard anything in regards to progress made on a budget...)
Frankly, Canada, it's really time we see things for what they are. The current Prime Minister's ego is preventing him from seeing the issues affecting the average Canadian, the official opposition is in tatters and frantically scurrying about trying to find a leader, Quebecers are probably sharpening their blades getting ready to draw some Tory blood for all the attacks on La Belle Province recently, the NDP is waiting it out to see if the Liberals will continue to support a coalition (since it's the only real chance the New Democrats have at running the country within the next half century) and the public is up in arms over the whole mess.
What's left to do?
Vote for the newly created Monster Raving Loony Party of Canada, led by yours truly.
Then things will really be complete.
“It is the Parliament that’s supposed to run the country, not just the largest party and the single leader of that party.” - Stephen Harper, September 30th, 2004
These were statements made by Stephen Harper to Adrienne Clarkson, our former Governor-General, during the turbulent times that Paul Martin was Prime Minister of Canada. He also made the following statement:
“The reality is that [Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin] is in a minority situation, and his government has to create a functional majority (in Parliament).”
Now, bearing this in mind, let's go over some of the things that have been said about the current proposed coalition, shall we?
Actually, I've got a bright idea. I'll quote verbatim from an ad I'm watching on YouTube right now, and you guys can follow along with the following URL! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfjPV7vGDhw&feature=related)
"In the last election, just a few weeks ago, Canadians overwhelmingly said NO to Stephane Dion as Prime Minister. Now, just a few weeks later, Stephane Dion is trying to overturn the election he lost, and take power through the BACK DOOR. Except this time, it wouldn't just be Stephane Dion. This time, the balance of power would be in the hands of the SEPERATIST BLOC.
Stephane Dion and the SEPERATIST BLOC. Shouldn't YOU get to decide?"
Wow. Now, I'm confused... I thought Harper once said coalitions were okay? Let's rewind and take a look at this again to see, shall we?
“The Governor General does not have to follow the prime minister’s wishes… She must ensure that [Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin] has the House’s confidence, that’s all.”
(just a note: these sources are from the following site: http://www.nowpublic.com/world/2-faces-or-3-amigos-welcome-canadian-politics, where the excerpts are sourced and credited properly.)
...
Now, though it's difficult for me to do so, let's put sarcasm aside for the moment. Harper said in 2004 that he was more then willing to make Parliament function through the use of a coalition government. He even went as far as to include the Bloc Quebecois in a potential coalition. Now, 4 years later, he is declaring that to do so would be unconstitutional, and insinuating through various ads that to work with the Bloc like this would be treasonous. Folks, let's be completely honest with ourselves here: the only difference between then and now is that our pal Stevie is on the inside of fort government now, rather then being the one outside looking in. Other then that, there is no difference. Oh, pardon me, there is one slight difference, a complication, you could say: we're in an economic crisis now.
A crisis, I don't think I need to remind anyone, that Mr. Harper's government has already failed to address once. Not only has he failed to address it once, but in proroguing parliament, he has halted ANY chance that the government had at putting a stop to this crisis before it got out of control. He has put thousands, no, sorry, HUNDREDS of thousands of jobs on the line, all to save his hide. Is anyone else out there mad about this? We're talking about average Canadians here! Lots of them! All sacrificed, because they don't matter to Mr. Harper in the great game of the House at this point. Hopefully in the next election they prove otherwise.
Now, all this talk of economy is making me remember something from our most recent election... I seem to recall that, during the election, when Mr. Dion promised that (if elected) he would tour the country and interview the top 100 economists in the country to come up with the best method of combatting the crisis (which was developing even then.) Mr. Harper then scoffed and said that Dion had no plan for the economy. However, he has presented us little more then a charades act for his own economic plans. Instead of going through with Mr. Dion's plan and going right to the experts (the CANADIAN experts, I might add... not a bunch of foreign economists, but guys who are actually on the ground here and could come up with reasonable means of addressing the crisis in a manner best suitable for Canada) he insults our people by putting forward a ridiculous bill that contains nothing, other then the means to destroy his political opponents and pave the way for his party to become the sole party in the House of Commons.
Whew. Glad I got that out of my system. Still with me, everyone? Okay. Let's get back to it, then.
Now, on to the headlines of the day. Dion has stepped down as Liberal leader. (isn't it deliciously ironic that today would have been the day he would have become our defacto prime minister?)They finally realized that having a man who spoke oddly like Yoda as the leader of the national party probably wasn't the greatest move they've ever made. I mean, really, guys. Oh well. I personally hope he doesn't go back to being a prof of Political Science, I'd like to see him stick around in cabinet... he did a helluva job on the Clarity Act (http://www.canadianlawsite.ca/clarity-act.htm) and with the Three Letters, and just generally at keeping Quebec in line. But I'm getting off topic again (gee, I'm really bad at that, aren't I?)
His resignation has left the guys vying for his job in a bit of a pickle. See, they were expecting to have a vote to replace him ages from now, in May. There are two candidates left to replace him: Mr. Michael Ignatieff and Mr. Bob Rae. What's that? All the adult Ontarians just cringed a little when I said "Bob Rae"... hey! You did it again!
I'm personally rooting for Mr. Rae. Maybe it's because I'm not old enough to remember what life was like under Rae. I'm supporting him because he's for eliminating Harper's government as soon as parliament resumes. Since Harper poses a threat to democracy, it's my personal belief that his government needs to be brought down at the first opportunity. However, on the other side of that coin, Mr. Ignatieff is for continuing to use the threat of Coalition to extract concessions from the Tories and keep Stevie on the hop.
The dilemma could put a big rift in the liberal party. As outlined in the Liberal Party's constitution, the Party President now has to pick an interim leader with the approval of the Liberal Caucus (senators and MPs) it's widely expected that Mr. Ignatieff would take the crown should the caucus appoint the leader, but wait... Rae has been calling this method out as "undemocratic" saying:
"I don't think that coronations are generally very successful in political parties. I think most people believe that it's better to have a contest, it's better to have a choice." (http://www.610cktb.com/news/14/840699)
He's got a point... it's not a very smart move of the Liberals to simply nominate a leader. They ought to be electing one based on the entire party's approval. Granted, there's hardly time now for the pomp and mind-blowingly ridiculous expense of a full party leadership convention, but the Libs are going to need to find a way to get the ENTIRE party's say on who is going to lead them. Otherwise, things could turn nasty, as Rae has said he would be unhappy (http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=1049552) if the caucus simpy nominated the leader (I'm sure he wouldn't be fighting so hard for the party if he were the frontrunner... but that, I suppose, is neither here nor there, right, Bobby?)
Long story short, there's a power vacuum that's been left behind by one of the most unpopular opposition leaders in Canadian history. Let's give Dion a hand, eh? Just when we thought he'd beat the odds and actually manage to deal a smashing defeat to Harper (at long last!) he (once again) snatched defeat from the jaws of victory in his usual manner by bungling his national address to the Canadian public on that national address of his. Brilliant.
The whole tragicomedy that has been presented to us in the past week is pathetic, really. These people are supposed to be running the country, and instead it's all about egos and sinister moves. I think if things keep up like this I might as well run for Prime Minister next go-round. It certainely wouldn't be as ridiculous as what's been happening lately.
One thing that people should be comforted with is this: when (I mean, if) the Libs manage to get their act together by January 26th, we'll be able to do one of two things:
-Approve a nice budget full of (belated) assistance to our beleaguered industries that might be able to provide some damage control for our tottering economy.
or,
- Topple Harper and his little band of cronies now, before they put us through another massive screw up and suspend parliament again. (I think this is the more likely of the two... with all the attack ads coming out of Harper's camp this past week, I haven't heard anything in regards to progress made on a budget...)
Frankly, Canada, it's really time we see things for what they are. The current Prime Minister's ego is preventing him from seeing the issues affecting the average Canadian, the official opposition is in tatters and frantically scurrying about trying to find a leader, Quebecers are probably sharpening their blades getting ready to draw some Tory blood for all the attacks on La Belle Province recently, the NDP is waiting it out to see if the Liberals will continue to support a coalition (since it's the only real chance the New Democrats have at running the country within the next half century) and the public is up in arms over the whole mess.
What's left to do?
Vote for the newly created Monster Raving Loony Party of Canada, led by yours truly.
Then things will really be complete.
Saturday, December 6, 2008
Constitutional Justice
Talks of popular uprisings! Accusations of a coup d'état! Rebellion! People swearing to take up arms and fight the government and depose it by force!
Good Lord. Can these things really be being discussed in modern Canada?
Well, friends and neighbours, the sad news is that it can. In fact, in even sadder news, it IS being discussed at this very moment.
There's a lot of anger over the current consitutional crisis, and the anger is being fanned by a blustering and fierce Tory ad campaign aimed at attacking and discrediting the proposed coalition government as an "unjust" and "undemocratic" idea, and one that plays into the hands of the seperatists in Quebec. Speaking of seperatists, why has everyone forgotten that the Tory leader himself, our good buddy Stevie Harper, is an Albertan Seperatist (or at least, a sympathizer?) seems that no one from the Conservative party is mentioning that anymore. Then again, the new Conservative party is mostly made up of Alliance members, so maybe it's just taken for granted that the party is for Albertan separation but not a Quebec separation.
I find it interesting (and really quite amusing) that the Tories are so hell-bent on destroying their base of support in Quebec so quickly. I've got two words in mind to describe the strategy behind what they're doing. Give up? I'm personally calling it the "Train Wreck" approach. Seems fitting. I mean, really. Stevie goes for more then a year without so much as a peep about the Bloc or Quebec separatism. He calls Quebec "a nation within a nation" (which I found a brilliant move, myself, I'll be honest) as a way of recognizing Quebec as it's own nation-within the larger national entity that is Canada, that is. He waits, and tries wooing Quebec voters towards the Tory cause, knowing that you can't gain a majority without Quebec (well, you can... it's just harder) then, finally, this time round, he basically compromises his 10 seats in Quebec during our political crisis when he'll need all the help he can get!
I really don't understand that bit of strategy. Granted, he needs to discredit his opponents to save his own hide, but Quebec's motto isn't "Je Me Souviens" (that's "I Will Remember" for you Anglos out there) for nothing. Screwing with Quebec now is going to cost him, folks, and it's going to hurt Tory credibility in Quebec a whole helluva lot. I'm willing to bet he won't be getting any more seats in Quebec for a good long while. Is this worse then his proposal to scrap funding for the arts? You betcha!
The attack ads, however, are misinformed, Canada-the proposed Coalition does NOT include the Bloc Québecois in it. The Bloc will not make up part of the government. If they would, I'd still be wearing blue and supporting Mr. Harper. So stop panicking.
The misconception arises from a bit of a mistake during the initial reporting (and possibly even from Mr. Dion's poor use of English... but that's not a very nice thing to say, now is it? :) ) the truth is, Canada, much like what I put in my previous message, that the Bloc is not going to be part of the government. The sole reason they have anything to do with the government is because the Liberal-NDP coalition doesn't have enough seats on their own in the House of Commons to retain a majority. So, they asked the Bloc to sign an agreement, a legally binding contract, in fact, stating that they (the Bloc) would side with (meaning, vote for) the Coalition. In other words, they're agreeing to vote for legislation the Coalition would put forward. No more, no less.
Some people are arguing that a coalition is undemocratic because it unseats the legally elected government. Let me ask you fellas something in return:
Does a party who only got 38% of the vote (40%, if you don't count the Green Party) really have the right to rule the country?
Especially attempting to destroy all of it's opposition like it did? (see the blog right below this one for more info on that topic)
The fact of the matter is, what the opposition parties are doing is perfectly legal, as outlined by our national constitution (which Stevie was so eager to use when it came to toppling his own opponents, but, again, let's not mention that one, right, Steve?) and when you really think about it, the other political parties represent... well, 60% of your votes! Hey! notice how a MAJORITY of votes went for the other guys, not the Tories?
I understand how our First Past the Post system works (I don't like it, but that's off topic) but let's think about this for a second. Wouldn't it be substantially MORE democratic if the opposition got together and made a coalition government to represent Canadians? After all, they DID win 60% of the vote, compared to Harper's 40%. The parties that got all those votes just didn't want to play in the same sandbox before. Doesn't that make MORE sense, guys?
Now, back to this talk of armed insurrection (because that's always bloody interesting, isn't it?)
If you guys look at what Mr. Harper has to say about the Coalition government on his Facebook(Parizeau Endorses Coalition: http://www.facebook.com/s.php?ref=search&init=q&q=Stephen%20Harper&sid=8e9e698a071bdae5e68328b6aff61581#/note.php?note_id=42162051572) You'll find all kinds of lovely statements from his supporters, such as this:
"Ira Elliott (Calgary, AB) wroteat 4:19pm on December 3rd, 2008
This whole situation sickens me. If this coalition goes through I'm willing to topple it through armed force. I'm willing to take up arms to defend my government the way past generations did."
or how about this one:
"Mac Ka Mitsu (Kitchener, ON) wroteat 4:47pm on December 3rd, 2008
...Our forefathers stood up to injustice before, this is no different then before except now it is in our time. They are violating the basic tenants of our constitution, and if we need to use force to re install the duly and legally elected governement, then we should be willing to. I am sure that the military members would support the overthrow of this coalition..."
or my personal favourite:
"Edwin Fang (Simon Fraser) wroteat 8:33pm on December 3rd, 2008
It is about time we have a revolution and clean up the filth that has afflicted this Parliament for so long.
That is the only way we can have a Canada that is governed democratically."
Strange, for a second there, I felt like I was in the United States, didn't you?
Now, there are naturally people who opposed such talk. I'm not saying that all of Steven Harper's supporters are ultra-right wing nutballs. Hell, I don't even want to say that his supporters are ultra-right wing. Some are definately nutballs, some are probably ultra-right, but that's neither here nor there.
This shouldn't be a partisan issue. It should be a nationwide issue. Well, it is a nationwide issue, but for the wrong reasons. People are being suckered in by the Tory attack ads and some have a distorded view because of it. Lots are up in arms because they believe the BQ is actually part of the government. Canadians here "BQ" and they go bananas. I don't blame them. I would too, if they were actually governing the country. But, they aren't. The point is, Canadians should be concerned that the current minority government failed to take an active role in preparing a decent economic update, they failed our country, and they tried eliminating their opposition in a despicable, anti-Canadian and anti-democratic way. They can talk of backstabbing and backroom deals and power grabs until the cows come home, but it will NOT change the truth, and the truth is, they are the ones who were committing a power grab when they let Finance Minister Jim Flahrety say they were planning on eliminating public subsidies and not providing one bloody dollar for our Canadian industries or anything to help the average Canadian weather the economic storm that is going to hit us like a sledgehammer. Economists predict that up tp 600,000 Canadians will lose their jobs. What does Mr. Harper propose we do to save them? Axe the opposition. Other then that, he has zero game plan.
Come on, Canada. Wake up. It's about high time something get done about this. Support real democracy, support a coalition. Let's end this bloody madness and make Canada great again.
Good Lord. Can these things really be being discussed in modern Canada?
Well, friends and neighbours, the sad news is that it can. In fact, in even sadder news, it IS being discussed at this very moment.
There's a lot of anger over the current consitutional crisis, and the anger is being fanned by a blustering and fierce Tory ad campaign aimed at attacking and discrediting the proposed coalition government as an "unjust" and "undemocratic" idea, and one that plays into the hands of the seperatists in Quebec. Speaking of seperatists, why has everyone forgotten that the Tory leader himself, our good buddy Stevie Harper, is an Albertan Seperatist (or at least, a sympathizer?) seems that no one from the Conservative party is mentioning that anymore. Then again, the new Conservative party is mostly made up of Alliance members, so maybe it's just taken for granted that the party is for Albertan separation but not a Quebec separation.
I find it interesting (and really quite amusing) that the Tories are so hell-bent on destroying their base of support in Quebec so quickly. I've got two words in mind to describe the strategy behind what they're doing. Give up? I'm personally calling it the "Train Wreck" approach. Seems fitting. I mean, really. Stevie goes for more then a year without so much as a peep about the Bloc or Quebec separatism. He calls Quebec "a nation within a nation" (which I found a brilliant move, myself, I'll be honest) as a way of recognizing Quebec as it's own nation-within the larger national entity that is Canada, that is. He waits, and tries wooing Quebec voters towards the Tory cause, knowing that you can't gain a majority without Quebec (well, you can... it's just harder) then, finally, this time round, he basically compromises his 10 seats in Quebec during our political crisis when he'll need all the help he can get!
I really don't understand that bit of strategy. Granted, he needs to discredit his opponents to save his own hide, but Quebec's motto isn't "Je Me Souviens" (that's "I Will Remember" for you Anglos out there) for nothing. Screwing with Quebec now is going to cost him, folks, and it's going to hurt Tory credibility in Quebec a whole helluva lot. I'm willing to bet he won't be getting any more seats in Quebec for a good long while. Is this worse then his proposal to scrap funding for the arts? You betcha!
The attack ads, however, are misinformed, Canada-the proposed Coalition does NOT include the Bloc Québecois in it. The Bloc will not make up part of the government. If they would, I'd still be wearing blue and supporting Mr. Harper. So stop panicking.
The misconception arises from a bit of a mistake during the initial reporting (and possibly even from Mr. Dion's poor use of English... but that's not a very nice thing to say, now is it? :) ) the truth is, Canada, much like what I put in my previous message, that the Bloc is not going to be part of the government. The sole reason they have anything to do with the government is because the Liberal-NDP coalition doesn't have enough seats on their own in the House of Commons to retain a majority. So, they asked the Bloc to sign an agreement, a legally binding contract, in fact, stating that they (the Bloc) would side with (meaning, vote for) the Coalition. In other words, they're agreeing to vote for legislation the Coalition would put forward. No more, no less.
Some people are arguing that a coalition is undemocratic because it unseats the legally elected government. Let me ask you fellas something in return:
Does a party who only got 38% of the vote (40%, if you don't count the Green Party) really have the right to rule the country?
Especially attempting to destroy all of it's opposition like it did? (see the blog right below this one for more info on that topic)
The fact of the matter is, what the opposition parties are doing is perfectly legal, as outlined by our national constitution (which Stevie was so eager to use when it came to toppling his own opponents, but, again, let's not mention that one, right, Steve?) and when you really think about it, the other political parties represent... well, 60% of your votes! Hey! notice how a MAJORITY of votes went for the other guys, not the Tories?
I understand how our First Past the Post system works (I don't like it, but that's off topic) but let's think about this for a second. Wouldn't it be substantially MORE democratic if the opposition got together and made a coalition government to represent Canadians? After all, they DID win 60% of the vote, compared to Harper's 40%. The parties that got all those votes just didn't want to play in the same sandbox before. Doesn't that make MORE sense, guys?
Now, back to this talk of armed insurrection (because that's always bloody interesting, isn't it?)
If you guys look at what Mr. Harper has to say about the Coalition government on his Facebook(Parizeau Endorses Coalition: http://www.facebook.com/s.php?ref=search&init=q&q=Stephen%20Harper&sid=8e9e698a071bdae5e68328b6aff61581#/note.php?note_id=42162051572) You'll find all kinds of lovely statements from his supporters, such as this:
"Ira Elliott (Calgary, AB) wroteat 4:19pm on December 3rd, 2008
This whole situation sickens me. If this coalition goes through I'm willing to topple it through armed force. I'm willing to take up arms to defend my government the way past generations did."
or how about this one:
"Mac Ka Mitsu (Kitchener, ON) wroteat 4:47pm on December 3rd, 2008
...Our forefathers stood up to injustice before, this is no different then before except now it is in our time. They are violating the basic tenants of our constitution, and if we need to use force to re install the duly and legally elected governement, then we should be willing to. I am sure that the military members would support the overthrow of this coalition..."
or my personal favourite:
"Edwin Fang (Simon Fraser) wroteat 8:33pm on December 3rd, 2008
It is about time we have a revolution and clean up the filth that has afflicted this Parliament for so long.
That is the only way we can have a Canada that is governed democratically."
Strange, for a second there, I felt like I was in the United States, didn't you?
Now, there are naturally people who opposed such talk. I'm not saying that all of Steven Harper's supporters are ultra-right wing nutballs. Hell, I don't even want to say that his supporters are ultra-right wing. Some are definately nutballs, some are probably ultra-right, but that's neither here nor there.
This shouldn't be a partisan issue. It should be a nationwide issue. Well, it is a nationwide issue, but for the wrong reasons. People are being suckered in by the Tory attack ads and some have a distorded view because of it. Lots are up in arms because they believe the BQ is actually part of the government. Canadians here "BQ" and they go bananas. I don't blame them. I would too, if they were actually governing the country. But, they aren't. The point is, Canadians should be concerned that the current minority government failed to take an active role in preparing a decent economic update, they failed our country, and they tried eliminating their opposition in a despicable, anti-Canadian and anti-democratic way. They can talk of backstabbing and backroom deals and power grabs until the cows come home, but it will NOT change the truth, and the truth is, they are the ones who were committing a power grab when they let Finance Minister Jim Flahrety say they were planning on eliminating public subsidies and not providing one bloody dollar for our Canadian industries or anything to help the average Canadian weather the economic storm that is going to hit us like a sledgehammer. Economists predict that up tp 600,000 Canadians will lose their jobs. What does Mr. Harper propose we do to save them? Axe the opposition. Other then that, he has zero game plan.
Come on, Canada. Wake up. It's about high time something get done about this. Support real democracy, support a coalition. Let's end this bloody madness and make Canada great again.
Friday, December 5, 2008
Parliament Makes Me Angry
http://news.sympatico.msn.ctv.ca/abc/home/contentposting.aspx?isfa=1&feedname=CTV-TOPSTORIES_V3&showbyline=True&date=true&newsitemid=CTVNews%2f20081204%2fGG_decision_081204
This link will take you to an article that says the Governor-General of Canada has suspended parliament until the month of January. She has the power to do that in the constitution, so all's well, I suppose, but I really don't understand why our government get's to take a vacation when the economy is in the shithole and we're in the middle of a bloody political crisis.
For those of you that aren't aware of what's going on yet, early las week, the government put forward a "mini budget" (a rough outline of what they planned on doing in the REAL budget, the March budget that the Federal government releases every year) proposing a few ideas that they had for what to do to deal with the economy. As I'm sure you've all noticed from reading the paper or seeing the price of gas lately, the economy is BAD. Anyway, long story short, our good old boys in Ottawa got together to decide exactly what they were going to do about it.
What did they decide? Well, firstly, they decided NOT to bail out any national companies that might be in financial trouble (like the auto industry, or, more important for Canada, our lumber industry) which pretty much every other government in the Western World is doing (the US government has so far approved 1.4 trillion dollars worth of bailouts, if I'm not mistaken) which seems a little peculiar, since, hey, we need those companies afloat to keep Canadians working and keep out economy... well, not strong... but at least keep ourselves going through the tough times ahead.
Secondly, they GUTTED government spending, but, interestingly, there was also a proposal to eliminate a public subsidy of political parties that is given out after the election.The subsidy works like this: After an election, a party recieves a certain amount of money (I believe it's about $1.95, so let's just assume it's that for simplicity's sake) per vote. So, roughly two bucks a vote. That's 60 million dollars up for grabs right there, folks. Roughly speaking, this is how much each party made after this year's election:
Conservative - 10.4 million
Liberal - 7.2 million
NDP- 5 million
Bloc Québecois - 2.6 million
Green - 1.8 million
This money is used to fund each party's research and think tanks, making them more effective at either putting forward legislation or opposing it. The money is spent on teams of political scientists, researchers, lawyers, and others to dissect legislation and look for any loopholes that need mending or ways that it could benefit the public, or impact it negatively (if your oppositiion) or impact Quebec (if your the Bloc). Slashing this subsidy would take these teams away, SERIOUSLY impairing the parties abilities. This especially affects the current opposition parties (the Liberals, the NDP, and the Bloc) because their budgets rely on this subsidy far more then the Conservatives. See, (traditionally) the Tories are much, MUCH better at fundraising then the Grits or the NDP. So, while the Tories will suffer somewhat from the removal of subsidies (after all, they stand to lose the most) they are more likely to pull through... just fine. It's the OPPOSITION that would be sent into a spiral. Without the ability to research, they would not be able to effectively oppose the government, because they wouldn't know enough on the proposals to make effective decisions. It hits the opposition right where it hurts, and frankly, folks, I think this kind of strong-arm politics is just dangerous. Who would oppose the Federal government if all the other parties can't see them coming for the amount of debt in the way?
Needless to say, the Libs and the rest of the House of Commons are NOT happy about this. So, they decided to hold a no-confidence vote, aimed at toppling the government. For those of you that might not be entirely sure what a no confidence vote is, it's the opposition's way of ending a minority government they feel is unfit to govern the country. It's how Stephen Harper ended Paul Martin's Liberal minority government back in 2006. That government lost the confidence of the house thanks to this guy named Paul Martin, who didn't really seem to have a clue what he was doing throughout his brief stint as Prime Minister. That's not a very good summary of what happened, but I'm getting off topic.
The point is, Steve Harper's government put forward this vote aimed at crippling his opposition, they didn't like it, they decided to do something about it. The last time there was a no-confidence vote, there was an election. Now, the Liberals and the NDP didn't want an election, since we just had one less then two months ago. For a while, party leaders Stephane Dion (liberal) and Jack Layton (NDP) were puzzled on just what to do about it. But then? SUCCESS! They came up with a better idea... THEY'D just TAKE power and form a coalition government!
This bright little idea of Stephane's is allowed in Canada thanks to our Constitution. The constitution basically says that if the House of Commons holds a vote of no confidence, and it passes, and the government is "dissolved", there are two options:1. An Election (boooo (N))2. The leaders of the opposition CAN go to the Governor-General and say that they can form an effective government with the set-up in the house of commons. This set up would consist of multiple parties getting together to make one governent - this is called a COALITION government.
Jack and Stephane were delighted - they could get rid of Harper this way! But wait. When they combined there two parties into one government, they only got 106 seat - not enough to ensure they could govern effectively. What to do? Well, the answer came along with the support of Gilles Duceppe, the leader of the Bloc Quebecois, a (sometimes) sovereignist party that fights for (you guessed it) Quebec.. He said he'd help the new coalition - he'd suffer if subsidies were removed as well, after all- and with his support the government would have 155 seats - a majority. Success!
It's important to note that the BQ would not actually be a part of the government- the actual government would be made up of the NDP and the Libs. The Bloc would SUPPORT the government, giving them 49 more seats in the House and giving them a majority, making it the first really effective government that Canada has seen since... (well... since Jean Chrétien left, actually...) since 2000. By "effective" I mean "one that could get stuff done without having to worry every time that there would be an election over it" or, in other words, a majority government. 2000 was the last time in recent history that a majority government was elected. We've had minority government's since then. There's been 3 elections since then, spaced out every two years (2004, 2006, and 2008)
Harper, by now, has realized that he probably shouldn't have put this idea of his forward. Proposing to cripple your opponents while you have a minority government was probably not the brightest move we've seen from our buddy Steve. Like any smart politician does when his rear is in a sling, he backpedaled and got the opposition to hold off on a confidence vote until this coming monday, the 8th of December.Steve soon realized that the opposition wasn't going to let this one blow away, and that they were still planning on replacing him. Obviously not wanting that to happen, he slammed on the governmental brakes and started attacking the opposition, screaming them down, telling them that they were wrong to negotiate with "Separatists" (the Bloc) and that there decision was "undemocratic" (which, in a way, it is... but so is destroying your opposition so that your the only effective party in the House of Commons, but let's not mention that one, eh, Steve?) and saying that he would prorogue Parliament (which means have them all take a vacation) until January. In January, he said, he'd release a new budget filled with good stuff for all Canadians, full of spending on our industries to get their butts out of the fire and make sure there wouldn't be a big company going bankrupt in Canada, costing us potentially thousands of jobs and worsening the recession. To prorogue, you need the Governor-General.
She retains the power to do that as the head of state. So, he drove up the street from his house to her house today and asked for her to prorogue the house, which she agreed to do.
Now, everyone in Ottawa get's a month's vacation, we're in a recession, the rhetoric is stepping up, intimidation and strong-arm politics are starting to grip the nation (an NDP member of Parliament who's riding is somewhere in BC watched a bunch of his signs get burned-the culprit hasn't been apprehended.) Western Canada (the Conservative stronghold) is up in arms over the possibility of a Left-Wing coalition government, political instability is at an all time high, and we're losing quite a few jobs right now. This kind of climate is a dangerous one to have any added crisis in. Crisis can lead to panic or rash action, which everyone will regret. Personally, I think that the Harper government is dangerous to our democracy. Any government that would deliberately cut a major source of funds out of his opponents, making them politically ineffective and impairing their ability to oppose him, is a serious threat and should be watched VERY carefully. Remember, his party would come out of that kind of draining of funds better off then the rest. They could (theoretically) just use their talent at fund-raising to make up some of the loss, making them the only effective party in the House. ONE PARTY in the house? Sounds somewhat undemocratic, does it not?
Canadians, it's time to wake up and start paying attention to this kind of stuff. These moves coming from a government (a minority government, no less) are DANGEROUS. Can you imagine what would have happened if the Tories had a MAJORITY?
That motion would have PASSED! No help for Canadian industy, but, hey, instead, us Conservatives get to eliminate our opposition. The man is a threat to democracy. It's up to us as Canadians to write to our MPs and demonstrate just how upset we are with this. Get angry. You should be. It's YOUR democracy, YOUR country, not just Steve's.Thanks for reading this, guys.
Take a stand for the country.
Dave.
This link will take you to an article that says the Governor-General of Canada has suspended parliament until the month of January. She has the power to do that in the constitution, so all's well, I suppose, but I really don't understand why our government get's to take a vacation when the economy is in the shithole and we're in the middle of a bloody political crisis.
For those of you that aren't aware of what's going on yet, early las week, the government put forward a "mini budget" (a rough outline of what they planned on doing in the REAL budget, the March budget that the Federal government releases every year) proposing a few ideas that they had for what to do to deal with the economy. As I'm sure you've all noticed from reading the paper or seeing the price of gas lately, the economy is BAD. Anyway, long story short, our good old boys in Ottawa got together to decide exactly what they were going to do about it.
What did they decide? Well, firstly, they decided NOT to bail out any national companies that might be in financial trouble (like the auto industry, or, more important for Canada, our lumber industry) which pretty much every other government in the Western World is doing (the US government has so far approved 1.4 trillion dollars worth of bailouts, if I'm not mistaken) which seems a little peculiar, since, hey, we need those companies afloat to keep Canadians working and keep out economy... well, not strong... but at least keep ourselves going through the tough times ahead.
Secondly, they GUTTED government spending, but, interestingly, there was also a proposal to eliminate a public subsidy of political parties that is given out after the election.The subsidy works like this: After an election, a party recieves a certain amount of money (I believe it's about $1.95, so let's just assume it's that for simplicity's sake) per vote. So, roughly two bucks a vote. That's 60 million dollars up for grabs right there, folks. Roughly speaking, this is how much each party made after this year's election:
Conservative - 10.4 million
Liberal - 7.2 million
NDP- 5 million
Bloc Québecois - 2.6 million
Green - 1.8 million
This money is used to fund each party's research and think tanks, making them more effective at either putting forward legislation or opposing it. The money is spent on teams of political scientists, researchers, lawyers, and others to dissect legislation and look for any loopholes that need mending or ways that it could benefit the public, or impact it negatively (if your oppositiion) or impact Quebec (if your the Bloc). Slashing this subsidy would take these teams away, SERIOUSLY impairing the parties abilities. This especially affects the current opposition parties (the Liberals, the NDP, and the Bloc) because their budgets rely on this subsidy far more then the Conservatives. See, (traditionally) the Tories are much, MUCH better at fundraising then the Grits or the NDP. So, while the Tories will suffer somewhat from the removal of subsidies (after all, they stand to lose the most) they are more likely to pull through... just fine. It's the OPPOSITION that would be sent into a spiral. Without the ability to research, they would not be able to effectively oppose the government, because they wouldn't know enough on the proposals to make effective decisions. It hits the opposition right where it hurts, and frankly, folks, I think this kind of strong-arm politics is just dangerous. Who would oppose the Federal government if all the other parties can't see them coming for the amount of debt in the way?
Needless to say, the Libs and the rest of the House of Commons are NOT happy about this. So, they decided to hold a no-confidence vote, aimed at toppling the government. For those of you that might not be entirely sure what a no confidence vote is, it's the opposition's way of ending a minority government they feel is unfit to govern the country. It's how Stephen Harper ended Paul Martin's Liberal minority government back in 2006. That government lost the confidence of the house thanks to this guy named Paul Martin, who didn't really seem to have a clue what he was doing throughout his brief stint as Prime Minister. That's not a very good summary of what happened, but I'm getting off topic.
The point is, Steve Harper's government put forward this vote aimed at crippling his opposition, they didn't like it, they decided to do something about it. The last time there was a no-confidence vote, there was an election. Now, the Liberals and the NDP didn't want an election, since we just had one less then two months ago. For a while, party leaders Stephane Dion (liberal) and Jack Layton (NDP) were puzzled on just what to do about it. But then? SUCCESS! They came up with a better idea... THEY'D just TAKE power and form a coalition government!
This bright little idea of Stephane's is allowed in Canada thanks to our Constitution. The constitution basically says that if the House of Commons holds a vote of no confidence, and it passes, and the government is "dissolved", there are two options:1. An Election (boooo (N))2. The leaders of the opposition CAN go to the Governor-General and say that they can form an effective government with the set-up in the house of commons. This set up would consist of multiple parties getting together to make one governent - this is called a COALITION government.
Jack and Stephane were delighted - they could get rid of Harper this way! But wait. When they combined there two parties into one government, they only got 106 seat - not enough to ensure they could govern effectively. What to do? Well, the answer came along with the support of Gilles Duceppe, the leader of the Bloc Quebecois, a (sometimes) sovereignist party that fights for (you guessed it) Quebec.. He said he'd help the new coalition - he'd suffer if subsidies were removed as well, after all- and with his support the government would have 155 seats - a majority. Success!
It's important to note that the BQ would not actually be a part of the government- the actual government would be made up of the NDP and the Libs. The Bloc would SUPPORT the government, giving them 49 more seats in the House and giving them a majority, making it the first really effective government that Canada has seen since... (well... since Jean Chrétien left, actually...) since 2000. By "effective" I mean "one that could get stuff done without having to worry every time that there would be an election over it" or, in other words, a majority government. 2000 was the last time in recent history that a majority government was elected. We've had minority government's since then. There's been 3 elections since then, spaced out every two years (2004, 2006, and 2008)
Harper, by now, has realized that he probably shouldn't have put this idea of his forward. Proposing to cripple your opponents while you have a minority government was probably not the brightest move we've seen from our buddy Steve. Like any smart politician does when his rear is in a sling, he backpedaled and got the opposition to hold off on a confidence vote until this coming monday, the 8th of December.Steve soon realized that the opposition wasn't going to let this one blow away, and that they were still planning on replacing him. Obviously not wanting that to happen, he slammed on the governmental brakes and started attacking the opposition, screaming them down, telling them that they were wrong to negotiate with "Separatists" (the Bloc) and that there decision was "undemocratic" (which, in a way, it is... but so is destroying your opposition so that your the only effective party in the House of Commons, but let's not mention that one, eh, Steve?) and saying that he would prorogue Parliament (which means have them all take a vacation) until January. In January, he said, he'd release a new budget filled with good stuff for all Canadians, full of spending on our industries to get their butts out of the fire and make sure there wouldn't be a big company going bankrupt in Canada, costing us potentially thousands of jobs and worsening the recession. To prorogue, you need the Governor-General.
She retains the power to do that as the head of state. So, he drove up the street from his house to her house today and asked for her to prorogue the house, which she agreed to do.
Now, everyone in Ottawa get's a month's vacation, we're in a recession, the rhetoric is stepping up, intimidation and strong-arm politics are starting to grip the nation (an NDP member of Parliament who's riding is somewhere in BC watched a bunch of his signs get burned-the culprit hasn't been apprehended.) Western Canada (the Conservative stronghold) is up in arms over the possibility of a Left-Wing coalition government, political instability is at an all time high, and we're losing quite a few jobs right now. This kind of climate is a dangerous one to have any added crisis in. Crisis can lead to panic or rash action, which everyone will regret. Personally, I think that the Harper government is dangerous to our democracy. Any government that would deliberately cut a major source of funds out of his opponents, making them politically ineffective and impairing their ability to oppose him, is a serious threat and should be watched VERY carefully. Remember, his party would come out of that kind of draining of funds better off then the rest. They could (theoretically) just use their talent at fund-raising to make up some of the loss, making them the only effective party in the House. ONE PARTY in the house? Sounds somewhat undemocratic, does it not?
Canadians, it's time to wake up and start paying attention to this kind of stuff. These moves coming from a government (a minority government, no less) are DANGEROUS. Can you imagine what would have happened if the Tories had a MAJORITY?
That motion would have PASSED! No help for Canadian industy, but, hey, instead, us Conservatives get to eliminate our opposition. The man is a threat to democracy. It's up to us as Canadians to write to our MPs and demonstrate just how upset we are with this. Get angry. You should be. It's YOUR democracy, YOUR country, not just Steve's.Thanks for reading this, guys.
Take a stand for the country.
Dave.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
