JOIN THE LIVE CHAT - CAPITAL CONFUSION
Ivison: Stephen Harper may soon face wolves within his own party
Worthington: Harper showing a lack of guts in standing up to foes
Granastein: Why it's time for Stephen Harper to go
Harper's aide Guy Giorno getting blame
Tories outraged at Harper's potentially fatal fumble
Harper following Clark's old path
Tories to consider `all options' to stop opposition
Methinks we is aboard an early exploration vessel, whose crew is promised freedom if they survive the voyage. But, alas, they plan a mutiny on the bounty, to determine there own fates. They have forgotten to consider the world around them and the forces of nature(economically speaking) and the lack of good food leading to scurvy behaviour. This band of rogues will promise to throw dubloons to the fishes to get any kind of support, no matter how poorly thought out. The royalty may have to go back to the people to get a better captain and certainly a more carefully selected crew or at least rejects this plan as undemocratic and no less than a power grab. May better heads prevail and some advisors be replaced on all sides.
posted by snagglepus on 01 December 2008 at 4:09 PM
"Harpercratie" has set the table for the only circumstance where the G.G. can deny her First Minister's request (for dissolution). In the King-Byng dispute in 1926 the G.G. apparently acted on his own in turning to Meighen to form a government when King's government was defeated in the House. There was no evidence to support Lord Byng's exercise of discretion and the Meighen government soon fell, necessitating dissolution and elections.
Today in Ottawa it seems as though the G.G. will have some evidence that will allow the G.G. to call on another leader to form a government which will have some reasonable prospect of having the confidence of the House, at least for a reasonable time and for, perhaps, a specified legislative program (in the manner of the Peterson/Rae accord).
People are forgetting that in a constitutional monarchy the monarch's duty is to find a First Minister and government in the House of Commons. The choice is usually obvious, which is, by the way, the very basis for having political parties. The irony today is that excessive partisanship (abuse of the "confidence" vote as a bullying tactic) has made the choice not so obvious.
I hope the coalition-builders will take a leaf from Harper's book (when he appointed Fortier to the Senate and his cabinet). It would be a stroke of political genius to appoint Elizabeth May to the cabinet and make her a senator. It would also allow the Liberal-NDP-Green coalition to claim to represent more than 50% of Canadians who voted in the last election.
posted by Allan Millard on 01 December 2008 at 6:28 PM
"Harpercratie" has set the table for the only circumstance where the G.G. can deny her First Minister's request (for dissolution). In the King-Byng dispute in 1926 the G.G. apparently acted on his own in turning to Meighen to form a government when King's government was defeated in the House. There was no evidence to support Lord Byng's exercise of discretion and the Meighen government soon fell, necessitating dissolution and elections.
Today in Ottawa it seems as though the G.G. will have some evidence that will allow the G.G. to call on another leader to form a government which will have some reasonable prospect of having the confidence of the House, at least for a reasonable time and for, perhaps, a specified legislative program (in the manner of the Peterson/Rae accord).
People are forgetting that in a constitutional monarchy the monarch's duty is to find a First Minister and government in the House of Commons. The choice is usually obvious, which is, by the way, the very basis for having political parties. The irony today is that excessive partisanship (abuse of the "confidence" vote as a bullying tactic) has made the choice not so obvious.
I hope the coalition-builders will take a leaf from Harper's book (when he appointed Fortier to the Senate and his cabinet). It would be a stroke of political genius to appoint Elizabeth May to the cabinet and make her a senator. It would also allow the Liberal-NDP-Green coalition to claim to represent more than 50% of Canadians who voted in the last election.
posted by Allan Millard on 01 December 2008 at 6:31 PM
Steven Harper has only his own arrogance and disconnect from reality to blame for the government coup. He acted like he had a majority and could do anything he wanted; thinking the other parties wouldn’t dare cause another election by bringing down his government so soon after an election. I can just imagine, and laugh at, the shock he got when they ganged up on him to throw his government out without even having to force another election. His final arrogant stupidity that forced the other parties to act together against him was his decision to remove the federal income support that the other parties need.
Of course Harper’s boneheaded move to sit on the sidelines concerning the faltering economy gave the other parties the public platform they needed to proceed with their coup. And he also acted to ban strikes under the guise that it was needed to address the economic situation that he wasn’t addressing otherwise, which gave the opposition parties the additional argument that he was suspending democratic rights to add to their arsenal. It also proved that Harper just plans to follow the usual conservative stupidity of stepping on the throat of the workers while catering to the wealthy business owners with more tax cuts without doing anything constructive to promote Canada’s economic security and growth. The economic horse is pushing on the barn door and Harper in his infinite stupidity decided he’d just wait to see how soon the horse would escape, and how many of the rest of the animals will also leave, instead of looking for a method of keeping the door shut to secure the animals and save the farming business.
What will the new coalition government do though? Are they going to just use their usual shotgun approach and scatter money around foolishly to buy some quick votes while they pretend they have a clue?
I think Harper and his conservative boneheaded inconsiderate government got what they deserved, but I don’t have any confidence in the coalition to properly secure our economy and steer Canada to a better future either.
posted by JosephThePoet on 01 December 2008 at 7:42 PM
Prime Minister Harper has no one to blame but himself as he is the author of his current troubles. Instead of leading a productive government he called an unnecessary election. He did not get the majority that he wanted and was unable to change his stripes to become a leader rather than a bully. Previously Mr. Harper spent years bullying members of the Conservative Party into silence and vilifying the opposition members of the Parliament of Canada. Now there are very few who trust him or want anything to do with him. It is time for the Conservative Party of Canada to look for real leadership and become the party that many of us want, fiscally responsible and progressively social.
posted by Wendell Prime on 01 December 2008 at 8:13 PM
It is very sad to see political leaders only interested in their own career, not doing thing for the country. First Mr Harper did not follow the law he set up and as a result we had an election this year. Even worse, the other party leaders now do not respect the democratic election procedure. My simple requirement from an ordinary citizen: Politicians should at least has a heart for the country, not only entirely focus on their own ambition. I sincerely hope that our party leaders should at least have the wisdom to give us political stability, not to build their ambitions at the cost of our country.
posted by Cathy Chan on 01 December 2008 at 8:35 PM
I think a coalition is the least harmful choice. An election is way too expensive.
Harper's moves last week showed that he has not changed and he is the very dangerous individual with an extreme ideology. He is still the man who apologized to the United States for Canada's refusal to go into Iraq.
Hopefully he will leave politics after the coalition and the Conservative party will be led by one of the many idealistic progressives that also are in parliament.
In a couple of years when there is an election, Canadians might have a good choice between leaders who are more like the leaders described in the remarkable book - Good to Great - self-effacing, modest and sublimate their personal ambitions to those of the organization.
posted by Joe "A great many people think they are thinking when they are really rearranging their prejudices" on 01 December 2008 at 9:05 PM
I am not a political pundit but the actual Liberal/NDP coalition does NOT have more seats than Harper. Unless the Bloc joins the coalition rather than just pledging 18 months support the numbers don't add up. Of course the Bloc has the Nation's best interest at heart so we should trust its intention.
posted by skins saya on 01 December 2008 at 9:13 PM
DION our next PM
posted by skeeter on 01 December 2008 at 9:29 PM
Ask yourself, where would we be if Harper had won a majority in the last election?
This Harper minority government tried to eliminate roughly $28 million in public subsidies that political parties receive for each vote they in federal elections. If Harper ever wins a majority government he will succeed in this effort. Parties will rely on private donations. Those preoccupied with making money tend to have more of it to make political investments. A Harper majority will give big money and big business more political clout than ever.
The economic update released this past week revealed the tip of the Harper's hidden agenda iceberg. In the midst of an unprecedented international financial crisis, and only six weeks after the last election, Harper tabled an economic statement designed to cripple all organized political opposition, thereby improving his party's electoral chances next time around.
Harper's perpetual preoccupation with the next election blinds him and the Conservative Party to the needs of Canadians. Rome burns while Harper schemes.
The coalition government proposed by the NDP, Liberal and Bloc is the most democratic solution available. These coalition partners earned the confidence of 54.4% of Canadians in the last election. Conservatives assumed power in October with only 37.6% support. I, for one, am excited by the prospect of the majority of MPs putting their considerable differences aside, forgetting about the next election, and running the country.
posted by R Pardo on 01 December 2008 at 10:07 PM
At the recent summit in Peru, Stephen Harper stated that it was imperative that all countries do what they can to stimulate their own economies and help ease the financial crisis facing the world. What does he do when he comes home? He embarks on an exercise to advance his usual brand of divisive politics; recinding the right of federal civic servants to strike for 2 years (last time I looked no strike was hovering on the horizon): change the rules of pay equity (when was the Harper government ever a friend of women???); deny political parties the federal subsidy ( what happens to parties like the Greens who have so much to contribute to democracy?). Nothing here that would remotely pass as a fiscal update, rather it is a ploy, under the disguise of difficult financial times, to push his extreme right wing agenda. In a parlimentary democracy, such as we have in Canada, when a governing party looses the confidence of the House, the party falls. The Conservatives have lost the confidence of the House, therefore they have lost the right to lead the government. The opposition have presented a viable alternative for providing stable, thoughtful government to the people of Canada and they should be given the opportunity to prove their ability or the electorate will throw them out. In trying to hold on to power, the Conservatives are once again showing us that it is not Canada's interests that they have at heart but their own political survival. To close down parliament to meet their own needs and agenda is a blatant mockery of democracy. Should they survive this crisis, by fair or foul means, how much respect and trust could the Canadian people have in them? Will they not have plainly shown us that they want power just for power's sake and not because they believe in Canada and its citizens? Is a government not elected by the people for the people? Perhaps this time Stephen Harper has been too cute by half, and by urging their supporters to flood the airwaves in support of them says much about their motives for wanting to govern the country. For once in your life, Stephen Harper, do the right thing. Admit that you no longer have the confidence of Parliament and gracefully surrender power. Jeannette I.
posted by Jeannette I. on 01 December 2008 at 11:16 PM
It was my democratic right to vote for the party which would receive my little $1.95 and I did that knowing they would not get elected in my riding. Conservatives have no right to step on my expression of democracy. Just a small but BIG thing to me.
posted by Shari on 01 December 2008 at 11:37 PM
With four major political parties running in every federal election the probability of any single party winning with a majority is slim to say the least. I am starting to get really frustrated with the constant playing with figures that the opposition uses to justify an action or make a point….ie:-Harper only got 38% of the vote, therefore 62% are opposed to him. Have they ever said that as Jack Layton had only 18% it stands to reason that 82% are opposed to him! If the G.G. actually goes along with this take over by the unelected I fear that the same is going to be forced upon us again and again in the future, in other words democracy as we know it now will continue to be hijacked by a long series of “coalitions” generated by the three parties that did not get the votes needed to form any kind of government…..Hey! If it worked once..... If this is the case many people have stated that there is no point in voting in any election…and I have to agree. Why would anyone bother to vote when the results are going to be reversed at the first excuse the “Majority” can fabricate. The other scare is the fact that just maybe there is good reason why, for example Jack Layton wasn't elected.....because the majority did not agree with his very costly universal day care...which is now a number one priority for the new "coalition"! The only viable alternative to this is to call a new election whenever this stunt is pulled to veto the results of a bona-fide previous one. The outcry then is the cost of $3 million…a staggering outlay of about $8 each, but at least it will see the democratic process upheld instead of being hi-jacked !
And before anyone forms an opinion about my political leanings,I will only say I did NOT vote Conservative in the last election.....
posted by nitehawk532 on 02 December 2008 at 1:46 AM
As Canadians, we do NOT elect governments and we do NOT elect prime ministers. We elect parliaments. And it is only with the confidence of OUR DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED PARLIAMENT that any government can claim legitimacy! I think far too many Canadians are in dire need of a major civics lesson.
posted by OneWorld on 02 December 2008 at 11:22 AM
Much better than some opposition members going for a walk during critical non-confidence votes as in the last Parliament.
They've certainly got the extreme right in a terrible skid. Its great to see them throw every resource at their disposal to regain control.
But just like the best automobile traction control, I think now the best outcome may be they at least go in the ditch frontwards!!
Dave Thomas, Fort Erie, Ontario
posted by dthomas1 on 02 December 2008 at 10:11 PM
you hit the nail on the head here. I am so tired of these political elites spewing I'm standing up for Canadians. When they are really only thinking of themselves and I am tired of this government does not represent a majority of Canadians bull. Even the admired Obama just squeeked past 50%, therefore almost half Americans did not vote for him. What is it with Canadians that they always support the LOOSERS after the election. Hopefully IF this 3 party grab for their 15 minutes of infamy succeeds it will backfire in the future and we end up with a two party system. And hopefully in the future Quebec will see that their self absorption is destructive to a truly united Canada. So they suffered in the past GET OVER IT, and become part of this most wonderful Country.
posted by opinions/dialogue on 02 December 2008 at 11:51 PM
I agree with the commentators who suggest that, if the coaltion does form a government, it will soon wish it hadn't. The proposed new government will be very unstable. Only a dozen renegades among the three parties (including the Bloc members, who are renegades to start with) could bring it down. That will probably happen within six months, a year at the most. If the Conservatives are smart enough to accept defeat in a statesmanlike way, then await the inevitable collapse of the coalition, Harper will look like an island of stability to Canadians in the election which will follow, especially since economic conditions will probably be worse then than they are now. Unfortunately for them, the Conservatives don't seem to recognize what an opportunity they have, and seem intent on trying to hang onto power at any cost. in that case, the next election will be more of the same.
posted by Alexander on 03 December 2008 at 1:14 PM
What are your thoughts on Harper right now? Still the man for the job? Can he get himself out of this mess?
posted by Mike Miner
on 03 December 2008 at 1:53 PM
What are your thoughts of adding another leadership race (on the Conservative side) to this messy situation? Needed?
posted by Mike Miner
on 03 December 2008 at 1:54 PM
"I hope the coalition-builders will take a leaf from Harper's book (when he appointed Fortier to the Senate and his cabinet). It would be a stroke of political genius to appoint Elizabeth May to the cabinet and make her a senator. It would also allow the Liberal-NDP-Green coalition to claim to represent more than 50% of Canadians who voted in the last election."
I have to say, adding yet another party into this confusing stew doesn't appeal to me. For one thing, it would make the relationship with the NDP that much more testy.
Any concerns that adding May would just make things more confusing, and that adding Fortier to the Senate and cabinet was criticized by the opposition?
posted by Mike Miner
on 03 December 2008 at 1:57 PM
Like the thinking of your post. I just printed off a list of the current breakdown of House of Commons. Conservatives 143, Liberals 77. NDP 37. 77 plus 37 equals 114. The elephant in the room is the BQ 49 seats for the PROVINCE of QUEBEC. All parties have to work with the elephant BUT they do not request that the elephant CRUSH them. They have hired the prostitute for temporary gratification, at a cost no one in the MAJORITY of CANADA will ever know BUT WILL PAY FOR DURING THE DECADES TO FOLLOW. It is time MEEK Canadians stood up for all Canada. We have tried for YEARS to appease Quebec and sent BILLIONS to them. IT HAS FAILED. Tune into Quebec today and they are absolutely drooling at the prospect of the BILLIONS more they now expect to receive. THE BLACKMAILER NEVER GOES AWAY. Oh yes Ms. May if confident in requesting her pal DION to appoint her to the SENATE or advise CABINET on the future of all Canadians
posted by opinions/dialogue on 03 December 2008 at 2:02 PM
Coalition be damned! Despite his repulsive approach to Canada and Canadians, Harper was elected to govern the country in a responsible and fiscal manner. His feet should be held to that fire by those both within and without his party -- until he accepts his role as the prime minister for all of us. It's the country that needs help -- not his narrow ideology.
posted by Paul Murphy on 04 December 2008 at 8:46 PM
All things considered I am finally happy with the GG's decision to allow parliament to be prorogued under the circumstances. Certainly, I have the appetite to prevent such intent to bankrupt the opposition from its chances of participating in future elections by removing the subsidies currently available. However the big issue of preparing a proper response to the forcast economic crisis in a timely manner in the wake of President Obama's coming into office is paramount. An allowance for time would seem most advantageous for all concerned including Canadians.
posted by WillowdaleBoy on 04 December 2008 at 8:47 PM
I'm happy to see Mr Harper stand his ground and take any and all measures that are allowed to remain as the Governing Party of Canada and believe he and his Party are interested in only the betterment for Canada and ALL Canadians as a whole.I personally don't want a Primeminister that would just roll over and concede to this situation.This political manoeuvring is only a self-serving move for the Parties of the proposed coalition and the Peoples involved with these parties, not for the betterment of Canada or Canadians as a whole. I see it is not advantageous to Canadians and or Canada to propagate this situation.If they were interested in Canada they would work with our legally elected Governing party . To even think they would govern (Unified) with the best intensions for Canada and Canadians as a whole is a complete fallacy.To have a separatist Party ( The Block; we all know what it is about ) to be part of the Coalition that governs all of Canada.NOT A WISE SITUATION. We all know how Politicians have a way of not doing what they say they will do,after they assume power.The Block states it will not have a say in Governing this Country ,if they are part of a coalition government is a statement that is TOTALLY Unbelievable.It is a disaster waiting to happen. We are not that brain dead not to see what is being proposed in regards to this situation.Lets have another election (KNOW) and see what happens We will see how the party supporters of the proposed coalition parties really think about the forming and being part of this coalition with the Block. We just could end up with a major majority party Government.If not,I'm personally tired of appeasing the French Canadian ( Block) Party and Quebec. A Separation might be in Order. We Canadians Separate form Quebec. Let Quebec govern them selves with out any help from the rest of ,what would be THE New CANADA.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
posted by canadianpublic on 05 December 2008 at 2:15 AM
Harper's plan to destroy,or as he put it more bluntly,to kill the opposition parties is what has brought us to this point. He like Cheyney is intent on pushing his Reformist plan,and look where that got the Bush Administration to date. I am disappointed in the G.G.'s decision; being appointed by Paul Martin does not mean she had to be swayed by the public and especially the media and political pundits as to her decision to slap Harper on the wrist so as to not look as if she is showing favouritism. She is now in the position of Pontius Pilate at Jesus' crucifixion delima,saving Barabas (Harper) when she knew in her heart is was wrong.Sometimes you have to loose the favour of the masses; we do not stone people in this country,or throw them to the lions in the collosium to be eaten alive. She made the wrong decision,and wil regret this,mark my words,and they never fall to the ground. Harper may have backed down and seem to be reconcilitory,but do not buy that for a minute,it is all and act,after all he is a politician looking to stay alive.If you look deep into his eyes,you can see deceit. This country will pay a heavy price,if he is allowed to continue as P.M. First the Liberals need to can Mr. Dion,he may be a good man,but he is not right for this time. R.E.Toronto
posted by password on 05 December 2008 at 6:07 AM
The wedge go's in a little deeper. When the wedge was first inserted with bilingualism and that government party it has progressively been hammered in as the years go by to initiate the split. Canada as we know it now is destined to split. The writing has been on the wall since that time. The hammer that has been driving that wedge in , is as we all know is the majority of French Canadians in Quebec.As the hammer gets bigger in Quebec it is being driven deeper and faster as we have just experienced in recent days.It seams all the governing parties spend more time appeasing Quebec and their separatist Parties , than working for the betterment of all the Provinces of Canada .The general pubic is know finding out more and more of all the huge amounts of money that has been given to Quebec and their Separatist aspirations and all the other concessions and movements in regards to appeasing them. Since they have been so diligent at working at separation .We the rest of Canada lets help them as we have the BIG hammer to finish the job and separate from them. As sad as that is, it is inevitable, and build a new country with out them.Let them be an entity to them selves and see how well they fair without the support of all of us in our own united one national language Country. History tells us a country with 2 national languages has never survived in unity. Lets get on with it peacefully.
posted by canadianpublic on 06 December 2008 at 3:06 PM
The National Council for a New America will engage with and empower the American people to develop innovative solutions that meet the serious challenges confronting our country. It is the right time to begin a thoughtful conversation about the future of this country. The National Council for a New America might not be such a bad thing. The conservative element in America certainly is in need of a reboot of sorts, and so naturally, something like the National Council for a New America, or NCNA, would arise. The economic crisis is one of their focal points, as well as the healthcare system, alternative fuels, and a broad array of other issues. Some people might get installment loans to sign up. It could be the short term loans towards a new day in America with the National Council for a New America.
posted by Arriana E on 07 May 2009 at 4:49 AM
*You must have a FREE TVO account in order to comment on posts
Don't have an account?
*You must have a FREE TVO account in order to comment on posts
Producer Mike Miner blogs about the Internet, media and culture. Follow Mike on Twitter.
The Agenda with Steve Paikin Allan Gregg in Conversation Big Ideas
Think Again
Capital Confusion
What are they thinking? The jackals are scheming(too many parties without a leader) in a Pavlovian deliriam to assuage the human lust for power. Oh! for a decent majority upon whom to bestow the power and not just let it fall, in times that are uncharted with a need for steady conservatism. Canada may just be in need of its own new(political and financial) homegrown policies.
posted by Jonny on 01 December 2008 at 3:39 PM