UPDATE!! According to John Baird (on Charles Adler) Gilles Duceppe will have veto power over every single bill put forward by the coaltion.
Oh man, I do think I see the twinkling of the asteroid about to extinguish the Liberal Party as we now know it.
If it doesn’t take out Confederation first.
Related thoughts from Kelly McParland.
Given that voters do directly elect the PM, pity that so much energy is put into promoting the party leaders during elections. Can’t have it both ways.
Shaken
Must be smoking what ET’s been smoking.
“…not my typing though, it’s fine.”
No, of course not, why bother, when rape and pillage is fine?
steve …you are right . They do have a good working relationship, united indeed.Sorta like the Three Stooges.
About as effective too.
lberia – stop right now with the leftist mode of ad hominem. Stick to the issues and don’t get into obscene talk.
The fact that the voters don’t directly elect the PM in a Westminster parliamentary system is totally irrelevant to this discussion. We are discussing the legitimacy of a coalition of parties, each one of them not having achieved a plurality of seats in a general election – then, after the election, backroom dealing to cobble together a coalition – is undemocratic.
The fact that some countries, those in particular with proportional representation, regularly use coalitions is totally irrelevant to the Canadian Westminster system. The way these countries operate, is to elect a party from multiple parties; the winning party is then expected to gather a coalition. We don’t operate this way. So, don’t use it as having any validity. As you are aware, Harper’s CPC won the election; there was no requirement for him to gather a coalition.
Next time, lberia, watch you language, don’t talk like a street juvenile smart-aleck and do some thinking.
Hey ET, you’re the one telling people who do not agree with your opinion to not be stupid.
The leader of the country is the one who has the most MPs supporting him. Period. Everything else you write about is irrelevant. Just because we never had this type of coalition in Ottawa doesn’t mean it can’t be done. Suck it up, princess.
I think Harper has the opposition right where he wants them. He knew this coalition talk was happening. It was to his advantage to expose it quickly. I say this because the election was only six weeks ago AND the opposition just passed the throne speech. By threatening to take away the $1.95, he knew the coalition talk would be fast forwarded. Now, the coalition form a Gov’t that is even more un-stable. It won’t take long for some M.P.’s to see the writing on the wall and jump to the Conservatives in an effort to save their own ass. Soon the coalition falls and all three parties that were part of it are wiped from the political scene. Harper has a 300 seat majority and Canada can get moving again. Never under-estimate the man, he is always 6 steps ahead of the others and they keep falling into his traps.
Dave
Sorry ET, but much as it irritates me to say this, Iberia is largely correct. A government only rules with the confidence of the House. What the opposition parties have said is that this government no longer has that confidence and will be defeated on a measure of non-confidence as soon as possible. Only if and when that happens, then the Prime Minister and Cabinet must resign.
This is entirely separate from the formation of a new government. In tendering his resignation, the Prime Minister leaves the Governor General with two choices: 1. to call on another Member of the House who has the confidence of the House to form a new government; or 2. to call for national elections. This is the GG’s constitutional choice, and popular vote has no role in it. It is purely a matter of House representation.
It has happened before in Ontario in 1985. Whatever the merits of the government which resulted, the Liberals and NDP of the day could demonstrate to the Lieutenant Governor that they enjoyed the confidence of the House. Please remember, Canada is not a republic with sovereignty resting with the people; it is a constitutional monarchy, with sovereignty resting with the Crown.
That’s why this statement of yours is fundamentally wrong:
“That would be to deny the will of the people. It may surprise you, lberia, but Canada is not an oligarchy. Its government is not decided by backroom deals made by and only by parties. it is decided by the Will of the People.”
There is no Will of the People in a British Parliamentary system. There is only the Confidence of the House. The GG is entirely within her constitutional right to turn to another who can claim to be able to govern.
Remember that these things are often much more complicated than appears at first glance. Only once has the GG refused the request of a Prime Minister for an election, namely Lord Byng in 1926, and that turned out rather badly for the opposition at the time.
What is essential in all this is what does Harper request of the GG at the time of tendering his resignation. Whatever that may be, we do not yet know.
I was born in Canada but have lived in Kalifornia most of my life. Just recently started reading SDA. I don’t know much about Canadian politics but it looked like with the recent elections you were on the right track. Oh well……
iberia:
“Moreover, having a coalition is legitimate and is a fact of life in many countries.”
Assuredly. If memory serves, it’s been very effective in Italy.
“This has nothing to do with who YOU voted for, it has everything to do with having the support of the majority of MPs”
Yes, especially considering the fact they truly have canada’s best interest in mind, and are not sprawling in a drunken power stupor. If you’re that confident perhaps you’d agree to an election with just 2 candidates: the CPC & the Bermuda Triangle, and we’d truly let the majority rule.
Great quote from wardb on the “legitimacy” of a coalition found here: “Canadians did not vote for a coalition that has to clear its policies with Gilles Duceppe”
Let’s hope Harper prorogues & forces an election on this basis.
ET, I always enjoy reading your posts, especially that at 7:32 PM. I cannot fathom your patience, however; trying to reason with iberia et al is not unlike casting pearls before swine, but I do admire your persistence.
What William Lyon Mackenzie King might have said:
“An argument to march on Ottawa to take back the country and crush the abominable insurrection.”
Is this too much to ask? Too much to organize?
Or shall we watch democracy, liberty and freedom rent asunder by treasonous criminals, marxists and anarchists?
Are our joined voices limited to blogs? Or can our hearts, minds and plowshares be beaten into swords?
This is now. The barbarians are at the gate. Tomorrow is too late.
Their lick spittle greedily falls on the future of free men and women.
Free enterprise and wealth creation.
Children who would otherwise be free to dream, rather than inculcated into doom.
Do we no longer have the right to choose independent destinies, protected by shared laws, enforced by those who have been democratically elected do so?
Or is this the end, a whimper, not a bang?
Or, maybe I’m full of shit.
What use is force, when the enemy is already in three parts with no way west?
The revolution starts the day after the non confidence vote. Load up. And by the way I live in Toronto. I want a referendum on Quebec. It is time that we vote on whether we want them to be a part of Canada or an independent country. As a conservative voter I believe we would have a conservative government majority without Quebec.Let the revolution begin.
Dear “cgh”,
You are completely mistaken about “this happening before in Ontario in 1985”. In that situation the Premier of Ontario did not want an election and, in fact, recommended to the Lieutenant-Governor to let the opposition parties try to govern.
That’s a HUGE DIFFERENCE!
So, assuming that Stephen Harper tells the GG that he wants another election, can you provide us with even ONE example of actual precedence? Just one, that’s all we’re hoping for.
And please don’t even both with the 1926 King-Byng affair lest you want to be proven wrong again.
Robert W.
It’s kinda unfair to say that only those in Quebec can vote for the Bloc, the Libs and the NDP have become the proxy for the rest of Canada.
Good article on this situation by David Frum.
“The Poisoned Chalice”
Whomever wins….loses.
http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/story.html?id=1019067