• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

All according to plan?

AgentM

AgentM

Comrade from Canuckistan!
Joined
Jan 10, 2010
Messages
995
Reaction score
257
Location
British Columbia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Adam Radwanski said:
It apparently wasn't just a rogue poll by the Strategic Counsel earlier this week. With Ekos reporting similar finding - albeit with some peculiarities in the regional breakdown - it seems the Conservatives have taken a public opinion hit from prorogation.

Whether they were expecting to take that hit is a different question, and the answer would tell us a lot about how much trouble they're really in.

<snip>

Or maybe - and from occasional glimpses of panic, this is starting to seem like a good bet - prorogation is a short-term strategy that's backfired miserably.

Maybe the weakness of the Liberals, and Canadians' general disinterest in what goes on in Parliament, led the Conservatives to think they could score a little tactical victory - sparing themselves the detainees headache with very little backlash. Maybe they even thought it would win them support, since Harper and his ministers are better able to communicate with the public when they're not stuck in Ottawa, answering opposition questions.

In other words, maybe they just misread the public's mood, and overestimated its patience. Conservative supporters should be hoping there's something more to it - if not because this will necessarily matter in the next election, then because of what it says about the instincts and the foresight of the party's decision-makers.

All according to plan? - The Globe and Mail
Click to expand...

Some interesting speculation from Adam Radwanski's blog on the G&M website. He's absolutely correct in that prorogation will be a major issue when the next federal election rolls around!
 
As soon as a competent rival becomes available, the Conservatives will be voted out.
 
Orius said:
As soon as a competent rival becomes available, the Conservatives will be voted out.
Click to expand...

It's more that the Liberals just need to show that they'd be an actual alternative to the Tories. Iggy hasn't been very good at showing how his gov't would be different.
 
AgentM said:
It's more that the Liberals just need to show that they'd be an actual alternative to the Tories. Iggy hasn't been very good at showing how his gov't would be different.
Click to expand...

You say tomato, I say tom-ah-toe.
 
Orius said:
You say tomato, I say tom-ah-toe.
Click to expand...

I wonder when Stephen Harper will leave the scene? If the Tories get defeated in the next election that may be his time to go. It'll be interesting to see who the Conservatives find to replace him.
 
Orius said:
As soon as a competent rival becomes available, the Conservatives will be voted out.
Click to expand...

I guess we are looking at 2014 at the earliest. I think that the Conservatives have done a great job of 'defining' Ignatieff for him. The other people with a chance to win a leadership vote: Rae, Dryden, Dosanjh are not strong enough to win an election. The Liberals needs new blood. Besides, I don't trust party changers.
 
legojenn said:
I guess we are looking at 2014 at the earliest. I think that the Conservatives have done a great job of 'defining' Ignatieff for him. The other people with a chance to win a leadership vote: Rae, Dryden, Dosanjh are not strong enough to win an election. The Liberals needs new blood. Besides, I don't trust party changers.
Click to expand...

I agree that the Liberals do need new blood. Iggy is a vast improvement over Stephane Dion, but he hasn't been that great so far. Iggy is actually speaking at my university today, but I'm not going to bother going to see him cause I have an assignment to do today.

To Iggy's credit though, he has realized that Canadians A. Don't really want an election these days, and B. That he needs to present them with an alternative. So hopefully the Liberals are using this time to start crafting an alternative policy platform that distinguishes them from the Tories.
 
can someone explain to me why I should care about the prorogation? I mean seriously. Other than the whole avoiding the discussions of torture thing, it's not like they are on an extended vacation. They actually, from what I hear, have a very ambitious agenda for the off-time to develop ministerial plans for next year and prep the budget and the like.

Isn't all this gripe just political?
 
Does anyone ever really say 'tom-ah-toe?'

I've never heard anyone say it other than in that little line, there.
 
CJ 2.0 said:
can someone explain to me why I should care about the prorogation? I mean seriously. Other than the whole avoiding the discussions of torture thing, it's not like they are on an extended vacation. They actually, from what I hear, have a very ambitious agenda for the off-time to develop ministerial plans for next year and prep the budget and the like.

Isn't all this gripe just political?
Click to expand...

Of course it's political, but it's not just partisan from what I've heard about. Having the PM shut down Parliament on a whim, for the simple reason of political expediency sets a bad precedent (especially when he does it twice)! In a system of Responsible Government like ours, the legislature is the most important element of our democracy, seeing as the Executive is supposedly responsible to it. Parliament is supreme, and should be treated with more respect than just the PM's play-thing. This entire charade is anti-democratic!
 
AgentM said:
Of course it's political, but it's not just partisan from what I've heard about. Having the PM shut down Parliament on a whim, for the simple reason of political expediency sets a bad precedent (especially when he does it twice)! In a system of Responsible Government like ours, the legislature is the most important element of our democracy, seeing as the Executive is supposedly responsible to it. Parliament is supreme, and should be treated with more respect than just the PM's play-thing. This entire charade is anti-democratic!
Click to expand...
didn't the liberals do it a whole slew of times the last time they were in charge?

Is this a case of pretending there is breach of some custom that never really existed or hasn't existed in practice for a long time?

If the government is comfortable its legislative agenda has gone as far as they need it to go and that time would be better spent advancing their next years' agenda, then what exactly is the problem? Would it be better if they kept the house open but stopped discussing any of the bills they are happy to let die and just sit around and play bridge?
 
CJ 2.0 said:
didn't the liberals do it a whole slew of times the last time they were in charge?

Is this a case of pretending there is breach of some custom that never really existed or hasn't existed in practice for a long time?

If the government is comfortable its legislative agenda has gone as far as they need it to go and that time would be better spent advancing their next years' agenda, then what exactly is the problem? Would it be better if they kept the house open but stopped discussing any of the bills they are happy to let die and just sit around and play bridge?
Click to expand...

The Commons is the only voice the people have. How is the government supposed to be kept to the minimal standards of accountability that it normally is if Parliament is shut?

I take it that you're ok with our democracy being suspended whenever the PM feels like it?
 
AgentM said:
The Commons is the only voice the people have. How is the government supposed to be kept to the minimal standards of accountability that it normally is if Parliament is shut?

I take it that you're ok with our democracy being suspended whenever the PM feels like it?
Click to expand...
come now. it's not shut FOREVER. It's a few extra weeks while the government reformulates its legislative agenda. In the meanwhile, no new laws will be passed, so there is no disenfranchisement of our elected officals in that regard.

And he is not "suspending democracy". That would only happen if elections were not held within legally specified timeframes.
 
CJ 2.0 said:
come now. it's not shut FOREVER. It's a few extra weeks while the government reformulates its legislative agenda. In the meanwhile, no new laws will be passed, so there is no disenfranchisement of our elected officals in that regard.

And he is not "suspending democracy". That would only happen if elections were not held within legally specified timeframes.
Click to expand...

Well we'll have to agree to disagree. I would just add that I would still be opposed to this if it were a Liberal PM doing it. I'm also annoyed that Michaelle Jean is apparently an easy push-over for Stephen Harper.
 
Last edited:
The GG can really only act within established precedant. There is no reason to deny him prorogation at this time. There probably was the last time but Harper got lucky.

PM's have used prorogation throughout history to their political advantage. Chretien left Martin holding the bag on Sponsorship when he proroged to avoid the release of the report while he was still in office.

The only way you remove the power of prorogation from the PM is to move to fixed election dates and legislated sitting days for the House/Senate. A move which would more than likely require constitutional change.
 
Joe Blow said:
The GG can really only act within established precedant. There is no reason to deny him prorogation at this time. There probably was the last time but Harper got lucky.

PM's have used prorogation throughout history to their political advantage. Chretien left Martin holding the bag on Sponsorship when he proroged to avoid the release of the report while he was still in office.

The only way you remove the power of prorogation from the PM is to move to fixed election dates and legislated sitting days for the House/Senate. A move which would more than likely require constitutional change.
Click to expand...

Hey Joe, good to see you! :)

Alright, I'll grant you that point. I still think it's wrong, but it has been done in the past. Although it didn't seem to hurt Chretien like this has hurt Harper, the Tories have gone from a comfortable lead to being tied neck and neck with the Grits.
 
It didn't hurt Chretien in the past because he was holding all the cards. He had a divided opposition (two Conservative parties) and a majority in both the House & Senate. Like it or not, Chretien ran more of a dictatorship than Harper ever will, it just didn't get played that way at the time.

Personally I think the polls will shift again. For some reason Iggy doesn't resonate well with the electorate and this surge will be temporary at best. What the Grits need is a firebrand (albeit intelligent and well spoken) and while Iggy might have the last two of those qualities, he is most definitely missing the first.
 
Joe Blow said:
Personally I think the polls will shift again. For some reason Iggy doesn't resonate well with the electorate and this surge will be temporary at best. What the Grits need is a firebrand (albeit intelligent and well spoken) and while Iggy might have the last two of those qualities, he is most definitely missing the first.
Click to expand...

They could very well shift again, but you never know. Ignatieff's new Chief of Staff Peter Donolo (an old Chretienite) seems to be working on turning his team around. Maybe Donolo will whip Iggy into shape.
 
We'll have to wait and see what Peter can do with Ignatieff because the 'reserved intellectual' act is not flying with the electorate.
 
CJ 2.0 said:
didn't the liberals do it a whole slew of times the last time they were in charge?

Is this a case of pretending there is breach of some custom that never really existed or hasn't existed in practice for a long time?

If the government is comfortable its legislative agenda has gone as far as they need it to go and that time would be better spent advancing their next years' agenda, then what exactly is the problem? Would it be better if they kept the house open but stopped discussing any of the bills they are happy to let die and just sit around and play bridge?
Click to expand...

Yes Chretien did it a few times

However is he the person Harper wants to be compared with?

I think not
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom