|
Coalition Government - in Canada
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Fir3start3r |
Wow, talk about desperate!
The Liberals are in NO condition to even consider this when they can't even run their own party...they're still in shambles. |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
Dion being a former seperatist, and Rae being the former NDP priemier of Ontario (and aspiring LIBERAL LEADER...) I think if anything they may be able to represent the two other parties somewhat more than Mr. Harper, who was only a former liberal. Maybe Harper can cross the floor and gun for a cabinet position like western development? |
If Rae becomes leader of the Liberal party they're toast.
Ontario took forever to recover from his disastrous leadership as NDP Ontario Premier...:whip: |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
If the coalition succeeds the electoral backlash will be huge come next election.
With the Liberals jumping in bed with the NDP, they automatically pull themselves to the left by default, leaving the center and the right pretty open...
We just had an election and if there is one think you can count on, it will be a lot of pissed off people (ie the MAJORITY of the electorate) that didn't vote for this fiasco.
This isn't what we voted for!
Jack Layton as Finance?? God help us all...
I can already see the GST going back up 7% to pay for all the wonderful nanny state programs he must have dancing in his head. |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
So why can't political parties pay for themselves again?
What short memories we have - it was Chrétien and Liberals that set this precedent in the first place! And yet somehow it's the PCs fault for finishing it and taking it to where this needs to go.
Political parties in Canada should NOT be getting taxpayer $$ for each vote they get to fill their coffers.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpa...755C0A9649C8B63
Why the hell anyone would want the Liberals anywhere near political power again with all their recent major scandals and deceptions needs a reality check and a history lesson.
We (the MAJORITY OF CANADA) didn't vote for these other political jackasses for a reason and now they want to FORCE a take-over coup-style with a single stroke of a pen??!
I DID NOT VOTE FOR THESE PEOPLE FOR A REASON!
Do we not think for one second with Duceppe holding the all the cards that there isn't going to be some sort of recompense?
Duceppe doesn't care for anything other than Quebec!
FFS people we're talking a party that WANTS TO SEPARATE FROM CANADA and now the rest of Canada is about to be held hostage to a man that cares not a thing for it.
I hope all involved this in this socialist coalition have their parties burn in flames and disbanded in the next election because this is robbery! :whip: |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
Why? Would you like another election so soon afte the last. Is 250Million so soon after the last 1/4 billion good when Flaherty is skimping on a measly 30million? The commons isn't fully a partisan organization - it is a legislature, if you know the way parliament actually works rather than a mass mob. Actually I see the conservatives loosing support by the next election once their feather is yanked from their hat. There is no reason for an electoral backlash, actually if anything this will likely reassure voters of a capable liberal government, that is able to work with the other parties in the house to make an effective government, unlike the conservatives who have no general support of the opposition.
|
All the other parties lean left...
| quote: |
That is more or less plagerism, you've been mining I see. Actually it doesn't, it just means they need to make agreeable measures. This doesn't change the ability to propose bills or have people vote in open votes on legislation, eg. Freevotes. The government Runs the country, the legislature makes the laws, you have blurred the two.
Technically the government doesn't even need to come from the commons.
This does not change the liberal party - it changes the government, there is a difference.
|
So because the opposition as common ground in disliking the government they have to bring the government down?
What happened to, 'agreeable measures' with the current government?
| quote: |
They didn't vote for lies, and a bunch of economic measures that wern't even mentioned during the campaign - and casually ommited and replied by - oh I didn't think it'd be like that, by Harper. Technically a coalition government is perfectly legal. Also the MAJORITY of people voted for the NDP and Liberals over 6 million vs 5 million.
|
You can't just total them up like that and assume that grassroots NDP and Liberals want to join hands; that's a pretty big jump in logic.
Were all their constituents polled, asking if even bringing down the government was a good idea?
This is nothing more than a conniving power grab and REAL bad timing considering a) we just came from the polls at the cost of $300 Millions dollars to the taxpayers expense and b) in light of the economic forecast, we should be looking for solutions together for all Canadians, not just looking to forward their political agendas WTF! Canadians should be reading about solutions from all levels of government, not reading about if there is going to ANY government at all!
| quote: |
You are a conservative you voted for more lies, what did you vote for an ineffective government that could move on to social issued like no abortion and stronger punishments and costs for the justice system by locking more people away and for longer, now that you've spent the entire surplus, which hasn't happened in over a decade. And for what Mortgages during an economic crisis?
|
The Conservative have been much more effective than any current party could hope for at this point - that doesn't make them not fallible though. They are however less fallible than all the other parties IMHO.
Don't even get me started on the economic crisis. The government was right to sit and wait to see what the Americans were going to do. To do otherwise would be very myopic and ignorant to believe that somehow the American's plight doesn't effect us in days of a global economy.
It was a very prudent and fiscal move - one I happen to agree with.
Of course, for the opposition it was a time to raise their flags and jump up and down about the government doing nothing when they didn't even have a good plan of their own! Again, political prowess for the Canadian television camera, plans powered by a single A battery...
| quote: |
He helped make a few of the last few budgets.
|
Really? In what way?
(You should know better than to put Taliban Jack out there without some support) ;)
| quote: |
Rarther than keeping it at 5% and going into debt and seeing cost of living skyrocket with lost jobs mounting? The GST cuts in the way they were done were financially irresponsible, the funds should have went straight to the FEDERAL DEBT until it was paid off, now Harper has risked the debt to be extended to 2030 and beyond, when we were only around 10 years from paying it off in full, now not only does this generation have to pay off interest and debt irresponsibly racked up during the Mulrooney era but canadians may need to pay it but the youth of today may also be stuck with the bill, and this with a baby boomer surge.. simply put Harper may have caused us to miss the deadline. Of course the banks love the conservatives they make them a lot of money by fiscally irresponsible measures that cause borrowing from them at interest. Although I wouldn't rule in a GST change by the coalition government, at default.
|
Yes, because that's exactly what the Liebrals did when they were in power didn't they?
In fact, the Liebrals LIED when they said THEY were going to decrease scrap the GST AND NEVER DID after 12 years!
And this is a single example amongst a fat dossier of broken promises by the Liberal Party.
BTW the FEDERAL DEBT is actually doing quite well under Harper thanks - http://www40.statcan.gc.ca/l01/cst01/govt03a-eng.htm
Pointing Canada's budget out now considering how well the other G7 countries are doing compared to us just makes us look good.
| quote: |
Chances are McCallum will somehow be involved with spearheading a finance initiative. Layton would be a capable finance minister - but the policies wouldn't necisarily be those that the banks and ultrarich would like.
McCallum on the other hand is a banker.
|
Nor anyone else that's not socialist...hardly a, 'bank or ultra rich' factor here...
McCallum, being a banker himself, is a good thing yes.
Bumping the GST back up to 7% would be a colossal mistake - especially in this global economic climate.
Even the British are lowering their taxes; why the hell would we? It would be fiscal suicide and drive away much needed business!
It's hard to pay for nanny state programs if you chase all the businesses out of town and loose jobs - who's going to pay the bill then? Everyone on the dole?
I'm not saying anyone is going to do this, but I've heard comments of this being a possibility to help pay for government initiatives and startup projects. |
|
|
| Alex |
| If Jack Layton ever gets anywhere near the position of Prime Minister, or ever attains any position of real power this country is in for a DEPRESSION. He will let unions hold us hostage left right and center and Quebec will get it's wish on separation GUARANTEED if the Liberals take this thuggish approach to returning to power. |
|
|
| DJ Shibby |
| quote: | Originally posted by Fir3start3r
So why can't political parties pay for themselves again?
|
I heard that your conservative party conveniently banned donations to the other parties.
Not that I really have any care about it, it is Canada afterall. |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
Because the Conservatives have shown themseleves to be more plausably corrupt than the liberal party was stated as.
|
Conservative have some black eyes yes, but nothing even close to the Liberal ones.
| quote: |
Actually I agree to some extent on this, I don't think politics should be wrapped around economic incentive, at the least, I think that they should be run like businesses. Although I do think that elections canada could offer forums for advertising directly through elections Canada, by offering local forums and paying for ads in papers for all local canidates etc..
The politics IS news so I don't see a reasons why private financing should be required to run campaigns, of course campaign staff and party organization is something else.. I do think it is a business and should be treated that way. However I do think it was irresponsible to rock the boat. Personally this shouldn't have just been sprung, they should have consulted on the budget prior to deliverig it formally in parliament --- why waste peoples time -- or rather why waste floor time, when you can work on measures in committees then delivry the plan once you know it will move ahead OR it MUST be done - why cut 30 million of the parties when you can deliver a few less unneeded modified bell helicopters to afghanistan - in a performance enviornment they arn't designed for. Why not patrol oil piplelines IN Canada where they are being bombed, rather than Afganis under occuption for a lost cause.
|
Wow, we agree on something. Wait, let me find my calendar. ;)
Taxpayers should not have to prop up political parties for the sake of their own existence.
BTW, there is NOTHING wrong with supporting our military.
Harper is only trying to fix the military after decades of trying to mothball no thanks to the Liberals.
We (as Canadians) cannot continually bitch about 'American Imperialism' while piggy backing them for support at the same time.
We may have treaties and military agreements but personally I'd rather see Canadians Forces at my door when they're needed than Rent-a-Soldiers from down South or some U.N. contingent.
| quote: |
It ain't JUST the liberals it is both the NDP and Liberals to admister GOVERMENT - you are slightly confusing the two.
|
...actually I'm not but proceed...
| quote: |
The legislature will to some degree insure that only bills mutually agreeable are presented. It is clear that working on a mutual budget it likely - everything outside that is somewhat unclear. In regard to what their legislative platform might be - however I would geuss it may thwart some conservative agenda items like ProLife Legislation, and Stiffer Sentancing and Reguations within the Justice System.
|
What was issue wrong with stiffer sentencing again? I don't see any problem with that..
| quote: |
I frankly don't mind some of the conservatives fiscal positions, but they have made some incredibly stupid calls IMO, and don't seem to be building canada - they intended to sell more of it off, and are running a deficit while doing so, which is really bad business.
|
Examples?
| quote: |
They had no growth stimulus in a downturn that I've seen.
|
And exactly WHICH country at the moment has a growth stimulus in this GLOBAL economic downturn?? Please point one out...
| quote: |
It will likely be a few strokes, but fact is you arn't the majority - 6 million people backed the coalition at election time while only 5 million backed the conservatives.
I didn't vote for these people for a reason too - they wern't in my riding, and wouldn't let me run in the election.
[quote]
That is a shallow yet pretty thing to say. I think Duceepe cares about far more than just Quebec, but he most certainly does care for Quebec and the Quebeqois. But in caring about quebec you must look at the big picture.
|
It's not shallow at all; Duceppe has been quoted NUMEROUS times that unless there is anything in it for Quebec he won't consider it.
And this is on several different issues.
How is that shallow again?
Do some Googling, you might be surprised...
| quote: |
This is no different then it has largely been - just cause you had a session without the cheif party of opposiion voting, doesn't mean that is how politics actually work - eg. you had it easy because they let you have a term, they can topple with support of the bloc at anytime, the NDP DO NOT support the conservatives, in general. Eg. Corporate issues, workers rights, etc, but do have some common policies. BUt the conservatives Right wing is not at peace with the centrists and left wingers.
|
This is actually a two way street which apparently, 'the coalition' only sees as a one way street...
| quote: |
Hardly robbery, it is called the law. The opposition has the right to propose structure of government should they hold a majority consensus - which they do.
|
Not without the Bloc - both the NDP and the Liberals don't have enough to form a majority without the Bloc and you can guarantee it won't be without concessions to the province of Quebec...(the only reason the Bloc exists)
The Liberals got their ass handed to them last election and now they want sign deals with the devil? It's a huge desperation move and that will backfire come next election big time.
| quote: |
Throwing away 1/2 a billion dollars makes no sense when they are whining about 30 million. |
Throwing away? Are you on crack? That election (6 WEEKS AGO!) was the perfect opportunity for all the opposition parties to get their together and they all FAILED miserably!
Especially the Liberals - is it one of their WORST elections ever.
Instead all they could come up with is to say f$ck the election results we're going to take over anyways???
These are the same incompetent boobs that LOST the federal election, fair and square not once by TWICE in TWO YEARS!
Canadians were pissed off for even having to go back to the polls early the last time; now this coalition of wannabes want to f$ck with the those results?
Heaven help them in the next election should they succeed and I'm going end this debate with that until we get more real info.
We can speculate all we want, the fact of the matter is, we need to see what's going to happen before going any further. |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
| quote: | Originally posted by ********
I won't comment further on this, but the current government having black eyes is far worse than previous governments.
|
I think you need a lesson in Liberal party history or you have a huge blind spot in your political knowledge on this subject...
| quote: |
We'll hold on arn't tax payers funding the conservatives? Where is all this money coming from? What about the tax deductions.. arn't they loosing the taxpayers money.. why are they tax deductable, should a business pay taxes on the money it makes?
|
Yea, but the conservatives were obviously fine with it, what's the other parties excuses other than using this as a catalyst to destroy a government that was elected twice in two years?
| quote: |
I applied to join the reserve? You? Or are you one of them, other people fighting for my values is good but I won't stand up for them myself types?
|
I did as well except I found a job.
| quote: |
Why do we need it in Afghanistan, what missions does it need? Was it harper, if it was harper, does he have military experience to know what the militarty needs?
|
Because us being in Afghanistan is actually legitimate and our military needs the tools?
Unless you enjoy watching Canadian soldiers coming back in coffins why shouldn't we give them what they need?
EVERY Canadian knows our military is laughable when it comes to actual hardware - have you been living under a rock?
| quote: |
Hold on so are you saying you don't support overseas missions?
|
Sorry where did I say I didn't support overseas missions again?
| quote: |
Waste of taxpayers dollars.
1. Get rid of light sentences and replace them with probations and works orders, if they screw up repeatedly increase it. Give them a chance to end probation orders, restitution orders etc.. or otherwise early if they cooperate and do well. Resitutution depending private victim or social vicit.. if private victim the victim should be able to set the acceptable punishment, if not agreed at a pretrial level, all trials should be by jury, and open to public input.
2. For serious crimes (where an ongoing social danger or harm exists), death at their choice, or ship them off to a ghulag that will generate revenue for the government, or turn one of our islands into a "resettlement location". Give them materials to live life in the ghulag like real people in a community, but protect them. The current prison system is a waste of time and resources, and they shoulnd't be located near communities, and should be self sufficient as possible.
3. Time doesn't matter, it is the lessons learned during it. I don't support punishment for crimes, I think that we should be proactive in rehabilitation and progressing people personal growth and capacitization in society to assit it in being the best it can be.
|
This is a joke right?
You want to rehabilitate every criminal to death?
'I don't support punishment for crimes'?? wtf?
See this is the problem with today's society - no personal responsibility for anything, it's society's fault..blah blah.
You do the crime - you do the time - zero tolerance
| quote: |
I know china is doing fairly well, with a perhaps 7 to 7.5% growth rate but that is subject to change (it was forcast to be 9.5% however the growth rate and the loss of growth are two different factors... eg. china lost 2% while canada lost 0.5 to perhaps 1%.
|
I don't count China, they're a communist country hello!
| quote: |
and what does that mean? All his MP's come from Quebec? Where else would they be representing? However the key is things outside of Quebec effect Quebec, so the Bloc has an interest in what develops outside Quebec in the view of how it effects Quebec, I would suppose.
Once again while i volunteered to be a bloc candidate they don't run the party outside of Quebec.
|
Why would a party that doesn't campaign outside Quebec (EVER) care what the hell the rest of Canada thinks unless there's something in it for them? That all the Bloc cares about - EOD on this end.
| quote: |
Thinking the bloc is blind to everything that goes on outside of Quebec, it is not the case it is a fairytale.
|
Of course they're not blind, they hold all Canadian policies hostage until an acceptable offer is made that's in the best interest of QUEBEC, not Canada.
| quote: |
What the hell is that suppose to mean. THis is the emptiest peice of rhetoric in relation to the circumstance ever. I would say it is the other way around. The conservatives are a one way street, while the majority of parliament is a three way street, or atleast a three lane road - perhaps in Quebec.
|
The truth hurts I know because you know I'm right.
All the other parties lean left so what? It's not like I just let out some secret. Anybody with any Canadian background in politics knows this. It's the reason the Liberals were in power so long because they simply didn't lean as hard as the NDP or the Bloc.
| quote: |
The one in 2010 or 2011?
|
Whenever the next federal election is.
| quote: |
I think they got their stuff together. Maybe not what you were expecting.
|
There are lots that weren't expecting it, not just me.
| quote: |
Learn about parliamentary procedure, they have the right to assume power if they hold a majority.. parliament is not a partisan organization, every elected member has the right to represent its constituents how it chooses. Also Partisanship holds only a figurehead role, not a real legal application, it is loosely based in conventions which favour democratic choice, of the members. The govenorgeneral chooses the Prime Minister in the role of the Queen as powers delegated to her. However by convention the largest group of Commons Members lend their support, as a show of the person most capable to form a government - however this need not be a member of parliament. Coalitions are a real thing in the parliamentary system, they just arn't all that common in Canada, but in places like Europe they are far more common.
|
By not that common you mean, oh, in the last 100 years of Canadian politics???
| quote: |
The federal election is done by riding, not as a whole federally to elect a party. It elects local representatives. By convention those representatives give advice on how to form government (as part of the process of parliamentary consent of the queen to act on advice of Parliament. Somewhat the same idea of Orders in Council (which harper is likely to potentially abuse to some degree by stalling over the chirstmas holidays, when a "crisis" is ongoing.
|
Not sure why you feel compelled to give a lesson in Canadian politics - I'm going to guess it's for the benefit of those outside Canada but if the other three losers are going to play dirty ball why not capitulate?
| quote: |
Harper is the one who called the last election.
|
Yes and?
You too. :)
| quote: |
There is little if any speculation. Their government appears stronger, and more inventive. Also the recent demonstrations of illegal conduct of the conservative party - again, likely don't help the situation. It makes Canada look stupid.
|
Actually it makes the NDP look stupid.
Who the hell doesn't do a role call on a conference call?
And to have access they would have had to have been given an invite with a number and a password to call into that audio bridge.
Pure incompetence on the NDP's part - and they want to run the country!
| quote: |
It will go ahead next monday unless harper damages his party more. |
Time will tell.
I agree that Harper should have at least talked it over with the other parties before tabling the party funding cut... |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Fir3start3r
So why can't political parties pay for themselves again?
What short memories we have - it was Chrétien and Liberals that set this precedent in the first place! And yet somehow it's the PCs fault for finishing it and taking it to where this needs to go.
Political parties in Canada should NOT be getting taxpayer $$ for each vote they get to fill their coffers.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpa...755C0A9649C8B63 |
there are plenty of countries that do have public funding for parties that win seats in parliament, and it works very well thankyou very much. i would even go so far as to say it is a very important part of real liberal democracy. |
|
|
| colonelcrisp |
Fir3start3r, your starting to sound like an albertan.....
We elect a house of commons, not a government. The leader of the government is the party leader in the house who holds the confidence of the house. In all honesty im suprised it took this long for the opposition to table the coalition idea, Harper has run the most opaque and stonewalling government in the last 20 years.
lets not forget he only got 38% of the popular vote...... hardly a majority of canada wanted him to lead the country. In fact i think that the coalition better represents the interests of the whole country.
Gilles doesn't scare me at all, in fact i think the main goal of his involvement is his total disdain for harper and his bullish manipulation of the PMO. The seperatists havent tried a referendum in years for a reason, they know that if they call another one and lose it will be the death blow to their rhetoric.
Every other major country affected by the latest ecinomic downturn has already tabled releif packages for the financial and credit markets. Harper hasnt done anything but promise more infrastructure spending (great for me, but that doesnt fix anything imo) and whispered about a measly 400M to 1B over 4-5 years for the auto industry (which is akin to putting a bandaid on a small scrape while ignoring a severed femoral and carotid arteries) |
|
|
| Magnetonium |
Still can't believe this, I ignored the rumours and the behind-the-scenes talk.
This is a huge gamble for Libs-led coalition, if it goes sour you can be sure of Conservatives gaining a majority during the next elections ... this is a huge gamble, not at the best time either, with God knows what to achieve ... oh well.
Dam, why the heck they didn't axe Dion in time for this??? :disbelief |
|
|
|
|
