View Single Post
Old 09-24-2015, 12:19 PM   #2180
crazy_eoj
Powerplay Quarterback
 
crazy_eoj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Doe View Post
That is a pretty liberal recall of the facts. There was no coalition (just an agreement to form one after the non-confidence vote) and definitely no "coalition demands to deny prorogation".

The Liberal leader (Dion) was not forced to resign because of the "coalition crisis". He had already stated that he would step down after the election and before the fiscal update that started the whole ball rolling.

I could be wrong, but it seems to me that most coalitions are formed (granted?) immediately after elections. I don't know why the proximity to the election date would be a deterrent to the GG deciding in favor of a coalition.

Once again, coalitions are not "undemocratic" and would not "undermine the very foundations of responsible government". This is a construct created by the Conservatives in 2008 to try to win over public opinion. While it did indeed to that, it is not based in facts. Coalitions are perfectly legitimate ways to form governments, regardless of what kind of spin is used. Yes, Trudeau said he would not formally enter into a coalition, but Mulcair and Harper (as he also did in 2008) promised that they would not run deficits. Can we expect the GG to dissolve parliament if they do run deficits (as many are predicting) since they will have lied?
You can argue the semantics whether agreeing to form a coalition is actually forming one or not but it's really beside the point.

It is very well documented that Stephan Dion wrote to Michelle Jean as head of the coalition to convince her to refuse prorogation. It used to figure prominently on the Liberal Party website.

Lastly, comparing budgeting decision to a deceitful backdoor deal to become prime minister after losing an election is really ridiculous.
crazy_eoj is offline