Here we go again folks... so get used to it.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Rerun

I just glanced at this story this morning but didn't not the Liberals say they would support the immediate passage of stand-alone pension bill?

Maybe its just me, but I can't really tell what this sentence means?

The Liberals said they were in favour though, and the reason its a huge win is because this won't dog them next election. Otherwise we all know that there are things in the omnibus bill that are there purely to aggravate the opposition so they will vote against the bill. If the pensions were part of the bill then next campaign we would hear "we [the CPC] couldn't get these guys to come around and vote for MP pension reform, even though it was the fiscally conservative thing to do".

[Slava]

And it passed unanimously: http://www.calgaryherald.com/busines...615/story.html

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Slava

Maybe its just me, but I can't really tell what this sentence means?

What I meant was that I just glanced at the newspaper story and I thought I saw that the Liberals said they would support such a bill for immediate passage, if the CPC deleted it from their omnibus bill...

Which in my opinion is a win-win for everyone... and the CPC and the Liberals both see it that way (I have no idea what the NDP thinks about this though)

Just asking you if that was true... as I didn't want to have to search for the story.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Slava

And it passed unanimously: http://www.calgaryherald.com/busines...615/story.html

[GP_Matt]

If this is pure optics then I don't see why they can't peel out the popular policies and pass them quickly as they did with the pension reform and then ram the unpopular policies through using their majority.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Slava

Maybe its just me, but I can't really tell what this sentence means?

The Liberals said they were in favour though, and the reason its a huge win is because this won't dog them next election. Otherwise we all know that there are things in the omnibus bill that are there purely to aggravate the opposition so they will vote against the bill. If the pensions were part of the bill then next campaign we would hear "we [the CPC] couldn't get these guys to come around and vote for MP pension reform, even though it was the fiscally conservative thing to do".

If this was the CPC plan, why did they go along with the Liberal suggestion to separate this part from the overall omnibus bill?

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by GP_Matt

If this is pure optics then I don't see why they can't peel out the popular policies and pass them quickly as they did with the pension reform and then ram the unpopular policies through using their majority.

Sounds like a good idea or plan but I doubt there is anything else in the omnibus bill that the opposition parties would be willing to pass quickly and unanimously.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by GP_Matt

If this is pure optics then I don't see why they can't peel out the popular policies and pass them quickly as they did with the pension reform and then ram the unpopular policies through using their majority.

Well they have to make sure that some sensible things get voted against along with the unsavoury elements!

Originally Posted by Rerun

If this was the CPC plan, why did they go along with the Liberal suggestion to separate this part from the overall omnibus bill?

Who knows. I haven't been rationalizing things for Harper for the past 7 years and I certainly am not going to try now!

[mykalberta]

Originally Posted by Rerun

The fact is that for the most part, once bills to go multi-party committees, they tend to get delayed, changed, watered down, etc and it generally takes another year or more before they even make it back to parliament. Plus there are a limited number of committees so no way can they study/debate everything simutaneously.
If Harper broke this omnibus bill into multiple separate bills, there is no way would everything be passed into law before the next election.... which is exactly what the opposition parties, for the most part, would love to see happen and what Harper is trying to avoid.

But that is how the system is supposed to work. With a majority the Cons have majority on all the committees so they can push the bill through without change but it will take a while, which is how its supposed to happen in a Democracy so that things dont get missed, and I think its required in this day and age especially when you have smart lawyers out there much smarter than our elected officials who can find and exploit loopholes.

Its why a majority gov is so needed, if they have that they can pass what they want but it will take time. There are tricks they can do to push things through quickly but if they do to many of them then then public opinion will turn against them.

Hey I am a cons supporter and all for their proposed legislation, but I dont want to allow something for someone, and then if the sky turns orange and the NDP get in charge then they will try the same bs to get their bills through and then I am stuck being the one hating their reforms and complaining but wont have a leg to stand on.

Committees and public input are an important part of the process whether their suggestions are taken into account or not. In the past it was used to try to get the best possible bill passed for the country regardless of ideology.

[Azure]

Good that they divided the pension bill part up. Now they should break off the other more important parts of the bill and have a formal debate on them before they are passed.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

But that is how the system is supposed to work. With a majority the Cons have majority on all the committees so they can push the bill through without change but it will take a while, which is how its supposed to happen in a Democracy so that things dont get missed, and I think its required in this day and age especially when you have smart lawyers out there much smarter than our elected officials who can find and exploit loopholes.

Its why a majority gov is so needed, if they have that they can pass what they want but it will take time. There are tricks they can do to push things through quickly but if they do to many of them then then public opinion will turn against them.

Hey I am a cons supporter and all for their proposed legislation, but I dont want to allow something for someone, and then if the sky turns orange and the NDP get in charge then they will try the same bs to get their bills through and then I am stuck being the one hating their reforms and complaining but wont have a leg to stand on.

Committees and public input are an important part of the process whether their suggestions are taken into account or not. In the past it was used to try to get the best possible bill passed for the country regardless of ideology.

I understand your point but the CPC's do have a valid point too. I remember reading this last summer...

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle4249837/

“It’s regrettable” that the Conservatives are pushing through such a large bill, said Jean-François Godbout, a parliamentary scholar at the University of Montreal. But “if they’re not doing anything illegal, we can’t really blame them for getting their agenda across.”

Consider the alternative. If the opposition had succeeded in their attempt to force the Conservatives to break their budget bill into four or five parts, debate on much of it would not have begun until the fall. Final votes would typically not have occurred until spring, 2013, at the earliest.

The bills would probably have been better for such consideration. Flaws would have been caught and fixed. But the government’s agenda would have been delayed by a year or more, with future priorities pushed back to 2014.

By forcing this bill through now, the Conservatives have given themselves a clean slate for the fall sitting. Whatever Stephen Harper has planned – changes to equalization? to public-sector union contracts? – there will now be plenty of time to implement it.

Governments like omnibus bills because they can shove a raft of controversial measures into one package and force them through early in a mandate and repair any political damage before the next election.

Harper and the Conservatives have a huge amount of legislation they would like to see passed and I guess this is the only way they can see themselves accomplishing it.

I guess what they are trying to do (not that I can read Harper's mind) is to get the gist of the legislation passed now and fix the flaws down the road.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by Rerun

I guess what they are trying to do (not that I can read Harper's mind) is to get the gist of the legislation passed now and fix the flaws down the road.

If that is true, its the dumbest idea we've heard in a while. It should be done properly the first time and not just rammed through based on ideology and being bull-headed.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Slava

If that is true, its the dumbest idea we've heard in a while. It should be done properly the first time and not just rammed through based on ideology and being bull-headed.

You know and I know that when a bill comes before a committee that may be the ideal, but reality often doesn't align with the ideal. For any particular legislation the Conservatives will see the bill in one form as the best they can do, the Liberals will see it another way, and the NDP will see it a third way. Rarely do all parties agree on a particular piece of legislation and each party will want to put their own stamp on it or perhaps even water it down so much that its virtually useless (if they disagree with the bill's premise).

Better sometimes to just get the flawed bill in place now and then tweak it later to close the loopholes... than wait through 18 months of committee meetings to get something passed that will also have flaws.

[Reaper]

http://openparliament.ca/debates/199...harper-1/only/

... in the interest of democracy I ask: How can members represent their constituents on these various areas when they are forced to vote in a block on such legislation and on such concerns? - Stephen Harper

Harper has been criticized before for pressuring Conservative MPs to vote along party lines.

Harper is a hypocrite of the highest order. The 1994 bill C-17 was 21 pages long.

[GP_Matt]

Originally Posted by Reaper

http://openparliament.ca/debates/199...harper-1/only/



Harper has been criticized before for pressuring Conservative MPs to vote along party lines.

Harper is a hypocrite of the highest order. The 1994 bill C-17 was 21 pages long.

I am not defending the hypocrisy, but if the NDP ever got their hands on power do you really believe they would do all the things that they demand of the Conservatives?

[Reaper]

Originally Posted by GP_Matt

I am not defending the hypocrisy, but if the NDP ever got their hands on power do you really believe they would do all the things that they demand of the Conservatives?

No way would they do everything that they demand of the Conservatives. However, the chances of the NDP gaining a majority government are slim. I actually think they will fall to a distant third in the next federal election.

[GP_Matt]

That is my point.
People are attacking the Conservatives because they don't support them and others are defending them because they do support them but all the parties are the same. They say one thing when in opposition and do another when in power. Arguing about it is a futile exercise as they all do it but people only complain when the party they don't like does it.

[Reaper]

Originally Posted by GP_Matt

That is my point.
People are attacking the Conservatives because they don't support them and others are defending them because they do support them but all the parties are the same. They say one thing when in opposition and do another when in power. Arguing about it is a futile exercise as they all do it but people only complain when the party they don't like does it.

I actually don't think the NDP would try to force through a massive 400+ page omnibus bill. Omnibus bills of that size are basically an affront to the democratic process. Couple that with Harper's love of closure to limit discussion and you basically have a majority government using brute strength to force legislation into passage.

[longsuffering]

Originally Posted by Rerun

The fact is that for the most part, once bills to go multi-party committees, they tend to get delayed, changed, watered down, etc and it generally takes another year or more before they even make it back to parliament. Plus there are a limited number of committees so no way can they study/debate everything simutaneously.
If Harper broke this omnibus bill into multiple separate bills, there is no way would everything be passed into law before the next election.... which is exactly what the opposition parties, for the most part, would love to see happen and what Harper is trying to avoid.

And yet, with less than a handful of exceptions, until Harper, Governments avoided omnibus bills and allowed Parliament to actual debate legislation while somehow managing to govern.

Because you support Harper you make an excuse for him. The truth is that there is no real justification for his approach except to stifle debate.

Canadians still don't know the full implications of his last omnibus bill.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by longsuffering

And yet, with less than a handful of exceptions, until Harper, Governments avoided omnibus bills and allowed Parliament to actual debate legislation while somehow managing to govern.

Because you support Harper you make an excuse for him. The truth is that there is no real justification for his approach except to stifle debate.

Canadians still don't know the full implications of his last omnibus bill.

I guess it all boils down to the fact that I trust him. You and many others don't. I can understand that.