Coalition Deal To Topple Minority Tory Govt- [Update Parliament Prorogued until Jan]

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by Mayer

I know nothing about Canadian politics, so this may be a stupid question.

Why does this coalition government get to choose how long they are in power for (30 months was it?) yet the government who was actually elected can be ousted so easily? It doesn't make sense to me.

They aren't saying that they'll be in power for 30 months. The agreement is that they'll maintain a coalition for 30 months, though it's entirely possible that coalition falls apart before then (or after just a few weeks) and the government is defeated. Or it's possible it lasts the full four years.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by Mayer

I know nothing about Canadian politics, so this may be a stupid question.

Why does this coalition government get to choose how long they are in power for (30 months was it?) yet the government who was actually elected can be ousted so easily? It doesn't make sense to me.

They don't....if they don't want to.

Two groups have agreed to work together for 30 months. 1 said 18 months.

Any can change their mind at any time. Or keep going beyond 30 months.

We don't have fixed election dates.

[ikaris]

Originally Posted by Bend it like Bourgeois

It does not say 'cannot', it says will not as long as they support the agreement. Which is to say as long as they feel like it.

Even if it said 'double pinky swear we won't' it wouldn't mean anything else. There's no consequence for changing their mind.

I don't really trust them but it says that they will adhere to the agreement until June 2010 at the end of the document. The statement I referred to is pretty clear though:

The Government will not request a dissolution of Parliament during the term of this agreement, except following defeat on an explicitly-framed motion of non-confidence presented by the Opposition; or any vote pertaining to the speech from the throne; or on a budget vote at on any stage in the House; or on any bill to implement a budget at any stage in the House; or on any motion in the House to concur in, restore or reinstate any Estimates; or on any supply bill at any stage in the House.

The Bloc Quebecois will neither move nor will it support any motions of non-confidence in the Government during the term of its support for this agreement, and will vote in favour of the Government’s position with respect to all matters referred to in the immediately preceding paragraph.

I don't see how this says "as long as they feel like it" if at the end of the document it says:

The Bloc Quebecois will adhere to this agreement until June 30, 2010 unless renewed.

As I said, I don't really trust them, but they have their own electorate to worry about if they bail out.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by ikaris

The Bloc Quebecois will neither move nor will it support any motions of non-confidence in the Government during the term of its support for this agreement, and will vote in favour of the Government’s position with respect to all matters referred to in the immediately preceding paragraph.

I don't see how this says "as long as they feel like it" if at the end of the document it says:

The Bloc Quebecois will adhere to this agreement until June 30, 2010 unless renewed.

As I said, I don't really trust them, but they have their own electorate to worry about if they bail out.

I dunno. It's pretty explicit I think. As long as they support the agreement, they will adhere to it. They choose when and how they support the agreement. There's no commitment there at all.

Their own electorate would not give 2 cents either way. They are elected with the expressed purpose of caring about no one but themselves. If Harper gave them a better offer they'd cozy to him tomorrow.

[flamesrule_kipper34]

This is probably the most anti-democratic thing Ive seen or heard of since the days of Stalin...and that aint saying a lot from a guy who prides himself in a democratic free-world in CANADA!!

[Robbob]

Even if the BQ goes against their word and vote against or abstain from a vote (It doesn't really say they can't abstain) down the road they can still turn to Quebec and say look at all the loot I got from the feds this time! This year the ice castles are going to be twice as big!

I really don't think the BQ care what the rest of the country thinks of them and Quebec will be happy because they will get something out of it.

[ikaris]

Originally Posted by Bend it like Bourgeois

I dunno. It's pretty explicit I think. As long as they support the agreement, they will adhere to it. They choose when and how they support the agreement. There's no commitment there at all.

I don't know what you mean. How do they choose when and how they support the agreement? The section I cited very specifically says that the Bloc Quebecois will vote in favour of the coalition for all those situations (which are the only situations in which the government could be brought down) during the term that they have committed their support to. I don't see any provision there that talks about whether they support them or not other than the reference to the time period of their adherence to this accord.

[ikaris]

Originally Posted by Robbob

Even if the BQ goes against their word and vote against or abstain from a vote (It doesn't really say they can't abstain) down the road they can still turn to Quebec and say look at all the loot I got from the feds this time! This year the ice castles are going to be twice as big!

I really don't think the BQ care what the rest of the country thinks of them and Quebec will be happy because they will get something out of it.

I agree. They've pretty much got everything they wanted. So I don't think it's a hidden agenda at all. It's too bad the mini-budget couldn't have passed as revised by the Conservatives.

[Mayer]

For those of us who have no idea, is there ANY chance the GG goes the election route rather than grant the coalition power?

[C_Rush]

Felt this was worth one more time. My last word on the subject tonight.

[First Lady]

Originally Posted by Bend it like Bourgeois

They don't....if they don't want to.

Two groups have agreed to work together for 30 months. 1 said 18 months.

Any can change their mind at any time. Or keep going beyond 30 months.

We don't have fixed election dates.

I give it 3 days before they would be tearing each other apart.

[mrdeeds]

Originally Posted by First Lady

I give it 3 days before they would be tearing each other apart.

I'd give it until the Liberal leadership race heats up.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Originally Posted by ikaris

I don't know what you mean. How do they choose when and how they support the agreement? The section I cited very specifically says that the Bloc Quebecois will vote in favour of the coalition for all those situations (which are the only situations in which the government could be brought down) during the term that they have committed their support to. I don't see any provision there that talks about whether they support them or not other than the reference to the time period of their adherence to this accord.

Think of it this way.

The Lib and NDP say they will not (blah blah blah) for the term of the agreement.

The Bloc agree for the term of their support for the agreement.

3 words make all the difference. They are not there by accident.

[FlamesAddiction]

Originally Posted by Mayer

For those of us who have no idea, is there ANY chance the GG goes the election route rather than grant the coalition power?

Just a gut feeling, but I think it is more likely they go the election route. It would be less contraversial.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by flamesrule_kipper34

This is probably the most anti-democratic thing Ive seen or heard of since the days of Stalin...

Oh come on now.

I don't like this whole circus either but lets not get crazy here. They haven't broken any rules. This is part of the deal.

The most annoying thing about all this is that they all are such weasels.Harper for being so damn arrogant and basically bringing this on himself and the rest of them for pretending that this is anything other than a way to weasel in.

Harper knows as well as anyone that 30 million bucks doesn't mean a damn thing but he risked it all anyway. Dion and Layton talk the talk, but these guys don't actually believe they are going to save the economy with some rash recovery plan they cooked up in the basement. They both want a shot at running the show and they are blinded by it. It's the wrong time for this and if they would stand back for a second they would see it.

The whole lot of them make me nostalgic for Chretien for crying out loud. It's like amateur hour.

The house is close to catching on fire and they are arguing about who gets to hold the hose.

[Dion]

[HotHotHeat]

Non scientific poll, but 73% of Canadians are calling this a power grab.

An NDP-Liberal coalition would:

Reflect the will of the people

4675 votes (27 %)
Be nothing more than a power grab

12846 votes (73 %)


This raises so many questions on the legitimacy of government in this country. Only 1 in 4 people agree with the motives of the (eventual) governing body, yet it makes up roughly 60% of populace representation in this country.

It's hard to fathom how it is that such an unsupported action could be possible on a scale so grande. Everyone in Canada should be concerned about what's going on in Ottawa at this moment, their prosperity is directly at risk.

Also, that 'economic roundtable' the Liberals want to put together is a complete disaster in waiting. Goodbye private investment.

I'm personally sickened that such a soft, flip-flopping individual is going to represent my views as a Canadian for the whole world to see.

link

[LGA]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Oh come on now.

I don't like this whole circus either but lets not get crazy here. They haven't broken any rules. This is part of the deal.

The most annoying thing about all this is that they all are such weasels.Harper for being so damn arrogant and basically bringing this on himself and the rest of them for pretending that this is anything other than a way to weasel in.

Harper knows as well as anyone that 30 million bucks doesn't mean a damn thing but he risked it all anyway. Dion and Layton talk the talk, but these guys don't actually believe they are going to save the economy with some rash recovery plan they cooked up in the basement. They both want a shot at running the show and they are blinded by it. It's the wrong time for this and if they would stand back for a second they would see it.

The whole lot of them make me nostalgic for Chretien for crying out loud. It's like amateur hour.

The house is close to catching on fire and they are arguing about who gets to hold the hose.

I think that's the reason I'm pissed off. I know that none of these politicians will be looking to help the country, instead they will be looking to push their own policies. Unfortunately at this point, and in the current economical climate we really can't take these risks. Not to mention we just had an election where we basically stated that we didn't want these people in office, and now they are essentially telling us "FU, we're going to do whatever the hell we want to do."

[Jagger]

So I understand that the Liberals in Parliament gave Duceppe a standing ovation today. A man who wants to break up Canada, a standing O. I'm sorry but that's just sickening and wrong on so many levels. The Liberals should be ashamed of themselves.

[metallicat]

Originally Posted by Mayer

For those of us who have no idea, is there ANY chance the GG goes the election route rather than grant the coalition power?

This is what I want to know as well. I realize that as a CPC supporter my opinion is skewed, but I really see no other option than an election. This coalition of two federalist parties is going to be propped up by a seperatist party whose only care is stuffing one province with money. How this can't be viewed as the worlds largest conflict of interest is beyond me. As far as I'm concerned, the GG has really only one choice, and that is to dissolve parliament.