Conservatives To Slash Federal Funding of Political Parties [Update-CPC backs down]

[ken0042]

My thoughts exactly getbak. I think this could quite easily turn into a Conservative majority just because people would rather not be going to the polls so often.

What I found funny was how last night on the news it showed the NDP trying to blame the current economic situation on Harper. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this a world wide ressecion? I just can't see Harper or any Canadian for that matter having that much influence on the world situation.

[burn_this_city]

Originally Posted by ken0042

My thoughts exactly getbak. I think this could quite easily turn into a Conservative majority just because people would rather not be going to the polls so often.

What I found funny was how last night on the news it showed the NDP trying to blame the current economic situation on Harper. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this a world wide ressecion? I just can't see Harper or any Canadian for that matter having that much influence on the world situation.

Mike Duffy was pure comedy last night.. Those twits were bitching about no stimulus yet complaining about running a deficit..

[Mccree]

But that is the way the opposition works. Harper could do everything the other parties want and they still will complain. Harper did it as the opposition leader too.

The funding that they are trying to eliminate, is this an annual amount of just after the election?

[peter12]

Everybody knows that this is part of a larger mini-budgetary plan to save money... right? These aren't the only cuts being made.

Flaherty's mini-budget proposes strict limits on federal spending, bans public-sector strikes through 2011 and denies federal parties about $30 million in annual funding.
Under the mini-budget, the government would also sell $2.3 billion in government assets and save another $2 billion by placing salary controls for public servants, MPs and senators.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/11/28/fed-govt.html

I think that this will turn out very bad for our opposition parties. Forcing an election or a change in government over this at such a bad economic time will have horrible political ramifications.

[peter12]

Conservatives backed down as of about 5 minutes ago. The funding cuts will not be included in the mini-budget. Shame, really.

[Bobblehead]

And I'm doubting it will result in an election, sounds like there is almost an agreement by the other parties to form a new government.

Former Liberal prime minister Jean Chretien and former New Democrat leader Ed Broadbent are working behind the scenes to broker a deal that could see the two parties form a coalition government, CTV News has learned.

"Under this deal the Liberals would form the government, the NDP would sit in it with cabinet seats and the Bloc Quebecois would support this new NDP-Liberal coalition from outside the government," said CTV's Ottawa Bureau Chief Robert Fife.

Liberal MP Michael Ignatieff is the most likely choice to lead the coalition, Fife told CTV's Canada AM.

One stumbling block to the deal, he said, is that the Bloc will not support the plan so long as Stephane Dion is at the helm of the Liberal party.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNew...hub=TopStories

[Devils'Advocate]

Originally Posted by fotze

You really think that we should pay political parties? I just can't believe it. and I'm sure the other side thinks the same thing. Its weird.

I believe that public money should be available to parties/candidates to get their message out rather than allowing special interests to control the government. Others have no problem with this, or as someone else said in this thread, the wealthy will control the country no matter who foots the bill for political parties. If you believe either of these things ("we have a plutocracy and I am okay with that" or "we have a plutocracy and there is nothing we can do about it") then, yes, you would be for the Conservatives plan. I don't believe either of those things, so I am against it.

Or I would be happy with the suggestion I made earlier - make political donations maximum $200. I don't think the rich should be able to control the dialogue.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by peter12

Conservatives backed down as of about 5 minutes ago. The funding cuts will not be included in the mini-budget. Shame, really.

It takes me too long to make a post.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

And I'm doubting it will result in an election, sounds like there is almost an agreement by the other parties to form a new government.
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNew...hub=TopStories

I'm extremely shocked that this was even considered as an option by the opposition. Talk about self-interest. Wow. The Liberals would actually kow-tow to the Bloc in order to stop a small public financing amendment from going through the House. Absolutely unbelievable.

[Cowboy89]

Originally Posted by peter12

Conservatives backed down as of about 5 minutes ago. The funding cuts will not be included in the mini-budget. Shame, really.

I imagine that this was a testing of the 40th parliament's waters. Harper wanted to test and see if the Liberals would continue to roll over and die considering their financial and leadership situation. Had they have let this pass, he would have proceeded with more stuff they didn't like prior to the leadership convention.

[cal_guy]

And so the Conservatives back down, the proposal is no long a confidence motion.

http://www.inews880.com/Channels/Reg...spx?ID=1042839

[CaptainCrunch]

Hopefully the government doesn't fall over this, however I find it odorous that the plug could be pulled over party coffers and the right to strike by public servants issues, especially during an economic crisis.

If there is an election, the optics for the "Loyal" opposition could be bad.

However it might not get to that as CTV is reporting that Chretien and Broadbent are meeting behind the scenes to plan the setup of a coalition government, an idea that terrifies me as any idea that gives the NDP any kind of power of government or the budget makes me want to vomit, as does the idea of a party that can't possibly announce a proper leader.

Lets hope that there's not an election especially one over the distribution of public funds to political parties.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Cowboy89

I imagine that this was a testing of the 40th parliament's waters. Harper wanted to test and see if the Liberals would continue to roll over and die considering their financial and leadership situation. Had they have let this pass, he would have proceeded with more stuff they didn't like prior to the leadership convention.

I think so, too. It seems like a strategic move, rather than a tactical one. I think it exposes some of the Liberal Party's inner workings and their plans re. Ignatieff for the future of the party.

[ikaris]

Originally Posted by fotze

But this issue puzzles me, can't believe people think we should subsidize political parties, especially if you yourself do not donate to them. Cannot see the democrazy strenghthening argument at all. You really think that we should pay political parties? I just can't believe it. and I'm sure the other side thinks the same thing. Its weird.

Well when you put it like that I just don't know how we can really have a fair process without the parties having some sort of equalized fund to dip into. Alternatively, as other people have suggested, by limiting the total private donation amount to $200 (even $100), and eliminating the tax break, I think we can reach a happy medium. Under those restrictions, I would support removing the current per vote scheme.

Anyways, glad to see the conservatives backing off. Other than this blatant attempt to advantage themselves, the rest of their economic plan is digestible and should not cause an election or coalition to form.

[ikaris]

Originally Posted by transplant99

How so?

Canadians didnt vote for all 3 parties vs 1 party. This kind of thinking is laughable actually. The Bloc and NDP working to govern is about as oxymoronish as it gets.

So unless EVERY vote for the Bloc, NDP and Libs was ONLY a vote AGAINST the Conservatives, and not a vote for the party they chose to gain governing power, this way of thinking is completely fallible.

While I like our system in comparison to the Americans as it allows for a greater diversity of views and representation, I would suggest that the left side of the political spectrum is currently being split between the Liberals, NDP, and Green. How many ridings would the conservatives have won if the Liberals and NDP combined their votes?

Is there another party in Canada that leans to the right other than the conservatives? I would suggest (purely my opinion) that Canada is left-leaning and that we are in this minority government not because the conservatives represent the majority, but because the Liberals can't get their "stuff" together (Dion didn't help either).

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by fotze

This is an odd issue, quite polarizing. I can understand both side of the green debate, I can understand both sides on funding arts or the poor, I can understand both sides on the abortion issue, can understand why people on both sides of most political debates choose their respective sides.

But this issue puzzles me, can't believe people think we should subsidize political parties, especially if you yourself do not donate to them. Cannot see the democrazy strenghthening argument at all. You really think that we should pay political parties? I just can't believe it. and I'm sure the other side thinks the same thing. Its weird.

I tend to agree with you. But to introduce this at this point just seems like it is intended to kick opposition parties. It strikes me as a very partisan measure, even if I agree with it.

The latest says that the Liberals and NDP are still talking about voting down the measure.

But Liberals and New Democrats say dropping the financing measures will not influence their decision to vote against the government's fiscal update.

I disagree with that. I'm getting the sense that they think they have a chance to form a government and want to bring the Conservatives down so they can have a chance.

If they want to vote down this bill now, then they had better prove they have a better idea to replace it with. Which I doubt they do - that would be giving them too much credit.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

I tend to agree with you. But to introduce this at this point just seems like it is intended to kick opposition parties. It strikes me as a very partisan measure, even if I agree with it.

The latest says that the Liberals and NDP are still talking about voting down the measure.I disagree with that. I'm getting the sense that they think they have a chance to form a government and want to bring the Conservatives down so they can have a chance.

If they want to vote down this bill now, then they had better prove they have a better idea to replace it with. Which I doubt they do - that would be giving them too much credit.

If they bring down this government, they betray the wishes of the people of Canada. Pure and simple.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

I tend to agree with you. But to introduce this at this point just seems like it is intended to kick opposition parties. It strikes me as a very partisan measure, even if I agree with it.

The latest says that the Liberals and NDP are still talking about voting down the measure.I disagree with that. I'm getting the sense that they think they have a chance to form a government and want to bring the Conservatives down so they can have a chance.

If they want to vote down this bill now, then they had better prove they have a better idea to replace it with. Which I doubt they do - that would be giving them too much credit.

They don't the Liberal's just want to show that unlike the last parliment where they basically lost their balls to avoid an election that they're all full of piss and vinegar this time around.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by peter12

If they bring down this government, they betray the wishes of the people of Canada. Pure and simple.

I don't agree with that.

It is not a majority government. The CPC did not earn that no matter what way you measure it.

I think if you asked people if they want an election, they would say no.
But you can also ask people if they want the CPC given a rubber stamp, they would say no as well.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

I don't agree with that.

It is not a majority government. The CPC did not earn that no matter what way you measure it.

I think if you asked people if they want an election, they would say no.
But you can also ask people if they want the CPC given a rubber stamp, they would say no as well.

So even if there is an NDP/Lib coalition, which is in itself totally bizarre, they still only have 114 seats and will have to rely on the Bloc (!!!!) to form a governing coalition. Nothing could be more politically damning than that. The so-called Party of Canada in league with the separatists. Awesome. Good on you, Michael Ignatieff. What a legacy.