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

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by EddyBeers

Well the ability to form a stable coalition government is something that I guess only you can determine. It seems to me that if the government falls over the lack of stimulus provided to the economy by a party that has pissed away a 13 billion dollar surplus, the GG has an obligation to see if these left of centre parties could form a coalition government before going to the polls.

It seems to me that very few people seem to understand the reality that the governing party needs the confidence of the House to govern. That is how our system of government works, the government is not the party that wins the most seats on election night, it is the party that has the confidence of the House. If the Tories lose that confidence by providing an inadequate fiscal update, or by not properly cleaning up election financing by eliminating 10 percenters, riding subsidies, tax credits for political donations, or for whatever reason the Loyal Opposition deems is appropriate, then they lose the confidence of the House, plain and simple. The GG then has an obligation to see if there is another party that can gain the confidence of the House. It is not like we do not have a precedent in Canada for this exact type of thing happening before....

Since when did the house have authority over the citizen's of Canada in terms of governmental confidence? Are the Liberal's and NDP representing their constituants (sp?) or their party interests in this situation?

[Ronald Pagan]

Originally Posted by peter12

You do know what a government surplus is... right? Overtaxation. So we should be happy that the Conservative government gave us enough money BACK so that they now have to struggle with balancing the books instead of manufacturing surpluses through taxation. That's how a government makes its money.

They've only been constrained by the stupid attitude in Canada that it is not okay to roll back the size of our massive government. They should continue cutting the fat off of our already bloated government programs.

in your opinion...

[Ronald Pagan]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Since when did the house have authority over the citizen's of Canada in terms of governmental confidence? Are the Liberal's and NDP representing their constituants (sp?) or their party interests in this situation?

Since the English invented the system of Responsible Government. Take it up with them.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Ronald Pagan

Since the English invented the system of Responsible Government. Take it up with them.

You can't keep a straight argument. First, you argue that since the NDP/Libs have a greater share of the popular vote, they are a more reasonable choice for government than the Conservatives. Then you argue that popular opinion doesn't matter.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Ronald Pagan

Since the English invented the system of Responsible Government. Take it up with them.

I'd be interested in what your concept of Responsible government is, because you've done quite a bit of flip flopping in this whole debate.

And no I'm not going to go take it up with the English, for the most part the people who have been debating this topic have done a good job, there's no place for smarmy posts like this.

[Ronald Pagan]

I haven't done any flip flopping at all. Please prove so.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by peter12

You do know what a government surplus is... right? Overtaxation. So we should be happy that the Conservative government gave us enough money BACK so that they now have to struggle with balancing the books instead of manufacturing surpluses through taxation. That's how a government makes its money.

They've only been constrained by the stupid attitude in Canada that it is not okay to roll back the size of our massive government. They should continue cutting the fat off of our already bloated government programs.

Agreed... governments should not be carrying around massive yearly surpluses. Nor should the average Canadian be happy with the administrative morass that taxpayer dollars fund.

I think its important to note the extreme differences in the three leftist parties. Banding together would only help the NDP, and thats because they have nothing to lose. Many Liberals would rather jump off the CN Tower than to get in bed with Separatists, let alone spendthrift socialists. The Bloc would be screwed. How can they seriously be defending the will of Federalist Quebec when they get in bed with the two most Nationalistic Parties in Canada? The Bloc may lean left, but their core ideology of provincial autonomy is only shared with the CPC. They become irrelevant and pave the way for the federalists to start voting conservative like they used to.

It would be comical in a way if the three stooges tried to do it, ignoring the fact that government stability would be nice in poor economic times. That government would fall within a month and be swiftly replaced by a CPC majority, powered by both shocked and betrayed blue and moderate liberals as well as federalists in Quebec who would feel betrayed by the Bloc.

As for the previous comment that the Liberal-NDP-Bloc "King Ghidorah" government would represent most Canadians... that is laughable. The Liberals would have to kowtow so much, their policy would be unrecognizable and undesirable to the typical moderate Liberal. The only people that monster might represent are some leftist separatist sociology students at Laval.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

Agreed... governments should not be carrying around massive yearly surpluses. Nor should the average Canadian be happy with the administrative morass that taxpayer dollars fund.

I think its important to note the extreme differences in the three leftist parties. Banding together would only help the NDP. Many Liberals would rather jump off the CN Tower than to get in bed with Separatists, let alone spendthrift socialists. It would be comical in a way if the three stooges tried to do it, ignoring the fact that government stability would be nice in poor economic times. That government would fall within a month and be swiftly replaced by a CPC majority, powered by shocked and betrayed blue and moderate liberals.

As for the previous comment that the Liberal-NDP-Bloc "King Ghidorah" government would represent most Canadians is laughable. The Liberals would have to kowtow so much, their policy would be unrecognizable and undesirable to the typical moderate Liberal. The only people that monster might represent are some leftist separatist sociology students at Laval.

As crazy as this seems now, I think Harper played a crazy strategic gamble and may have won big here. This exposes some wild fantasies that some of the partisans of the three opposition parties hold. If this is played right, it could alienate alot of the Liberal base. The very fact that the Liberals may have been talking to the Bloc should drive Montrealers crazy.

[EddyBeers]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Since when did the house have authority over the citizen's of Canada in terms of governmental confidence? Are the Liberal's and NDP representing their constituants (sp?) or their party interests in this situation?

The House has always had that authority, please see the Byng-King affair.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by peter12

As crazy as this seems now, I think Harper played a crazy strategic gamble and may have won big here. This exposes some wild fantasies that some of the partisans of the three opposition parties hold. If this is played right, it could alienate alot of the Liberal base. The very fact that the Liberals may have been talking to the Bloc should drive Montrealers crazy.

Agreed. Like I said, the only party that isn't in serious danger now is the NDP. Their supporters would be pleased with anything Layton has to do to grab some of the ring of power.

The Liberals in Montreal and Toronto will feel betrayed that their party would talk to the Bloc. The Bloc in Quebec City and rural Quebec will feel betrayed that their party would negotiate with nationalists.

They all look bad for their pouting over taxpayer money entitlements, despite the fact that they all tend to believe strongly in taxpayer money entitlement.

[flamesfever]

Originally Posted by peter12

As crazy as this seems now, I think Harper played a crazy strategic gamble and may have won big here. This exposes some wild fantasies that some of the partisans of the three opposition parties hold. If this is played right, it could alienate alot of the Liberal base. The very fact that the Liberals may have been talking to the Bloc should drive Montrealers crazy.

For the average voter, I can't think Harper's gamble will do anything other than questioning his wisdom.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by EddyBeers

The House has always had that authority, please see the Byng-King affair.

I love how you throw one of the most controversial constitutional crisises in this nation's political history like it's a par for the course example of House functionality in regards to democratic accountability.

[Thunderball]

Originally Posted by flamesfever

For the average voter, I can't think Harper's gamble will do anything other than questioning his wisdom.

Initially, I would suspect the average voter is questioning all four parties. However, I think the Liberals and Bloc have the most to lose. The CPC have a list of tactics they can deploy to make them look better... like giving some of their public monies to charity.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Thunderball

Initially, I would suspect the average voter is questioning all four parties. However, I think the Liberals and Bloc have the most to lose. The CPC have a list of tactics they can deploy to make them look better... like giving some of their public monies to charity.

Or give a tax refund for the specific amount that the Conservative's gain from the vote subsidy. That would kill.

[EddyBeers]

Originally Posted by peter12

I love how you throw one of the most controversial constitutional crisises in this nation's political history like it's a par for the course example of House functionality in regards to democratic accountability.

Can you name a time when the government fell and the opposition wanted to form the government and the GG denied them that opportunity?

[peter12]

Originally Posted by EddyBeers

Can you name another time when the government fell and the opposition wanted to form the government and the GG denied them that opportunity?

No, but this is essentially uncharted ground. A single case doesn't give us any predictive power. Besides, the King-Byng affair involved a high degree of political corruption, it was a bit more than whiny partisan politics.

[ernie]

I will never understand the Liberal Party. A party that was destroyed by Chretien and his friends. A party that lost power because of Chretien and his friends. A party that continues to be divided and lost another election being led by one of Chretien's friends.

And they publicly bring in Chretien to negotiate a coalition deal?

Somehow I don't see a lot of Quebecers being happy with Chretien getting involved in canadian politics again, even if it is in a party big wig possibly ceremonial type role. Heck i don't see a lot of Canadians being happy with that.

I don't see how the Bloc supports this. Well honestly they won't. They'll do what they always do...pick and choose what policies to support. This proposed coalition government would be at the mercy of the Bloc. If the leadership situation isn't strong they could be a puppet of the Bloc.

How many times did we have to hear about not getting into bed with the separatists from the Liberals over the past few years? And here they are planning to get into bed with the separatists.

and now that the Tories appear to have rescinded the cancellation of the public funding for political parties I bet the NDP and Liberals back off giving the Tories all the ammo they need to loudly proclaim this for what it is.

Honestly, given how poor the liberal spin machine is I can't see any scenario being a good thing for them.

[Ronald Pagan]

Originally Posted by peter12

Or give a tax refund for the specific amount that the Conservative's gain from the vote subsidy. That would kill.

LOL

Seriously this is just turning into a circle-jerk.

So the Conservatives are going to give each working Canadian a $1 tax credit for foregoing the public vote financing? And you don't think that would blow-up right in their face as crass political opportunism?

You just don't go messing around willy nilly with the tax system either.

This is just getting hilarious. Keep it coming!!

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Ronald Pagan

LOL

Seriously this is just turning into a circle-jerk.

So the Conservatives are going to give each working Canadian a $1 tax credit for foregoing the public vote financing? And you don't think that would blow-up right in their face as crass political opportunism?

You just don't go messing around willy nilly with the tax system either.

This is just getting hilarious. Keep it coming!!

Fine then donate it to charity. The point is, politics has (sadly) an optical component. From a strategic point of view, the Conservatives win here, if they play their cards right. It's not really opportunistic at all. You can just show Canadians that the CPC did the work to create grassroots fundraising structures that work and they don't need their forcefully taken tax subsidies.

[EddyBeers]

Originally Posted by peter12

Fine then donate it to charity. The point is, politics has (sadly) an optical component. From a strategic point of view, the Conservatives win here, if they play their cards right. It's not really opportunistic at all. You can just show Canadians that the CPC did the work to create grassroots fundraising structures that work and they don't need their forcefully taken tax subsidies.

If the grassroots fundraising structure worked, you would not need to give a huge tax subsidy to the individuals who are donating the money. If the Tories really wanted to clean up political fundraising, that is where they would start.