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

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Reaper

So, its not right whichever party does it but Rerun will let it slide if it is the Conservative Party responsible.

Whats not right?

[Senator Clay Davis]

Basically for Rerun its bad (but acceptable) when the CPC does it, but if this was the Liberals or NDP well we all know how this thread would be going.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Basically for Rerun its bad (but acceptable) when the CPC does it, but if this was the Liberals or NDP well we all know how this thread would be going.

Yes... I admit... I can be partisan.... not unlike a lot of Flames fans.

[calculoso]

Originally Posted by Rerun

If you voted Conservative last election, I would assume you support their election platform which promised these changes, therefore you probably fully support Conservative democracy in action... ie. omnibus bills that make the promised changes asap.

I voted Conservative and do not agree with everything they do or all of their policies.. I just agree that I supported their policies more than those of other parties.

[Slava]

Well there isn't much I can do about it, so whatever. I'll just note that the four year anniversary of the famous "a CPC government will NEVER go into deficit" comment just passed. I know that was the other parties fault as well (because its always some elses fault), but that was a highlight of incompetence and sheer stupidity all at once. Since this thread seems to have no real point, I figure its a good place to bring it up again.

[SebC]

Rerun is the Fox News of CalgaryPuck.

[Senator Clay Davis]

Rerun is more like SunTV. Calgaryborn and Flame of Liberty are like Fox News.

[Jacks]

Originally Posted by Senator Clay Davis

Rerun is more like SunTV. Calgaryborn and Flame of Liberty are like Fox News.

I wouldn't throw stones, you don't exactly raise the level of debate around here.

[longsuffering]

Originally Posted by Rerun

You have to concede that debating legislation is part of the democratic process. By limiting the democratic process, the CPC has taken that card out of the oppositions hands.

Fixed your post.

[longsuffering]

Originally Posted by Rerun

http://www.canada.com/Opposition+bal...512/story.html




Translation to the bolded part:

"Opposition MPs said the government should be introducing its measures in several bills, so that multiple parliamentary committees can hold numerous hearings in which opposition members can delay the changes as long as possible."




This is the reason why the Conservative government introduces these mega bills and this is the reason the opposition parties hate them.

I for one am happy that the CPC is pushing through these reforms. CPC supporters have been waiting a long time for them and I'm certainly not sorry that the Liberal party no longer controls parliament like they have for most of the last six decades. I understand that there are a lot of Liberal supporters on CP but thats the way it is right now. You'll have another kick at the can in 2115.

Is your wife ignoring you? I have to ask because for several days you've sure been seeking attention.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by longsuffering

Is your wife ignoring you? I have to ask because for several days you've sure been seeking attention.

Is it always necessary to make everything personal?

[GP_Matt]

Originally Posted by Slava

Well there isn't much I can do about it, so whatever. I'll just note that the four year anniversary of the famous "a CPC government will NEVER go into deficit" comment just passed. I know that was the other parties fault as well (because its always some elses fault), but that was a highlight of incompetence and sheer stupidity all at once. Since this thread seems to have no real point, I figure its a good place to bring it up again.

I am a conservative supporter for the most part, but shortly after they went into deficit I got a fund raising letter from them. I didn't, but I really wanted to send a cheque but post date it to when they cleared the deficit.
I have no idea what the Liberals would have done differently if they were in power, but at the time the Conservatives were forced to choose between stimulus spending and an election.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by GP_Matt

I am a conservative supporter for the most part, but shortly after they went into deficit I got a fund raising letter from them. I didn't, but I really wanted to send a cheque but post date it to when they cleared the deficit.
I have no idea what the Liberals would have done differently if they were in power, but at the time the Conservatives were forced to choose between stimulus spending and an election.

Well the reason I think that they were stupid to take a hard line wasn't because running a deficit was brilliant, it was because they had very few options. I remember I posted about this at the time as well; Harper is an economist and whether you support him or not (and clearly I haven't) he ought to have known this. I recognize that this is above the heads of most average voters, and its not some latte sipping elitist though, but Harper himself knew that governments have very little choice in those positions and to suggest that you aren't ever going to run a deficit based solely on ideology was just laughable.

So to the people who say "what choice did he have?" I tend to agree. That's exactly why the whole situation is so sadly amusing to me as a non-Harper supporter! He not only had no choice, but he knew that he would have no choice! It was his own stupidity and ignorance of the obvious facts that as the economic system crumbled around him that he would somehow avoid the basic economics that we're all told he is so well versed in.

[GP_Matt]

As sad as it is though, I don't think that any Prime Minister would be judged favourably based on his campaign promises.

I would like to see a system that rewards/punishes politicians at the end of their term based on how they lived up to their promises. I envision a tribunal that brings forward each and every promise and evaluates whether or not it was achieved. If it wasn't then the politician can present his case as to what went wrong, what new unforeseeable circumstances presented themselves that led to the breaking of campaign promises. The outcome of the tribunal would be either a large monetary reward or jail.

[Slava]

In sort of thread related news, it sounds like the government has agreed to carve out the MP pensions and make them a separate bill. Huge win for the Liberals.

[mykalberta]

On the outside I like large bills that seem to show that the government is actually working and trying to get things done.

However there is problem that can occur where they stick one of those "think of the children bills" in among a nastier bill and they try to use the "children" bill to pass the other one.

Honestly I dont really think every change needs to be given its own bill and dont mind if a few are grouped together so long as its within reason.

I wonder if MPs get more money if they sit on committees and this is the real reason MPs are upset as they are getting less extra money.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Slava

In sort of thread related news, it sounds like the government has agreed to carve out the MP pensions and make them a separate bill. Huge win for the Liberals.

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?

[Devils'Advocate]

http://www.rickmercer.com/Rick-s-Ran...ly-Better.aspx

Harper was against them before he was for them. By throwing everything into one crazy ass massive bill, the Canadian public isn't able to judge whether it like a particular part and digest the whole of it. Heck the people VOTING on it can't digest the whole thing.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

On the outside I like large bills that seem to show that the government is actually working and trying to get things done.

However there is problem that can occur where they stick one of those "think of the children bills" in among a nastier bill and they try to use the "children" bill to pass the other one.

Honestly I dont really think every change needs to be given its own bill and dont mind if a few are grouped together so long as its within reason.

I wonder if MPs get more money if they sit on committees and this is the real reason MPs are upset as they are getting less extra money.

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.

[Rerun]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

http://www.rickmercer.com/Rick-s-Ran...ly-Better.aspx

Harper was against them before he was for them.

Your point is?

People change their opinions and beliefs all the time. Heck, at one time Pierre Trudeau was a communist and Bob Ray was a NDP'er.