"Prorogue" Eh! A Coup in Ottawa?
Oh Canada!....Oh Canada! OK, so you really don't care a loonie (a Mounty Dollar) what is taking place in our frigid northern neighbor except to ensure that the next Molson shipment is not hijacked at the border. But yesterday, Canada's PM Stephen Harper placed a padlock on the House of Commons entrance in order to preserve his job.
Ya see, he could have been overthrown if parliament had been given a chance to vote on a motion of no confidence in his conservative government, which he surely would have lost.
So why should anyone outside of Canada care? In the scheme of great challenges faces the incoming Obama administration, an internal threat to Canada's democracy just ain't on anyone's priority list. But sometimes (oh, maybe once in a hundred years or so) our pristine northern preacher of civilized politics and good intentions goes off the rails, and parliamentary democracy can take on an odor as bad as anything we have seen down in the backrooms of the state house in Baton Rouge.
Harper pulled a real switcheroo. He managed to convince Canada's Governor General (the Queen's official representative in Canada and yes, oh my, she is still in charge up there!), to shut down the House of Commons until January 26 over a budget crisis.
What Harper did, in the Queen's English, was to "PROROGUE" the House of Commons -- technically a maneuver by which the Governor General can approve a prime minister's request to suspend parliament. Never done before under such circumstances.
So, Stanley Cup fans, take a gander up north.
Will Canada survive the crisis? Ya betcha.
But, in the order of things, we Yanks do need our good friends to the north to get back to civility soon and cease their PROROGATION of the House of Commons. Barack Obama has more than enough on his foreign policy plate, and America's largest trading partner and greatest of friends is a crucial ally in helping our incoming president unravel the crises that Canada helps us quietly manage around the world -- say particularly in Afghanistan and Iraq and in NATO.
Alas, we customarily take Canada too often for granted, I dare say, because so few Americans know how much Canada does help us around the world. Canada is a crucial ally of the U.S. on so many accounts (salmon fishing and some sticky border trade disputes aside).
So, to my good friends in Vancouver, Calgary, Thunder Bay, Ottawa, Montreal and Halifax and all points in between, prolonging proroguing is really loonie for the common good in the Commonwealth, eh!. We need ya.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
pro-rogue: to be in favo[u]r of rogues.
You can't possibly be serious! Just tell us what we have to do to become the 51st state, alright? Unless, of course...Michael Ignatieff becomes our next Prime Minister...yeah, right...it'll never happen...
Besides, statehood could be a win-win situation...d'ya know what I mean?...
Let’s see…the Conservatives against a coalition of the Liberals, the NDP, and the Bloc Québécois – that sounds like a two-party system to me.
By the way, Canada is our largest supplier of oil – not Saudi Arabia. Mostly from Alberta, which is again rumbling about leaving Canada if the Liberals get into power.
And Canada is talking about pulling out of Afghanistan because they are loosing a lot of troops with no appreciation from the U.S. of what they are contributing.
Maybe just this once POTUS could keep his nose out of a foreign imbroglio? Canadians (unlike Americans) have shown a remarkably consistent ability to manage their affairs in a civilized fashion, and I suspect that they'll resolve this without any help from south of the border.
what do you mean, I'm wrong about which --
do you believe the big white lie of the fabian & tory presses,
that the queen is just a figurehead?
I've read this ridiculous hearsay in The Holy Economist,
The new Statesman, and a famous conservative magazine
-- Punch or Spotlight--
it's just crappola from the Harry Potter PSes (Oxbridge).
--USA out of Darfur Cruizade!
http://larouchepub.com/pr_lar/2008/lar_pac/081124anti_clintons.html
--ROTC, your summer vacation in the Sahara Desert ( S u d a n ) ;
presage the Draft for your middleschool class of '12 --
brought to you by Allstate (tm) and Oxford U.Press!
http://larouchepub.com/pr/2008/080813moloch_brown.html http://wlym.com
--Wikipedia deletes notice of nullification of "preclearance rule" of
Voting Rights Act in LaRouche v. Fowler, March 27, 2000;
is the VRAo1965 a dead letter?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_Rights_Act#Pre-Clearance_2
Get your terminology right. It is NOT a "coup." There isn't anything that has been done by either party that falls outside of the normal parliamentary system. There is history and precedent on both sides here.
As a Canadian I feel Harper is not the best ruler for Canada, but he did drop the the ever hated GST from 7% to 5%. And I am not so thrilled with Canadians fighting and dying in Afganistan. And he is sort of Bush like. So I do think Canada could do better of course. But Dion is a huge loser that can't even speak proper English I don't want him as the Canadian PM. The Liberals don't even want Dion as leading their own party any more, so how can he be PM? It's a real joke and a mockery of democracy. The other problem is the Bloc Quebeco they are sifting votes away from the parties that would govern Canada, they aren't helping the country in any way, they will NEVER EVER form a government. Because of this Canada should move to an US style federal government that will take the power Quebec has in federal elections.
Bottom line Harper should stay on, for now, let the Liberals elect a new leader a Canadian Obama like Justin T. and then bring down the government. Have a new election, where you can vote for a more charismatic personality, these guys are boring and dull anyway.
Can you imagine Justin and Obama that would be awesome.
I would disagree with you regarding the Bloc in that the issue is not who forms a majority government (the cry of the media for three elections now) but who the people choose as their representatives. If Quebecers decide that the Bloc best suits their interests, then that is the voice of the people and they have as much right to introduce, influence and negotiate policy as any other party.
The turn of events with the Coalition for me is a very welcomed one because it means that policy now much be built on consensus and cooperation rather than a single party with an absolute majority ramming legislation down the throats of all non-supporters of that party. This is a substantial move in accountability which I whole-heartedly endorse. And while not a Liberal, I have to say that I wish Mr. Stephane Dion could stay on/ would stay on because I think he leaps and bounds ahead of Mr. Rae or Mr. Ignatieff. I heard him on Saturday at a rally with Mr. Layton and was so impressed by his civility, respect, dignity, passion and eloquence.
As a Canadian I can say we want nothing more than to be rid of 'Bush Jr.'
The only thing worse for Canada than a government led by Stephen Harper, is a government not led by Stephen Harper.
I'm really quite amazed by the amount of vitriol being spewed here by Canadian lefties. This is excessive even for them, although I really shouldn't be surprised. They have this deep sense of entitlement to government programs and other people's money. They've had their way in Canada for so long, that they tend to throw tantrums whenever it looks like they won't get their way, and they certainly aren't going to get their way now.
Mr. Genius:
Concur regarding the vitriol. It is not productive. Nor is limited to Canadian lefties.
What Canada needs is a leader like Mr. Obama. His focus is utilizing the best talent available, listening to the people, sharing power, and getting the job done. All Canada needs is a leader whose focus is unifying the nation.
If I was an American, I'd be considered a liberal too. I support Obama, and universal health-care. I am a social libertarian. But I also believe in the free-enterprise system and individual responsibility, which the Canadian left does not believe in. In that respect, they are much more hard-core than American liberals. All they want to do is convert Canada into a collectivist enclave within North America, and denigrate the system that has made Canada a wealthy country to begin with.
The left in Canada does not believe in sharing power. For all the years they've been in charge, they've only ever moved Canada towards greater socialist collectivism, and never listened to the Canadian right unless they felt electorally threatened. Given that experience, there is little reason now for Canadian conservatives to share power with them, especially since conservatives are virtually certain to win a majority government in the next election.
http://www.compas.ca/polls/081205-CommonsTurmoil-EPCB.htm
Hello, Mr. Genius,
Concur regarding the vitriol. It is neither productive, nor limited to Canadian lefties.
Canada needs a leader like Mr. Obama. He is inclusive, picks the best talent available from across the political spectrum, listens to the people, and is intent on getting the job done.
What Harper did, in the Queen's English, was to "PROROGUE" the House of Commons --
Actually, PROROGUE is an old French word.
I think it would be worse to let the economy flounder even more. Harper seems more concerned about keeping his own job than address the economic issues. If the opposite were true he would of negoiated with the Liberals / NDP and we wouldn't be in this mess.
The elimination of the voter subsidie was a clear sign that the new budget was more designed to cripple the left for a long time, not help the country.
No to mention the pettiness of the Conversatives taping a private NDP meeting and then releasing it to the media.
The Liberals and the NDP were exercising their power to oppose a budget that was wrong for Canada. The only one that threw a tantrum was Harper good sir.
Its not "other people's money." As a taxpayer, it is my money. And, don't get too comfortable. Harper can be turfed out yet.
By definition citizens, immigrants, homeless folk -- everyone -- is a tax payer. So, it's OUR money!
As an American, I did not realize this was happening in Canada. Harper sounds like the Canadian version of our Nixon at the height of his trickiest.
Many Canadians refer to Mr. Harper as George W. Harper.
Like our W., Harper runs a government that puts Corporations above all else. He has sold the Canadians to the lowest Corporate bidder (He's not very bright).
That, including a secretly taped phone call by Jack Layton leaked to the media.
Harper is our Bush.
I am continually stunned by the nonsense spewed by the right-wing. Everyone agrees that Mr. Harper caused the current political situation by historically stupid and divisive tactics immediately after getting elected. Yet Canadians are still being told that despite this, Mr. Harper is still the best bet for governing Canada. Huh?
At this point, literally anybody is better that Harper. And also at this point, Canadians seriously need to look at becoming a full Republic and dump unelected officials like our Governor General. Her actions are beyond the pale. Allowing a suspension of Parliament to allow Harper to avoid a mere confidence vote is completely outrageous.
I have been moved by this issue like few others in our political history. I am angry enough at the Conservatives to literally take to the streets, and when the new Coalition asks for support, I'll give them what I have (and by the way, this is despite not being too thrilled by the Coalition in general, but at least I think they'll get things done).
What I hope for now is for the Coalition to keep its resolve. The Liberals can use the time until Parliament sits to bring in a new leader to replace Stephan Dion. I will be seriously pissed if the Governor General allows another election when Parliament resumes. This is exactly what Harper is hoping will happen, and it, like everything else that is happening, does nobody in Canada but Harper any good.
You need to read your history. It's the GGs job to convene and dissolve parliament. As such, allowing time for tempers to cool is one alternative to dissolving parliament. The other is to allow someone else to form the government. Go check out the King-Byng crisis. Unlike the Americans, who use checks and balances, the parliamentary system has its own way of keeping things under control.
The point is I don't want someone who is unelected convening or dissolving parliament, or in any way exercising executive powers. I've thought about this a long time. I worked in the House of Commons in 1985, so I got well acquainted with our system then.
I also started to think about the role of the monarchy after swearing allegiance to the Queen, not Canada, when I joined the Army in 1981. That bothered me, and it still bothers me that there are people we are supposed to bow to just because of an accident of birth. Despite Presidents like Bush, there is a lot to admire about the Republic style of government.
"At this point, literally anybody is better that Harper"
I agree that Harper is atrocious, but don't get carried away. There are others who would make an even bigger mess. I do, however, wish that Harper would step down. His divisive behaviour is not becoming of a national leader.
I actually carefully considered my comment about anyone else being better than Harper before posting it. Seriously, I cannot imagine a worse leader other than Gilles Duceppe, who of course won't become Prime Minister.
Harper is deliberately stirring up resentment against Quebec to save his own skin. The Coalition he provoked into existence is pissing of the West, stirring up resentment there too. The attack on the public sector unions just causes hard feelings in the labour movement. Harper's budget proposal was weak and out of touch, and now nothing can happen to help the economy because of the suspension of Parliament until January, followed possibly by another election that will delay things even further. This is unprecedented incompetence, and seriously, I just can't see who could top this (don't want to either, mind you). This is just at the very beginning of Harper's term, so we can expect much more to come in a similar vein.
I'm not criticizing you for your reply, just clarifying my comments. I hope to work with others like you to defeat Harper before he does too much more damage.
Thanks for mentioning Vancouver! The true travesty in the prorogation element of our unfolding national debacle is not due to the fact that the Governor-General granted Harper's request, but that she was asked to do so in the first place. There is no precedent in the Commonwealth for the Crown's representative to refuse a Prime Minister's request to prorogue the legislature, although no one but Harper has been craven enough to use his request to dodge a vote of non-confidence. I note with some glee that the meeting between Harper and the GG at Rideau Hall (the ersatz Royal Palace) took almost two and one half hours. She obviously gave Mr. Harper no small amount of grief. It does not take two and one half hours to say "yes".
I would like to think that she gave him a piece of her mind, but then again once they get talking about hockey the time just goes flying by and before you know it 2 hours have gone by. At times the strictly confidential nature of communication between the Viceroy and the PM just su-cks!
Crisis ... what Crisis ?
It's the holiday season and all will be sorted out in the first part of the new year.
Steven Harper is a continuation of an effort to USA ize Canada. I think it"s unlikely that many Canadians want to be like us.
Would the average Canadian support illegal wars against third world countries?
Would the average Canadian want a health care system that discriminates?
( should I take the advice of the EMS attendant and go to the hospital or should I call a friend to pick me up?)
I suspect if a poll were taken in Canada ( do you believe Canadian policies and culture should mirror those of the USA ?) the results would not be published.
I say No to all of the above. Why do we need a Governor General anyway? Let the people decide.
The problem with Steven Harper is that his hero is George W Bush and he takes his orders from the Council on Foreign Relations (a David Rockefeller gimmick leading to the New World Order). We, Canadians knew that on Oct 14th but we voted him in anyway because his opponent is a wuss. We were careful enough not to give Harper a majority government. What this means is that to get anything done, he cannot rule as a dictator and he cannot thrash the Constitution, or the opposition will have a vote of non-confidence. (The Governor General then has the choice of calling new elections or asking the Opposition to form the New Government if they can form a coalition.) Steven Harper decided he was going to rule like his hero and bully the opposition. After two and a half years of bullying, the opposition called his bluff and poor little Steven is now crying. He and his cronies go on TV telling people that what the opposition wants to do to his government is not fair and is not democratic. IT IS FAIR AND DEMOCRATIC. AFTER ALL, IN THE LAST ELECTION, 39% OF THE ELECTORATE VOTED FOR STEVEN HARPER AND 61% VOTED AGAINST HIM. THAT'S DEMOCRACY STEEVIE. YOU'RE NOT GOING TO DO TO CANADA WHAT YOUR HERO DID TO HIS OWN COUNTRY.
I totally agree after attending a rally today in Toronto in support of the Coalition at which both Mr. Stephane Dion and Mr. Jack Layton spoke passionately and eloquently. I think Obama supporters would have loved the feel of the rally which took place in around -10C weather with a biting wind and occasional snow: at times there were chants of "Yes we can" and "Yes we Can-ada." Both Mr. Dion and Mr. Layton paid out specifics of the economic stimulus proposals with the support of the Bloc and (while not having any elected officials) the Green Party too.
I really cannot say how deeply stirring it was: addresses in both French and English to regular cheers of support and cries of "shame" to Mr. Harper's suspension of Parliament and, hence, a functioning democracy.
In the end, in all that cold and more snowfall, people broke out spontaneously into "O Canada," our national anthem. It was an incredible experience of consensus and national pride along with a very verbal popular commitment to further social justice for First Nations; the right to strike for workers; pay equity for women....
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
