Clever Clogs
Posts: 519 
August 27th, 2007, 02:46 PM
So are we to assume from this that if the reform/alliance/conservatives ever get a majority in Parliment they'll appoint their own MPs in every riding to remove any road-blocks to the smooth running of government...and any checks and balances...and any democracy.
I guess we understand what "Canadas New Government"really means now.
So are we to assume from this that if the reform/alliance/conservatives ever get a majority in Parliment they'll appoint their own MPs in every riding to remove any road-blocks to the smooth running of government...and any checks and balances...and any democracy.
I guess we understand what "Canadas New Government"really means now.
Clever Clogs
Posts: 519
August 28th, 2007, 01:12 PM
I wonder if Harper is a fan of Star Trek and gets some of his political ideas from the show.
This kind of reminds me of the Borg, the reform/alliance/conservatives will be assimilating all of Canada one riding at a time. No wonder they don't support democratic reforms in Canada,they have other plans for us.
"Resistance is futile".
I wonder if Harper is a fan of Star Trek and gets some of his political ideas from the show.
This kind of reminds me of the Borg, the reform/alliance/conservatives will be assimilating all of Canada one riding at a time. No wonder they don't support democratic reforms in Canada,they have other plans for us.
"Resistance is futile".
what green dots?
Posts: 3,157
August 29th, 2007, 11:49 AM
update and uptown
the first bolded was rather predictable but answers the pay-to-play question
the second bolded part highlights where this is going.
'Realistic' Conservatives try to bypass an elected MP
Barbara Yaffe, Vancouver Sun
Published: Wednesday, August 29, 2007
update and uptown
the first bolded was rather predictable but answers the pay-to-play question
the second bolded part highlights where this is going.
'Realistic' Conservatives try to bypass an elected MP
Barbara Yaffe, Vancouver Sun
Published: Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Quote:
There's so many reasons for Harper to NOT prorogue its no wonder Layton and Dion are telling him not to. The little imp just won't be able to resist.
An aggressive Conservative plan has bestowed a group of British Columbians with a representative from the governing party before they've voted one in.
Houston Mayor Sharon Smith has been appointed "government go-to person" for the NDP-held riding of Skeena-Bulkley Valley by the federal Conservative caucus chair for B.C., Dick Harris.
The MP for Cariboo-Prince George justifies his action with some pretty blunt opinions about how government really works in this country.
He says that, realistically, it's not possible for Nathan Cullen, the elected New Democrat representing Skeena, to access government services on behalf of his constituents in the manner that an MP of Conservative stripe would be able to.
Throwing in the waste bin the principles that make representative government in Canada function, Harris explained on a local radio show the other week: "To have access to the ministers, realistically, you have to be part of the government. You want to contact the Prime Minister's Office or even the prime minister when you need to, it helps immensely to be part of the government."
He said Smith, working through Conservative channels, would be able to get constituents' concerns in Cullen's riding "right to the ministers involved."
Asked if Conservative MPs in Opposition -- before January 2006 -- were thus ineffective, Harris elaborated further.
"There's a bit of a pecking order in Parliament. As a member of the official Opposition you're quite a bit closer to government than, say, a member of the fourth or the third party.
"There seems to be a cooperation between the official Opposition and the government when it comes to riding issues, so we were able to get a fair amount done.
"It's a matter of having the access and being effective with the access and, quite frankly ... the fact is, it hasn't been happening" in Cullen's riding.
Cullen, for his part, says his first reaction to the Smith appointment was "to scratch my head a little bit and laugh. I mean, this is ridiculous."
But his second reaction was anger. He calls the Smith appointment "sleazy [and] poisonous politics."
Noting that for the first time in the history of his riding there are now four constituency offices, Cullen says this issue goes straight to the fundamentals of democracy.
"It's almost like Mr. Harris and Mr. Harper want to replay the last election. Canadians have spoken in the last election .... When the election is over it's over, and it's time to work on behalf of everybody."
In the 2006 election, Cullen won his northern riding with 48 per cent of the vote. The Conservative, Mike Scott, won 33 per cent.
Smith, who will compete against Cullen in the next election, is volunteering her services to Skeena's voters, Harris says.
The situation in B.C. has caught the attention of Duff Conacher, coordinator of the Ottawa-based ethics group Democracy Watch.
Conacher told CBC radio the Smith appointment is "improper" and an investigation should be launched by Canada's new ethics commissioner, Mary Dawson.
Conacher says the naming of Smith as a government liaison person violates the Conflict of Interest Code for MPs.
Harris "is essentially saying that the federal government system is corrupt and is run by the ruling party only, and that voters who vote for other parties will not get served."
Conacher makes the point that Canada's public service is supposed to be impartial.
In 14 years of eyeballing politicians, the ethics watchdog reports he hasn't come across this particular tactic, though "MPs and cabinet ministers have tried pretty much everything you can think of ... to further their own interests."
He says of the Skeena situation: "What [Harris] is essentially saying is that it matters whether your MP is from the ruling party or not, which is saying, essentially, that the ruling party MPs get -- what? -- more favours from the public service?
"Is he implying that ruling party MPs can somehow solve a constituent's problems that are dealing with the bureaucracy, in terms of immigration applications or small business problems or just general citizen problems with government?"
This is an important question; it should be addressed not just by Harris but by Stephen Harper.
Houston Mayor Sharon Smith has been appointed "government go-to person" for the NDP-held riding of Skeena-Bulkley Valley by the federal Conservative caucus chair for B.C., Dick Harris.
The MP for Cariboo-Prince George justifies his action with some pretty blunt opinions about how government really works in this country.
He says that, realistically, it's not possible for Nathan Cullen, the elected New Democrat representing Skeena, to access government services on behalf of his constituents in the manner that an MP of Conservative stripe would be able to.
Throwing in the waste bin the principles that make representative government in Canada function, Harris explained on a local radio show the other week: "To have access to the ministers, realistically, you have to be part of the government. You want to contact the Prime Minister's Office or even the prime minister when you need to, it helps immensely to be part of the government."
He said Smith, working through Conservative channels, would be able to get constituents' concerns in Cullen's riding "right to the ministers involved."
Asked if Conservative MPs in Opposition -- before January 2006 -- were thus ineffective, Harris elaborated further.
"There's a bit of a pecking order in Parliament. As a member of the official Opposition you're quite a bit closer to government than, say, a member of the fourth or the third party.
"There seems to be a cooperation between the official Opposition and the government when it comes to riding issues, so we were able to get a fair amount done.
"It's a matter of having the access and being effective with the access and, quite frankly ... the fact is, it hasn't been happening" in Cullen's riding.
Cullen, for his part, says his first reaction to the Smith appointment was "to scratch my head a little bit and laugh. I mean, this is ridiculous."
But his second reaction was anger. He calls the Smith appointment "sleazy [and] poisonous politics."
Noting that for the first time in the history of his riding there are now four constituency offices, Cullen says this issue goes straight to the fundamentals of democracy.
"It's almost like Mr. Harris and Mr. Harper want to replay the last election. Canadians have spoken in the last election .... When the election is over it's over, and it's time to work on behalf of everybody."
In the 2006 election, Cullen won his northern riding with 48 per cent of the vote. The Conservative, Mike Scott, won 33 per cent.
Smith, who will compete against Cullen in the next election, is volunteering her services to Skeena's voters, Harris says.
The situation in B.C. has caught the attention of Duff Conacher, coordinator of the Ottawa-based ethics group Democracy Watch.
Conacher told CBC radio the Smith appointment is "improper" and an investigation should be launched by Canada's new ethics commissioner, Mary Dawson.
Conacher says the naming of Smith as a government liaison person violates the Conflict of Interest Code for MPs.
Harris "is essentially saying that the federal government system is corrupt and is run by the ruling party only, and that voters who vote for other parties will not get served."
Conacher makes the point that Canada's public service is supposed to be impartial.
In 14 years of eyeballing politicians, the ethics watchdog reports he hasn't come across this particular tactic, though "MPs and cabinet ministers have tried pretty much everything you can think of ... to further their own interests."
He says of the Skeena situation: "What [Harris] is essentially saying is that it matters whether your MP is from the ruling party or not, which is saying, essentially, that the ruling party MPs get -- what? -- more favours from the public service?
"Is he implying that ruling party MPs can somehow solve a constituent's problems that are dealing with the bureaucracy, in terms of immigration applications or small business problems or just general citizen problems with government?"
This is an important question; it should be addressed not just by Harris but by Stephen Harper.
Clever Clogs
Posts: 519
August 29th, 2007, 12:36 PM
This is worse than anything the Liberals ever did, the ad agency scandal in Quebec came about as part of highly contentious sovereignty fight where the Liberals were acting to hold the country together. This is an attempt by the sitting government to destroy some of the basic foundations of our democratic system. This government was elected as a result of the democratic deficit in this country, they've increased it by several orders of magnitude by their actions.
Quote:
It's up to the government to give equal access to all MPs when it comes to constituency issues, not deny access for political purposes. They're not forced by law or tradition to ignore the NDP, it's a matter of choice. Why is it we need to make major changes to other aspect of our economic and political structure to please Harper and Co. but they can't do something as minor as listening to fellow MPs who after all were elected by Canadians to represent them. This is just one more indication of the contempt this government has for our rights and freedoms, they may claim to be working for our best interests but it's all just spin. I wonder how many millions they spend on media "consultants"each year.
"There's a bit of a pecking order in Parliament. As a member of the official Opposition you're quite a bit closer to government than, say, a member of the fourth or the third party.
"There seems to be a cooperation between the official Opposition and the government when it comes to riding issues, so we were able to get a fair amount done.
"There seems to be a cooperation between the official Opposition and the government when it comes to riding issues, so we were able to get a fair amount done.
This is worse than anything the Liberals ever did, the ad agency scandal in Quebec came about as part of highly contentious sovereignty fight where the Liberals were acting to hold the country together. This is an attempt by the sitting government to destroy some of the basic foundations of our democratic system. This government was elected as a result of the democratic deficit in this country, they've increased it by several orders of magnitude by their actions.
Clever Clogs
Posts: 519
August 29th, 2007, 12:51 PM
Dick Harris says:
Dick Harris says:
Quote:
This is a defacto admission of corruption, the public service isn't intended to meet the political needs of the governing party, it's there to serve all Canadians. It's clear that Harper is unsuited to the demanding task of managing a democratic government, he's taken the easy way out and is using his position of trust to further his own ambitions, not the will of the people of Canada.
"It's a matter of having the access and being effective with the access and, quite frankly ... the fact is, it hasn't been happening" in Cullen's riding.
what green dots?
Posts: 3,157
August 29th, 2007, 02:01 PM
Quoting Cobalt_Kid
Indeed.
...This is a defacto admission of corruption, the public service isn't intended to meet the political needs of the governing party, it's there to serve all Canadians...
Clever Clogs
Posts: 519
August 29th, 2007, 03:02 PM
With its tight control of the media, Harpers government is the political equivalent of an iceberg, only a small fraction of it's behaviour shows above the surface. With this admission they're interfering with the lawful performance of the public service for political purposes is there any doubt there's more malfeasance going on behind the scenes.
Canadas New Government of self-righteous windbags could possibly be it's most corrupt.
With its tight control of the media, Harpers government is the political equivalent of an iceberg, only a small fraction of it's behaviour shows above the surface. With this admission they're interfering with the lawful performance of the public service for political purposes is there any doubt there's more malfeasance going on behind the scenes.
Canadas New Government of self-righteous windbags could possibly be it's most corrupt.
Electoral Member
Posts: 684
Location: Canada
Location: Canada
August 29th, 2007, 03:31 PM
Unbelievable! They see no problem doing this! It is a total disregard of our democracy through representation. This is basically 'one party rule' attitude where votes don’t count. Where did they get their political insight? Moscow?
What is wrong with this country?!! To what point are we going to keep arguing 'intentions' when this government have clearly shown the dangers they pose to the political foundation of our Canada?
They have clearly shown their hand. Eventually, we are just going to be like every other fallen country that sleeps through the details until one day we wake up in an environment that no longer resembles a democracy of which we stood as an example to others and to ourselves.
‘Fascists’ is indeed the correct word here.
Unbelievable! They see no problem doing this! It is a total disregard of our democracy through representation. This is basically 'one party rule' attitude where votes don’t count. Where did they get their political insight? Moscow?
What is wrong with this country?!! To what point are we going to keep arguing 'intentions' when this government have clearly shown the dangers they pose to the political foundation of our Canada?
They have clearly shown their hand. Eventually, we are just going to be like every other fallen country that sleeps through the details until one day we wake up in an environment that no longer resembles a democracy of which we stood as an example to others and to ourselves.
‘Fascists’ is indeed the correct word here.
Clever Clogs
Posts: 519
August 29th, 2007, 04:13 PM
The amazing thing is they don't seem to see any contradiction in what they were protesting so loudly while in oppositition and their own behaviour. It's alright for them to let their friends and supporters in the side door to public service but if anyone else does it they scream bloody murder.
The hypocracy of this is mindboggling.
The amazing thing is they don't seem to see any contradiction in what they were protesting so loudly while in oppositition and their own behaviour. It's alright for them to let their friends and supporters in the side door to public service but if anyone else does it they scream bloody murder.
The hypocracy of this is mindboggling.
Electoral Member
Posts: 684
Location: Canada
Location: Canada
August 29th, 2007, 04:28 PM
It really begs repeating that the Conservatives are basically making the case that if you vote for another party, this government isn’t going to work with that person and serve you. Only through 'their people' will you really be heard.
So what is the point of the vote then? How does the vote fit in here anymore?
It’s meaningless. It’s just an exercise, nothing more. Now that the Conservatives hold a leadership position (even a minority one!), the other voices of the citizenry don’t essentially matter within this country.
Quote:
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/c...d8c924cb24&p=1
Harris explained on a local radio show the other week: "To have access to the ministers, realistically, you have to be part of the government. You want to contact the Prime Minister's Office or even the prime minister when you need to, it helps immensely to be part of the government."
He said Smith, working through Conservative channels, would be able to get constituents' concerns in Cullen's riding "right to the ministers involved."
Asked if Conservative MPs in Opposition -- before January 2006 -- were thus ineffective, Harris elaborated further.
"There's a bit of a pecking order in Parliament. As a member of the official Opposition you're quite a bit closer to government than, say, a member of the fourth or the third party.
"There seems to be a cooperation between the official Opposition and the government when it comes to riding issues, so we were able to get a fair amount done.
"It's a matter of having the access and being effective with the access and, quite frankly ... the fact is, it hasn't been happening" in Cullen's riding.
Harris explained on a local radio show the other week: "To have access to the ministers, realistically, you have to be part of the government. You want to contact the Prime Minister's Office or even the prime minister when you need to, it helps immensely to be part of the government."
He said Smith, working through Conservative channels, would be able to get constituents' concerns in Cullen's riding "right to the ministers involved."
Asked if Conservative MPs in Opposition -- before January 2006 -- were thus ineffective, Harris elaborated further.
"There's a bit of a pecking order in Parliament. As a member of the official Opposition you're quite a bit closer to government than, say, a member of the fourth or the third party.
"There seems to be a cooperation between the official Opposition and the government when it comes to riding issues, so we were able to get a fair amount done.
"It's a matter of having the access and being effective with the access and, quite frankly ... the fact is, it hasn't been happening" in Cullen's riding.
It really begs repeating that the Conservatives are basically making the case that if you vote for another party, this government isn’t going to work with that person and serve you. Only through 'their people' will you really be heard.
So what is the point of the vote then? How does the vote fit in here anymore?
It’s meaningless. It’s just an exercise, nothing more. Now that the Conservatives hold a leadership position (even a minority one!), the other voices of the citizenry don’t essentially matter within this country.
Quote:
Duff Conacher, coordinator of the Ottawa-based ethics group Democracy Watch:
Harris "is essentially saying that the federal government system is corrupt and is run by the ruling party only, and that voters who vote for other parties will not get served."
They are saying that they really aren’t trying to work with the other parties and yet they are a minority government.
Harris "is essentially saying that the federal government system is corrupt and is run by the ruling party only, and that voters who vote for other parties will not get served."
They are saying that they really aren’t trying to work with the other parties and yet they are a minority government.
what green dots?
Posts: 3,157
August 29th, 2007, 04:31 PM
Yet another trial balloon goes bust...
resignation from the chair. as if its not another one hung out to dry.
Yet another trial balloon goes bust...
Quote:
next up...
..."He just kind of did that himself," government spokesman Ryan Sparrow said of Harris's move...
resignation from the chair. as if its not another one hung out to dry.
Clever Clogs
Posts: 519
August 29th, 2007, 07:09 PM
Dick says:
Harper got together with Duceppe and Layton in the fall of 2005 to bring down the Liberals, Harper didn't even have the nerve to introduce the non-confidence vote to the floor himself, it was Layton. You'd think he'd want to reward his friends better than this.
Also if Harper is only going to be responsive to constituents from ridings his party holds that will leave out the majority of Canadians. He recieved even less seats than the man he made so much fun of, Paul Martin, in the previous election.
All in all we've seen very arrogant behaviour from a government with only a marginal minority mandate.
Dick says:
Quote:
This is a laugh too, Harper and Co. have been doing everything possible to attack the Liberals, they're aren't going to be responsive to any constituency issues they raise. How many $millions were spent on ads attacking Dion?
"There's a bit of a pecking order in Parliament. As a member of the official Opposition you're quite a bit closer to government than, say, a member of the fourth or the third party.
Harper got together with Duceppe and Layton in the fall of 2005 to bring down the Liberals, Harper didn't even have the nerve to introduce the non-confidence vote to the floor himself, it was Layton. You'd think he'd want to reward his friends better than this.
Also if Harper is only going to be responsive to constituents from ridings his party holds that will leave out the majority of Canadians. He recieved even less seats than the man he made so much fun of, Paul Martin, in the previous election.
All in all we've seen very arrogant behaviour from a government with only a marginal minority mandate.
