But the whipped NDP vote against dismantling the registry in 2010 on the third reading was OK when they had voted "for" in the previous votes.....I get it now...whipped votes is only bad when the concervatives do it:roll:
Canadian Democracy - Takes another hit under Harper
- Thread starter Goober
- Start date
But the whipped NDP vote against dismantling the registry in 2010 on the third reading was OK when they had voted "for" in the previous votes.....I get it now...whipped votes is only bad when the concervatives do it:roll:
But of course DaS!!!
Anything that can remotely have the term "Undemocratic" pinned to it, is completely unacceptable when the present gov't does it.
But when the NDP does it, it's just darned good politicking.
I wonder how upset the local Dippers will be with Der Party, when they find out about the unethical theft of private property earmarked for charity.
I'm sure the sound of the crickets will be deafening.
Recall the Internet surveillance law- Tons of bad press - Con MPs were openly against it and what happened?
A fine example of how the current party system with whipped votes is about as undemocratic as your average dictatorship. I was not able to find one citizen that agreed with the legislation and a majority of MPs did not want it.
A democracy represents the will of a simple majority of the population and we have nothing even close to resembling that at this point.
It might have improved it.
The proper process is that any bill receive 3 readings in both the Commons and the Senate, then go to the Governor General for formal signature, at which point it becomes law. Either the Commons or the Senate can originate a bill, and the first three readings will take place in whatever body originated it, then go to the other. If one body amends the bill it must go back to the other for reconsideration, and if the differences are reconciled to the satisfaction of both it becomes law, otherwise it is lost.
First reading is just a formality, the bill is read without debate or amendment permitted, it's merely to introduce it. Second reading is the most important stage, when full and lengthy discussion occurs. The bill can't be amended at this point, though it can be defeated, and the Speaker will usually rule any attempt at detailed discussion of its individual clauses out of order, the discussion is supposed to be about the principle of the proposal, not its details. Passing second reading means the Commons (or the Senate, depending on the bill's origin) has approved the general purpose of the bill. Then the issue becomes, is this bill as proposed the best way to achieve this purpose. For that determination it goes to one of the relevant standing committees for clause by clause discussion and analysis, and the committee can call witnesses and do research and whatnot, then sends it back to the Commons (or the Senate as above). This is the report stage, in which the bill may be accepted or rejected as it came from the committee, much debate will ensue, amendments can be made, and so on, and finally it's given third reading.
That's a big oversimplification, but it's basically how things are supposed to work. It should be clear to any thinking person how invoking closure, limiting debate, and lumping a whole lot of things together into an omnibus bill, can subvert that process. Bills are frequently modified at the committee stage and the report stage, and spirited and newsworthy discussions happen. If they don't, then neither we the voters nor Parliament will know what the government's really doing.
It is alright, this government is slowly but surely ticking the broad base of the uncaring
into a point of interest. When that happens people become angry and when Canadians
become angry governments suffer. I have always found that when a particular leader
decides they have been elevated to the stature of King, they find themselves on the
scrap Heep of history. Dief, Mulroney, and Now Harper.
Yes this is not good for Canada in the short term however if it is one of the fuses that
ignites Canadians to take action, so be it, it is going to happen anyway. And yes this
little gutter snipe is kissing up to our neighbours to the south as he wants us to be a
cousin or part of America's immediate family. This too shall pass.
Like I said before, Harper and his party have peeked and I think they are vulnerable in
the next election. Especially when the rest of the lies they have told come to light.
Anyone know yet about the payout to the banks of over a hundred billion while the present
government claimed they did not assist the banks? It was on CTV this morning.
This is just an example of the untruths put forward by this government. The BC government
now finds itself in electoral trouble because of its dishonesty and the Harper regime will face
the same music.
into a point of interest. When that happens people become angry and when Canadians
become angry governments suffer. I have always found that when a particular leader
decides they have been elevated to the stature of King, they find themselves on the
scrap Heep of history. Dief, Mulroney, and Now Harper.
Yes this is not good for Canada in the short term however if it is one of the fuses that
ignites Canadians to take action, so be it, it is going to happen anyway. And yes this
little gutter snipe is kissing up to our neighbours to the south as he wants us to be a
cousin or part of America's immediate family. This too shall pass.
Like I said before, Harper and his party have peeked and I think they are vulnerable in
the next election. Especially when the rest of the lies they have told come to light.
Anyone know yet about the payout to the banks of over a hundred billion while the present
government claimed they did not assist the banks? It was on CTV this morning.
This is just an example of the untruths put forward by this government. The BC government
now finds itself in electoral trouble because of its dishonesty and the Harper regime will face
the same music.
Nope. I was against whipping that vote as well. I was also against using party discipline on two NDP MPs who chose to vote with the government in scrapping the registry. I didnt like the way they voted, but I think they should have been allowed to do it. If I had my way there would be no whipped votes.
They did it so it's okay for you to do it. How juvenile. Do two wrongs (or three or four or a hundred) make right?
You really need to come up with some new material... But on the lighter side, I notice that you sure do get your knickers in a twist whenever the Libs and Kyoto are brought up.
Why is that?
Why is that?
Something that is perhaps pertinent to this is the concept of the Rule of Law. In my opinion, this government is in serious violation of that Rule.
The most important principle of the Law is not that it calls for obedience to Law by both people and government, but that it prohibits arbitrary action of government.
Harper and co. live by arbitrariness.
The most important principle of the Law is not that it calls for obedience to Law by both people and government, but that it prohibits arbitrary action of government.
Harper and co. live by arbitrariness.
The question of whipping votes and Party versus independence gets to the heart of a democratic system.
Edmund Burke, in a speech to the Electors of Bristol (his constituency) said, :first my Party; next my country; last my constituents (or words close to that). The reasoning, and understood by voters at that time, was that a Party has a philosophy and an agenda for the management and progression of the country. That is what office is all about. Not the self interest of a local group against the whole. And the country's welfare is a function of the Party platform.
Whipping a vote can be essential at times to ensure that petty personal interests, the desire to ensure re-election being the most obvious, do not trump the Greater Good.
Edmund Burke, in a speech to the Electors of Bristol (his constituency) said, :first my Party; next my country; last my constituents (or words close to that). The reasoning, and understood by voters at that time, was that a Party has a philosophy and an agenda for the management and progression of the country. That is what office is all about. Not the self interest of a local group against the whole. And the country's welfare is a function of the Party platform.
Whipping a vote can be essential at times to ensure that petty personal interests, the desire to ensure re-election being the most obvious, do not trump the Greater Good.
Compare our systems - UK and Canada
PM - Labor backbenchers defy Party directive 28/02/2012
( minutes)
Alternate WMA version | MP3 download
MARK COLVIN: A small group of Federal Government backbenchers has defied a party direction by attending an event promoting human rights protection in West Papua.
The Greens hosted the launch of the Australia-Pacific chapter of International Parliamentarians for West Papua in Parliament House today.
West Papua, a province of Indonesia, has been at the centre of a long running campaign for independence.
This morning, the Acting Foreign Affairs Minister, Craig Emerson urged caucus members not to attend today's event.
U.K. Backbencher
The debate in the U.K. regarding Chancellor George Osborne’s proposal to set a specific cap on individuals’ tax deductible donations to charities has spawned a debate comparable to what we saw in the U.S. when President Obama proposed to cap charitable deductions (and all other itemized deductions) for very wealthy people. Except for one thing. In the U.S., while the nonprofit and philanthropic sectors, led by their national trade associations, mobilized to lobby extensively, we heard very little from members of Congress on the issue one way or the other. The president’s proposal sat there, the nonprofit sector by and large reacted in high dudgeon, but lawmakers said relatively little, including members of President Obama’s Democratic Party, who never seemed to fully embrace or even utter the proposal in public.
Anyone who has ever watched C-SPAN’s rebroadcast of the “Prime Minister’s Questions,” the weekly question time with the Prime Minister on the floor of the House of Commons, knows that the most junior backbenchers on up love to engage the PM in a verbal donnybrook on all sorts of policy proposals. It’s a bit livelier than the pro forma speeches to the cameras of many U.S. senators and representatives.
1922 Committee - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The PM survives the backbenchers
PM - Labor backbenchers defy Party directive 28/02/2012
( minutes)
Alternate WMA version | MP3 download
MARK COLVIN: A small group of Federal Government backbenchers has defied a party direction by attending an event promoting human rights protection in West Papua.
The Greens hosted the launch of the Australia-Pacific chapter of International Parliamentarians for West Papua in Parliament House today.
West Papua, a province of Indonesia, has been at the centre of a long running campaign for independence.
This morning, the Acting Foreign Affairs Minister, Craig Emerson urged caucus members not to attend today's event.
U.K. Backbencher
The debate in the U.K. regarding Chancellor George Osborne’s proposal to set a specific cap on individuals’ tax deductible donations to charities has spawned a debate comparable to what we saw in the U.S. when President Obama proposed to cap charitable deductions (and all other itemized deductions) for very wealthy people. Except for one thing. In the U.S., while the nonprofit and philanthropic sectors, led by their national trade associations, mobilized to lobby extensively, we heard very little from members of Congress on the issue one way or the other. The president’s proposal sat there, the nonprofit sector by and large reacted in high dudgeon, but lawmakers said relatively little, including members of President Obama’s Democratic Party, who never seemed to fully embrace or even utter the proposal in public.
Anyone who has ever watched C-SPAN’s rebroadcast of the “Prime Minister’s Questions,” the weekly question time with the Prime Minister on the floor of the House of Commons, knows that the most junior backbenchers on up love to engage the PM in a verbal donnybrook on all sorts of policy proposals. It’s a bit livelier than the pro forma speeches to the cameras of many U.S. senators and representatives.
1922 Committee - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The PM survives the backbenchers
Lets face it, until you elect someone in your constituency that has the platform of "I will represent the will of the majority of my constituents" you do not have democracy.
I have heard many different versions of what people seem to think democracy is from electing someone who will vote their conscience to electing someone who is representing their party but unfortunately none of them are truly democratic. Our MPs are our representative, that means they do as we, the voting citizens, want and nothing else. Any other form of so-called representation is not democratic. The only person I will ever support and vote for is the one who will follow the will of the people they are paid to represent.
I have heard many different versions of what people seem to think democracy is from electing someone who will vote their conscience to electing someone who is representing their party but unfortunately none of them are truly democratic. Our MPs are our representative, that means they do as we, the voting citizens, want and nothing else. Any other form of so-called representation is not democratic. The only person I will ever support and vote for is the one who will follow the will of the people they are paid to represent.
The problem with that is that you support only local democracy. The idea of Parties is that they gather together a majority of all the people in a jurisdiction to provide wider democracy. Democracy with an agreed set of values and goals. Representing the wishes of "your" constituents sounds good but, what when your constituents will not support a necessary road through their community and demand that it go through a neighbouring area? For an example.
Just heard on C.B.C. news that Harper has been implementing the promises he made a year ago, the gun registry, crime reformation etc. :smile:
But I really think he should "deep six" Bev Oda and cut Peter MacKay back a peg or two!
But I really think he should "deep six" Bev Oda and cut Peter MacKay back a peg or two!
How Stephen Harper is remaking the Canadian myth
Stephen Harper is reinventing Canada
The $20 bill is the most common currency in the land. The paper version in your wallet features Bill Reid’s iconic sculpture The Spirit of Haida Gwaii. The futuristic new polymer note, unveiled Wednesday, will honour the military instead.
On the first anniversary of Stephen Harper’s majority government, much attention has focused on tax and spending cuts, the law-and-order agenda, the Prime Minister’s promotion of free trade and the increasing estrangement of Quebec.
But the Conservatives are also bent on transforming the idea of Canada, by changing the national myth.
Many of this country’s most cherished symbols and values – the flag, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, peacekeeping, public health care, multiculturalism – are the product of Liberal policies.
The Harper government seeks to supplement, or even supplant, those symbols with new ones, and old ones revived. These new symbols are rooted in a robust, even aggressive nationalism that celebrates the armed forces, the monarchy, sports, the North and a once overshadowed Conservative prime minister.
God Save the Queen, again
As Canada’s British connection weakened, and accommodating a restless Quebec grew in importance, previous governments played down monarchical ties. The Conservatives aim to restore them.
They ordered the Queen’s portrait to be displayed in embassies and other government buildings, and restored the Royal to the navy and air force. They feted William and Kate during their visit as though they were the King and Queen, which they will be. This month, Charles and Camilla are dropping in. The government is encouraging local celebrations of the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee.
It may anger the French and bemuse recent immigrants, but the Conservatives are determined to remind Canadians that this country is a proud member of the anglosphere, and that the head of state is the Queen of Canada, who just happens to live overseas.
From a nation of peacekeepers to a nation that kicks butt
Canada once celebrated its role in peacekeeping (and the Nobel Prize that Lester Pearson won for inventing the idea), its staunch support of the United Nations, its lead in the fight against apartheid and its championing of the land-mines treaty and the International Criminal Court.
Under the Harper government, Canada takes pride in its muscular military tradition. The Conservatives have embraced the citizens who lined the Highway of Heroes in silent tribute to the fallen in Afghanistan; Stephen Harper repeatedly visited the Vimy memorial in France; the Harper government is actively commemorating the 200th anniversary of the War of 1812, in which British and Canadian troops evicted U.S. invaders; a Canadian general led the mission to overthrow Libyan strongman Moammar Gadhafi.
And every year Mr. Harper goes up to watch the summer military exercises in the Arctic, asserting that Canada will defend its sovereignty – and its oil – against all comers.
Silver doesn't cut it any more
Remember the images of Greg Joy triumphantly clearing the hurdle in the 1976 Olympics? He won silver that year. Canada failed to take a single gold medal at Montreal, or at the Calgary Olympics in 1988.
Compare that to the raucous celebrations that followed Sidney Crosby’s overtime goal sealing Canada’s triumph at the Vancouver Winter Olympics in 2010. The Own the Podium program, which supports Olympic athletes, had a lot to do with Canada’s record medal haul. The Conservatives have nurtured the program, protecting funding even during the latest round of budget cuts.
We are not a summer nation, but Own the Podium hopes to set new records for Canadian wins in London, with a top-12 finish.
Conservative Canada doesn’t just ask you to give it your sporting best. At the Olympics, we’re in it to win it.
Diefenbaker the Great
History is written by the winners. Liberal historians portrayed John Diefenbaker as a renegade in power – to quote Peter C. Newman’s biography of Canada’s 13th prime minister – who cancelled the Avro Arrow, crippling the country’s aerospace industry, and who was the only PM to fire the governor of the Bank of Canada.
The Conservatives have reinvented him as the prime minister who first envisioned the potential of the Canadian Arctic, and who authored the Bill of Rights that preceded the Charter. There is now a Diefenbaker Building beside the Pearson Building in Ottawa. The Diefenbaker Award celebrates contributions to human rights; there will be a John G. Diefenbaker icebreaker.
It’s not just Dief; there’s talk of honouring largely forgotten Conservative prime minister R.B. Bennett with a statue on Parliament Hill.
Time to melt a bit
Canada once took pride in weaving a multicultural fabric. Part of being Canadian could mean preserving your ancestral culture, in contrast to the melting pot that American immigrants were expected to jump into.
But while maintaining robust immigration levels, the Conservatives have moved to promote the idea of civic literacy: A new citizenship guide reminds immigrants that both genders are equal and they should check any other notions at the door; new citizenship rules require greater proficiency in one official language; face coverings at citizenship ceremonies are prohibited.
As yet, though, there are no rules requiring newcomers to identify the birthplace of John Diefenbaker. (Neustadt, Ont.)
How Stephen Harper is remaking the Canadian myth - The Globe and Mail
Stephen Harper is reinventing Canada
The $20 bill is the most common currency in the land. The paper version in your wallet features Bill Reid’s iconic sculpture The Spirit of Haida Gwaii. The futuristic new polymer note, unveiled Wednesday, will honour the military instead.
On the first anniversary of Stephen Harper’s majority government, much attention has focused on tax and spending cuts, the law-and-order agenda, the Prime Minister’s promotion of free trade and the increasing estrangement of Quebec.
But the Conservatives are also bent on transforming the idea of Canada, by changing the national myth.
Many of this country’s most cherished symbols and values – the flag, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, peacekeeping, public health care, multiculturalism – are the product of Liberal policies.
The Harper government seeks to supplement, or even supplant, those symbols with new ones, and old ones revived. These new symbols are rooted in a robust, even aggressive nationalism that celebrates the armed forces, the monarchy, sports, the North and a once overshadowed Conservative prime minister.
God Save the Queen, again
As Canada’s British connection weakened, and accommodating a restless Quebec grew in importance, previous governments played down monarchical ties. The Conservatives aim to restore them.
They ordered the Queen’s portrait to be displayed in embassies and other government buildings, and restored the Royal to the navy and air force. They feted William and Kate during their visit as though they were the King and Queen, which they will be. This month, Charles and Camilla are dropping in. The government is encouraging local celebrations of the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee.
It may anger the French and bemuse recent immigrants, but the Conservatives are determined to remind Canadians that this country is a proud member of the anglosphere, and that the head of state is the Queen of Canada, who just happens to live overseas.
From a nation of peacekeepers to a nation that kicks butt
Canada once celebrated its role in peacekeeping (and the Nobel Prize that Lester Pearson won for inventing the idea), its staunch support of the United Nations, its lead in the fight against apartheid and its championing of the land-mines treaty and the International Criminal Court.
Under the Harper government, Canada takes pride in its muscular military tradition. The Conservatives have embraced the citizens who lined the Highway of Heroes in silent tribute to the fallen in Afghanistan; Stephen Harper repeatedly visited the Vimy memorial in France; the Harper government is actively commemorating the 200th anniversary of the War of 1812, in which British and Canadian troops evicted U.S. invaders; a Canadian general led the mission to overthrow Libyan strongman Moammar Gadhafi.
And every year Mr. Harper goes up to watch the summer military exercises in the Arctic, asserting that Canada will defend its sovereignty – and its oil – against all comers.
Silver doesn't cut it any more
Remember the images of Greg Joy triumphantly clearing the hurdle in the 1976 Olympics? He won silver that year. Canada failed to take a single gold medal at Montreal, or at the Calgary Olympics in 1988.
Compare that to the raucous celebrations that followed Sidney Crosby’s overtime goal sealing Canada’s triumph at the Vancouver Winter Olympics in 2010. The Own the Podium program, which supports Olympic athletes, had a lot to do with Canada’s record medal haul. The Conservatives have nurtured the program, protecting funding even during the latest round of budget cuts.
We are not a summer nation, but Own the Podium hopes to set new records for Canadian wins in London, with a top-12 finish.
Conservative Canada doesn’t just ask you to give it your sporting best. At the Olympics, we’re in it to win it.
Diefenbaker the Great
History is written by the winners. Liberal historians portrayed John Diefenbaker as a renegade in power – to quote Peter C. Newman’s biography of Canada’s 13th prime minister – who cancelled the Avro Arrow, crippling the country’s aerospace industry, and who was the only PM to fire the governor of the Bank of Canada.
The Conservatives have reinvented him as the prime minister who first envisioned the potential of the Canadian Arctic, and who authored the Bill of Rights that preceded the Charter. There is now a Diefenbaker Building beside the Pearson Building in Ottawa. The Diefenbaker Award celebrates contributions to human rights; there will be a John G. Diefenbaker icebreaker.
It’s not just Dief; there’s talk of honouring largely forgotten Conservative prime minister R.B. Bennett with a statue on Parliament Hill.
Time to melt a bit
Canada once took pride in weaving a multicultural fabric. Part of being Canadian could mean preserving your ancestral culture, in contrast to the melting pot that American immigrants were expected to jump into.
But while maintaining robust immigration levels, the Conservatives have moved to promote the idea of civic literacy: A new citizenship guide reminds immigrants that both genders are equal and they should check any other notions at the door; new citizenship rules require greater proficiency in one official language; face coverings at citizenship ceremonies are prohibited.
As yet, though, there are no rules requiring newcomers to identify the birthplace of John Diefenbaker. (Neustadt, Ont.)
How Stephen Harper is remaking the Canadian myth - The Globe and Mail