Harper warns opposition over support for throne speech

[CBC News]

Prime Minister Stephen Harper said on Wednesday that if the opposition supports his upcoming speech from the throne, they must also pass, at later dates, all items that come from it, or risk triggering a federal election.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper speaks at at the National Press Theatre in Ottawa Wednesday. It was his first news conference at the theatre since becoming the prime minister.
(Tom Hanson/Canadian Press) ​

"The choice is not an election or obstruction. The choice is an election or give the government a mandate to govern," Harper said in his first news conference at the National Press Theatre in Ottawa since becoming prime minister.
Harper told reporters that the Oct. 16 speech from the throne will lay out the government's plans, touching on issues such as the environment, the economy and Canada's place in the world.
Harper said he doesn't want an election before 2009. But the prime minister added that he would consider any votes during the upcoming parliamentary session on items in the speech from the throne as confidence motions.
"If they get approval of the throne speech, we're going to expect those things to be passed," Harper said.
Full Story
Are the Conservatives itching for an election? Will we be going to the polls this fall?


More...

 

[lone wolf]

Could be an interesting fall in Ontario....

Wolf

 

[#juan]

It looks to me like Harper is waving a red flag at the opposition. He want it to appear that the next election is the fault of the opposition. I may be wrong but I think we'll have an early election. It will be a either a Conservative or Liberal minority.......and another election again within eighteen months..

 

[lone wolf]

Wolf makes a prediction:

Three successive and short-term minority governments - then a BIG surprise....

Wolf

 

[Locutus]

Cha-ching. $

 

[Locutus]

Wolf makes a prediction:

Three successive and short-term minority governments - then a BIG surprise....

Wolf

Green majority?

 

[#juan]

Green majority?

I don't think Green.....Canadians generally elect the crooks they know.....:roll::smile:

 

[Tonington]

It will be a either a Conservative or Liberal minority.......and another election again within eighteen months..

Seems that way. Two months and we'll be at the polls. What happens if it is a Conservative minority and they run with the same throne speech?

I don't like it one bit. Peter Van Loan and Harper angry up my blood. Agreeing to a throne speech means jack, when the Government says one thing, and then turns around and does something else. Harper is one ignominious, arrogant prick.

 

[#juan]

Seems that way. Two months and we'll be at the polls. What happens if it is a Conservative minority and they run with the same throne speech?

I don't like it one bit. Peter Van Loan and Harper angry up my blood. Agreeing to a throne speech means jack, when the Government says one thing, and then turns around and does something else. Harper is one ignominious, arrogant prick.

That about says it.....Says it very well I might add. I love the phrase "ignominious, arrogant prick". Fits Harper like a new sock.......;-):smile:

 

[Locutus]

Seems that way. Two months and we'll be at the polls. What happens if it is a Conservative minority and they run with the same throne speech?

I don't like it one bit. Peter Van Loan and Harper angry up my blood. Agreeing to a throne speech means jack, when the Government says one thing, and then turns around and does something else. Harper is one ignominious, arrogant prick.

So was Trudeau, and he was arguably one of the best leaders we ever had. Since we know so little about the early PM's, it's likely the same story a hundred years ago and more. I'll take arrogance over corruption when given the choice. Even the NDP or Greens over that bunch of current liberals.

 

[wallyj]

Seems that way. Two months and we'll be at the polls. What happens if it is a Conservative minority and they run with the same throne speech?

I don't like it one bit. Peter Van Loan and Harper angry up my blood. Agreeing to a throne speech means jack, when the Government says one thing, and then turns around and does something else. Harper is one ignominious, arrogant prick.

I had to read your post twice. I thought you wrote that agreeing to a throne speech means when Jack says one thing and then turns around and does somrthing else,that makes him an ignominious,arrogant prick. Harper is saying" quit playing politics,if you vote for it now,don't say later that you don't like it". Harper is challenging Dion,Duceppe and Layton to show character.Good for Steven,we are long overdue for a gov't that governs for the people,not for the job.

 

[Tonington]

So was Trudeau, and he was arguably one of the best leaders we ever had. Since we know so little about the early PM's, it's likely the same story a hundred years ago and more. I'll take arrogance over corruption when given the choice. Even the NDP or Greens over that bunch of current liberals.

The current Liberals seem as content as ever to fight for little morsels of power and control. Doesn't exactly instill much confidence in me. I have no idea who I'll vote for right now, because I can't honestly support any of em right now. I might vote for Bill Casey as an Independent. At least he stood up for NS when his own Government broke their word.

 

[wallyj]

I read it again.you are saying throne speeches are meaningless. What arrogance,you don't really care about anything but keeping your people in power. Am I wrong ? If so explain yourself.

 

[goat]

I love the phrase "ignominious, arrogant prick". Fits Harper like a new sock.......

Not just Harper.

Why, I do declare, it fits others too

 

[Tonington]

Harper is saying" quit playing politics,if you vote for it now,don't say later that you don't like it". Harper is challenging Dion,Duceppe and Layton to show character.Good for Steven,we are long overdue for a gov't that governs for the people,not for the job.

No, Harper IS playing politics. In the last throne speech, he said things like,

on strengthening the Federation:

Building on the work begun in the last Parliament, this Government will
seek to involve parliamentarians and citizens in examining the challenges facing Canada’s
electoral system and democratic institutions.

Then they sneak things into committee, or ask for consultation on things like warrants without evidence, and do not "seek to involve citizens, or parliamentarians". Only when they are caught red handed do they allow citizens and parliamentarians in on the act.

on environment:

It will take measures to achieve tangible improvements in our
environment, including reductions in pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.

On this, not only did they fail, but they failed on the first quote up there, by NOT involving parliamentarians. Harper has already admitted he will have most of his bills that were dropped by prorogation brought back, except for the one bill that was a work of ALL parliamentarians, the amended Clean Air Act.

The Conservative Government broke their promise on more than one occasion. So what good does their word in the speech from the Throne mean?

Parliament is supposed to seek advice from experts on pending legislation. Agreeing to blanket statements in a throne speech is all well, but transferring that to the specifics of legislation is just plain stupid, that is not how Parliament works. Shows the autocratic stylings of our current PM.

 

[Pangloss]

Harper wants an election while the Libs are divided, simple as that. And yeah, throne speeches mean little or nothing - they aren't bound by the promises they make, and they can introduce new policies after the speech that were never mentioned.

Harper confuses being a petulant bully with leadership. It's a shame such a smart, decently educated guy ended up such a lousy PM.

Pangloss

 

[Tonington]

I read it again.you are saying throne speeches are meaningless. What arrogance,you don't really care about anything but keeping your people in power. Am I wrong ? If so explain yourself.

The throne speech is meaningless because for one, it is not legislation. It's simply things that sound nice.

You have no idea who "my people are."

I'm getting sick of having to defend myself every time I point out some flaws with our government. You don't know me. Keep your hazy crystal ball statements to yourself.

 

[#juan]

Quote:
Originally Posted by wallyj
I read it again.you are saying throne speeches are meaningless. What arrogance,you don't really care about anything but keeping your people in power. Am I wrong ? If so explain yourself.

The throne speech is meaningless because for one, it is not legislation. It's simply things that sound nice.

You have no idea who "my people are."

I'm getting sick of having to defend myself every time I point out some flaws with our government. You don't know me. Keep your hazy crystal ball statements to yourself.

Plus you don't have to explain yourself to anyone, particularly not to the crowd who think debate or discussion is "attack first"and the best sarcastic jibe wins.

 

[wallyj]

Am I wrong? If so explain yourself. That is an attack in your mind. No,that is how people with intelligence debate. Have someone explain it to you. Now that is a sarcastic jibe. Actually #$@# off,I have had it with the twits on this site that love to "attack" and then whimper in the corner when challenged,Screw you guys,I'm going home. So now you can all rejoice and have a happy little circle jerk. And BTFW,the throne speech is important,no matter who is in power,the gov't can fall because of it. Well jerk-offs,one right wing poster down,keep it up and this place will resemble rabble.

 

[Tonington]

Am I wrong? If so explain yourself. That is an attack in your mind. No,that is how people with intelligence debate. Have someone explain it to you. Now that is a sarcastic jibe. Actually #$@# off,I have had it with the twits on this site that love to "attack" and then whimper in the corner when challenged,Screw you guys,I'm going home. So now you can all rejoice and have a happy little circle jerk. And BTFW,the throne speech is important,no matter who is in power,the gov't can fall because of it. Well jerk-offs,one right wing poster down,keep it up and this place will resemble rabble.

First off, I did not attack, I responded to one, then told you to shut your mouth about things you don't know about me.

People using intellect in conversation do not jump to ad hominem attacks. I explained why the throne speech is meaningless. True it can take down a government, but as we were discussing, agreeing to a throne speech does not mean the opposition will agree to pass all legislation. In that way, as Harper has laid down his challenge, it is meaningless, fallacious.

I understand very well how to debate Wally. I don't respond normally to attacks, but in this case this is not the first time I've been accused of partisanship for criticizing my own government. Though yours is plainly obvious.

I'm not whimpering, I'm saying you don't know what you're talking about when you say my people

If you do, tell me oh grand seer, what do my people think about:
economics
military spending
military action
other areas of foreign policy
the environment (probably obvious where I stand on that)
healthcare
government spending in general

You can guess, but you'll probably be way off. Good day Sir.