Canada: No longer a Democracy
- Thread starter Trex
- Start date
"Although I disagree with you (and Joe's opinion) I will defend to the death your right to say it"........:lol:
I am just a little curious as to what you supporters
of the coallition would say ,if Harper and Co. make a better offer to
the Bloc and form their own coallition.
It is after all possible.
I would bet there would be alot of screaming blue murder.
of the coallition would say ,if Harper and Co. make a better offer to
the Bloc and form their own coallition.
It is after all possible.
I would bet there would be alot of screaming blue murder.
Sure, in my opinion and (I assume) the opinion of every constitutional scholar. There is nothing in the constitution that says that the largest party must form a government in a minority situation.
I think the requirement is that the governing party must have the confidence of the parliament, the support of more than 50% of the MPs.
Pgs, if Harper can make a better offer to Bloc (or even NDP), and gets their support, why more power to him. And don’t think Harper wouldn’t do it. If he could do it, he most certainly would. Above all he wants to be the PM, if he can do that by enlisting the support of the Bloc, he won’t hesitate a minute to do it.
Anyway, even if he did, it is all part of the wheeling and dealing process. Sure, other parties will attack him for being in bed with separatists, but there will be nothing unconstitutional or illegal about it.
When did it become a threat to democracy to stand up to a bully? What example are we setting for our kids when we preach at then to just say no ... then knuckle under ourselves?
There IS another option: Harper resigns....
There IS another option: Harper resigns....
No one should be making a deal with that pack of traitors- The BLOC" the *****s of parliament". If this coalition goes through and they oust Harper it will enrage a very large part of the populace.
Well, IF Harper gets his wish, he will be able to very democratically suspend parliamentary process (democracy, if you will)
So WHO is the threat to democracy?? Harper doesn't even want the government to do ANYTHING for a few months in the hopes that he can do WHAT exactly?
So WHO is the threat to democracy?? Harper doesn't even want the government to do ANYTHING for a few months in the hopes that he can do WHAT exactly?
And of course if things are allowed to continue as they have been and Harper gets away with his political stunts yet again, there will be a very large part of the populace who will be enraged as well.
The Division lines have already been drawn a long time ago, the question will remain if the people of Canada can continue with their tollerance as they have done so many times in the past and let the government do its thing as it democratically should, or will they get so fed up as to make the entire situation even worse or destroy the country we currently know.
There are fears of it happening no matter what decision is made, some more valid then others...... but although I am one of the first to finger point at the government's screwups, I'm going to stick it out and see what this all can do, if the Coalition does form and does work for the 18 months they project it lasting.
If it fails, I'll be one of the pissed people against it and maybe Harper was the better plan (I highly doubt it) and if Harper gets to keep getting away with this joke of a process he's creating, then I will also be pretty pissed.
The question after all of this is said, done and a decision is finally made.... is what to do next?
Attacks.... Prorogues.... Guilt trips.... How many ways are there to manipulate time to stave off a well-deserved poke in the chops? Do the honourable thing, Stevie.... RESIGN!
[LEFT said:
Hello Sir Porter.
Since you addressed this statement specifically to me I am assuming
it is primarily concerned with my initial post a t the start of this thread.
Quote Sir Porter:
Parliamentary democracy (Canada or Britain), we do NOT elect a government, we only vote for an MP in our riding.
Government is decided after the election. If a party gets a majority, then it forms the government, simple. If a party gets a minority, in Canada it usually forms a government, but it
doesn’t have that right. Opposition can topple the government any time they want.
unquote.
^I know all that Sir Porter, never said otherwise.
I would however quibble that by voting for a particular MP in a Federal general election most people are indeed trying to elect both a party and a PM, therefore we are simply discussing the road traveled.
However your last sentence is completely incorrect.
The opposition can only topple the government by voting against a confidence issue, not "any time it wants".
As an example I would suggest the coalition would seize power today if it could, it cannot and thus must wait for a confidence issue( the budget I presume) to arise.
Quote Sir Porter:
You seem to think that because Harper got a minority, he is entitled to govern for four years, no matter what policies he pursues. You evidently have a complete misunderstanding of how a Parliamentary democracy works.
Harper did not earn the right to govern for four years; he would have earned that right if he had got a majority.
Unquote.
^I never said any such thing. You state "you seem to think". Sir Porter you are not psychic, please limited yourself to what I actually say.
You follow up by criticizing my understanding of Parliamentary Democracy based on a statement derived by your psychic powers.
Completely flawed logic.
What I actually believe is that the opposition has the right to bring down the present Federal Government on any non-confidence issue of it's choosing.
And probably should.
The house has probably become so dysfunctional at this point I am not sure if an effective Governance can be achieved.
I just don't happen believe an opposition coalition should be allowed to govern without a mandate.
Quote: Sir Porter
And contrary to what you may think, a coalition government is fully as democratic as a minority government. If the coalition is successful in defeating Harper, they have every right to try to form a government. It is democracy at work
Unquote.
Sir Porter what I actually think is unknown until I state it.
I have some understanding of how a modified Westminster system of governance
applies to Canadian politics.
I had the courtesy to assume the same of you.
I suspect that you and I could debate political systems into a coma inducing thicket.
I started this thread to incite debate.
Simple as that.
I previously stated that the coalition could form an new government.
I previously stated that that new government would be both legal and constitutional.
And it would be.
I also stated that I feel that forming a government without a mandate from the people and intentionally avoiding a general election for the life of said government is by definition undemocratic.
I do not define what is or is not a democratic system of government.
I simply use the definition as made by others to support my contention.
I do not feel that by proposing this issue I am lying or being dishonest in any way, after all it is only my opinion.
Here is another contention, slightly off topic but who cares.
Lets assume Harper thinks the GG Jean Michell is going to allow the coalition to seize control of the Federal Government.
It is indeed quite possible.
Harper can fly to theUK and insist on seeing the Queen.
He can state the government of the day has lost confidence in the GG.
He can then ask the Queen to remove her.
Its legal and its constitutional.
The Queen, unwilling to become embroiled in a swamp of Canadian politics could agree.
Harper then recommends to the Queen a new obedient GG.
Boom; no ruling coalition seizes power and its off to the polls we go.
Unethical,yes. Immoral, probably. Undemocratic, maybe.
Legal and constitutionally it's probably OK.
Trex