'Twas the Day After Christmas

[no1important]

RE: 'Twas the Day After C

They haven't held one since they lost the no confidence vote last summer.

What are you talking about? The libs never lost a non confident vote last summer.

Link NDP Leader Jack Layton says his party will introduce a motion on November 24 that demands the Liberals hold a February election.

"We will call for an election to be called in early January for a voting day in mid-February," Layton told a news conference in Vancouver Wednesday.

He is not bringing down government like what happened with Clark he wants a Feb election. If he were to bring down government Nov 24 an election would have to be held long before mid feb.

 

[Jay]

My fault. It wasn't an official no confidence vote, where the government had to call an election.

 

[no1important]

RE: 'Twas the Day After C

No problem

 

[Jay]

Re: RE: 'Twas the Day After C

He is not bringing down government like what happened with Clark he wants a Feb election. If he were to bring down government Nov 24 an election would have to be held long before mid feb.

Jack just doesn't want to vote with the Conservatives at the moment. It isn't good NDP press. He also doesn't want to be responsible for a Christmas election. He is doing what he can to control the situation. It might work out for him.

 

[Jay]

http://www.cbc.ca/story/canada/national/2005/11/10/layton-election051110.html

NDP election plan 'clucks like a chicken': analyst


NDP Leader Jack Layton's plan to introduce a motion that asks the Liberal government to resign in early January and call a February election won't have the force to make that happen, according to a political scientist.

"It looks like a duck, it quacks like a duck, but it clucks like a chicken," Ned Franks told CBC News. "He's avoiding pulling the trigger of saying it's a non-confidence vote but he's trying to make it as close to one as he can."


Jack Layton announces a plan to bring down the Liberal government on Nov. 24.

Franks, a professor emeritus at Queen's University in Kingston, Ont., said Paul Martin's government does not have to be bound by the House of Commons motion even if all three opposition parties support it.

That's because a call for an election at a future date is not a clear expression of no confidence in the government.

Martin's government has 133 seats in the 308-seat House of Commons, so it is vulnerable to a combined push by the other three parties to make the government fall. They have a total of 170 seats. Four seats are held by Independent MPs and one is vacant.

Holiday election to be averted

Like Conservative Leader Stephen Harper, Layton does not want to be blamed by voters for launching an election campaign one month before Christmas.

So on Wednesday, Layton told reporters that he will introduce a motion calling for a February election.


FROM NOV. 9, 2005: Layton calls for February election

"This avoids the holiday election that nobody wants," the NDP leader said at a news conference in Vancouver.

"I think it's an innovative proposal. It's trying to address things that concern us all," Harper said in response.

Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles Duceppe called the proposal "an important step forward."

The three opposition party leaders intend to meet Monday to discuss strategy.


Stephen Harper
Nov. 24 is earliest day for NDP motion

The NDP cannot introduce the kind of motion Layton is proposing until Nov. 24.

The earliest date the Conservatives can introduce a non-confidence motion is Nov. 15, a designated opposition day for the party.

Even if the prime minister respects the spirit of the NDP motion, as the opposition would press him to do, the election date would at most be moved up by only a couple of months.

Martin has promised an election will be called within 30 days after the release of Justice John Gomery's final report on the sponsorship scandal. That report is due Feb. 1.

 

[Colpy]

I don't know about anyone else, but I'm dying for a Christmas election.

I've been teased since last spring. It is driving me NUTS!!!

For God's sake SOMEONE.....move a vote of non-confidence, throw this corrupt scum out.

As an aside....for those who say the Conservatives are as bad as the Liberals. I have a theory.

The Liberals win consistently. I mean they are known as the Natural Governing Party.

If you are a crook, if you are out to line your own pockets, if you want POWER, what party do you join? Who do you run for?

The Liberals, of course.

The Conservatives have their crooked scum bags as well, but most of the worst of them wind up crossing the floor to serve as Liberals. Get my point?

Sooooo......elect the Conservatives, and you will get a more honest government than the Liberal government, because people join the opposition on PRINCIPLE. Something the Liberals have never heard of.

In 8 or 10 years the Conservatives will have degraded to Liberal levels, and then we should throw them out for whomever.

That's how a democracy is supposed to work. One party domination is NOT good. Another Liberal government will simply encourage the crooks.

As for the NDP, I believe they are probably the most principled party in the House. Yes, despite Jack whoring himself out in the halls of Parliament, NOBODY joins the NDP expecting to gain power and influence.

The problem is that the NDP as a government would be a well-meaning DISASTER.

 

[MMMike]

If you are a crook, if you are out to line your own pockets, if you want POWER, what party do you join? Who do you run for?

The Liberals, of course.

The Conservatives have their crooked scum bags as well, but most of the worst of them wind up crossing the floor to serve as Liberals. Get my point?

Sooooo......elect the Conservatives, and you will get a more honest government than the Liberal government, because people join the opposition on PRINCIPLE. Something the Liberals have never heard of.

I think people are drawn to politics (any party) to make a positive difference, not to line their own pockets. It is the power that corrupts, given enough time. And the Liberals have been given more than enough time. They are soaked with their own self-righteousness, infused with a sense of entitlement, and generally feel invincible because the people keep voting them back. They need to sit on the back benches for a while, and purge their party of the old guard.

Any party with so much power for so long would become corrupt, despite all good intentions - even the NDP!

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: 'Twas the Day After C

The Liberals are going to win another minority anyway, Colpy and Jay. Look at the polls, especially in Ontario.

Layton's proposal is a good one. It addresses the concerns of all involved.

No matter when the next election falls, I want a promise grom you two. When the Liberals win another minority, you'll shut the hell up about trying to force another election immediately and talk about real issues. Not gun control, which isn't going away. Not abortion, which is here for good. Not SSM, which never had an effect on you any.

If you want to talk about corruption, then talk about ways of solving the problem instead of scandal mongering and screaming about how corrupt the Liberals are when all evidence is that the Conservatives are just as bad.

Quit whinging about about how the Liberals cut the military...their plan for rebuilding it is at least as strong as the Conservatives, though not nearly as good as the NDP's.

In other words, after the next election get your Conservative masters (or maybe I mean monsters) to STFU and do their damned jobs for a change.

 

[Colpy]

The only poll that counts is taken on election day.

Layton's proposal is brain dead.

I've NEVER written about abortion on this forum, nor to I plan to at this time.

The first step (and only the first step) in ending patronage, corruption, and cronyism in Canada is to throw the Liberals out. I won't shut up until that happens.

What evidence the Conservatives are corrupt?

The FIRST major money for the military under the Liberals will come in 2008. Yep, they're serious about re-building.

The NDP want to build a unisex, conciousness-raised, politically correct, kinder and gentler strike force for the United Nations. The only thing that will save the poor misguided saps that joined the military under the NDP is that an NDP gov't wouldn't commit them without permission from that group of arseholes in New York, and the U.N is so useless it can't do anything.

The Conservatives ' job is to rid us of the Liberals.

 

[#juan]

I thought the Gomery inquiry was to find out if Martin was guilty. Last I heard was that Gomery found martin not guilty or whatever.

Chretien is not my favorite politician but under Chretien, the Liberals have made Canada economically, in better shape than any of the G-7 countries. My point is, that they must have done something right. Martin was the finance minister under Chretien and presumably had something to do with cleaning up the mess the conservatives left. I know that I would not vote for harper under any circustance I can think of. I think the NDP have a decade or two of hard work to get themselves in a position to be a contender to win.

 

[Ten Packs]

Poor Ontario - "Oh, the Humanity of it all..."

Waaaa!

 

[Reverend Blair]

Layton's proposal is brain dead.

Gee, that puts you in the same boat as Paul Martin and Tony Volare.

I've NEVER written about abortion on this forum, nor to I plan to at this time.

Other Conservatives have...extensively. It is part of the undeniable subtext of a Harper government. He would allow, then support, a private members bill to ban abortion.

The first step (and only the first step) in ending patronage, corruption, and cronyism in Canada is to throw the Liberals out. I won't shut up until that happens.

I think Canadians have changed the station, Colpy. They got tired of the song with one note.

What evidence the Conservatives are corrupt?

Plenty of examples have been given on this board, Colpy. Go read.

The NDP want to build a unisex, conciousness-raised, politically correct, kinder and gentler strike force for the United Nations.

You mean as opposed to Harpers plan of building a fascism enforcement force to help the Americans commit war crimes?

Your statements about the UN shows a certain ignorance of international politics and the structure and reason for the UN. Such a lack of knowledge surprises me in a political scientist.

I thought the Gomery inquiry was to find out if Martin was guilty. Last I heard was that Gomery found martin not guilty or whatever.

The word used was "exonerated". The question becomes whether Canadians have confidence in Martin to govern until the final report is out. That can be argued either way, depending who you talk to. I don't think it matters as long as the Conservatives and the BQ find some real issues to bring up in the H of C after the next election instead of their constant scandal mongering.

 

[Jay]

Re: RE: 'Twas the Day After C

The Liberals are going to win another minority anyway, Colpy and Jay. Look at the polls, especially in Ontario.

That is no reason to not have an election now. I want a government that has a mandate to govern. It is time, and now that Jack has no use for the Liberals the game has come to an end.

Layton's proposal is a good one. It addresses the concerns of all involved.

Jack's proposal is good for Jack, not everyone. He wants to control the situation and doesn't want to seem like he is cooperating with the conservatives.

No matter when the next election falls, I want a promise grom you two. When the Liberals win another minority, you'll shut the hell up about trying to force another election immediately and talk about real issues. Not gun control, which isn't going away. Not abortion, which is here for good. Not SSM, which never had an effect on you any.

If you want to talk about corruption, then talk about ways of solving the problem instead of scandal mongering and screaming about how corrupt the Liberals are when all evidence is that the Conservatives are just as bad.

Quit whinging about about how the Liberals cut the military...their plan for rebuilding it is at least as strong as the Conservatives, though not nearly as good as the NDP's.

In other words, after the next election get your Conservative masters (or maybe I mean monsters) to STFU and do their damned jobs for a change.

And if the Conservatives did win a minority government the Liberals and NDP are going to STFU and "make parliament work"? Perhaps when hell freezes over, and with global warming the way it is, this is very unlikely to happen.

We don't have to put up with a this corrupt government even if the left wants us to and is willing to turn a blind eye to it so they can soak this government for what they want, for their benefit. The fact Jack has propped up this corrupt government says to me, he is corrupt himself, so that makes it a nice level playing field...they are all corrupt, and it is time to get a different flavour of corruptness (or try).

Many want an election now and many don’t care who wins the stupid thing, what matters is that government will have a mandate to govern and it won’t be a Liberal/NDP mandate of damage control. I will get up Christmas morning and go and vote. It is my civic responsibility.

 

[Reverend Blair]

That is no reason to not have an election now. I want a government that has a mandate to govern. It is time, and now that Jack has no use for the Liberals the game has come to an end.

As long as they are working on things that they promised last election, they arguably have a mandate.

Jack's proposal is good for Jack, not everyone. He wants to control the situation and doesn't want to seem like he is cooperating with the conservatives.

Funny, both Harper and Duceppe liked it yesterday.

And if the Conservatives did win a minority government the Liberals and NDP are going to STFU and "make parliament work"?

The NDP record has been one of dealing with the issues, not scandal mongering. I don't expect them to STFU, I expect everybody to do their jobs, which does not include personal attacks and character assassination for cheap political points when there are real issues to discuss.

We don't have to put up with a this corrupt government even if the left wants us to and is willing to turn a blind eye to it so they can soak this government for what they want, for their benefit.

An unresonable characterisation. The NDP have worked with the Liberals, just as they worked with the Conservatives, to put forth policy that Canadians support. I know the budget thing really pissed off Conservatives, but the majority of Canadians liked it.

The fact Jack has propped up this corrupt government says to me, he is corrupt himself, so that makes it a nice level playing field...they are all corrupt, and it is time to get a different flavour of corruptness (or try).

That's a load of horse shit, Jay. Layton did his dealing in public and kept his word while your boys were dealing in backrooms and flip-flopping like a trout in a net.

I will get up Christmas morning and go and vote. It is my civic responsibility.

You should really check with Elections Canada...there won't be a vote xmas morning no matter what. We vote on Mondays in this country unless there's a stat holiday, in which case we vote on Tuesday. The earliest there would be an election is the 27th because xmas falls on a Sunday, making Monday the stat holiday.

 

[Jay]

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNe...jack_election_051110/20051110?hub=CTVNewsAt11


"Martin said his government had an ambitious agenda involving aboriginal issues, the environment and cutting down on wait times for medical procedures. He said he wanted to see that completed before asking voters to cast judgment."


Because the Liberals haven't been in power for 40 billion years....give it up big guy.

 

[no1important]

RE: 'Twas the Day After C

And if the Conservatives did win a minority government the Liberals and NDP are going to STFU and "make parliament work"?

Seriously though if this were to happen it Harper would be lucky to last as long as Joe Clark.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: 'Twas the Day After C

Yup. The first moeny bill they tried to pass, they'd be gone. Or maybe the NDP, BQ and Liberals would wait for them to try to sneak anti-abortion and anti-gay legislation in, then crush them on an opposition day.

 

[Colpy]

Come on, Rev, get serious.

The Conservatives would not touch the abortion issue with a 110 foot pole.

I would not call a move to return marriage to the traditional definition as "anti-gay". Civil union is basically the same thing. The argument is mostly semantics.

I was not happy with SSM legislation, but I would let that sleeping dog lie, right beside that other vicious monster of an issue, abortion.

 

[Reverend Blair]

RE: 'Twas the Day After C

The Conservative motion at their convention was carefully worded to make it clear that a private member's bill would have the tacit support of the party. This is further supported by things that Conservatives have said since that vote, and their appearance at anti-choice rallies. Those rallies included one on Parliament Hill that Stephen Harper attended when he was supposed to be working.

The anti-SSM movement is anti-gay. Civil unions, according to the Supreme Court, are not enough to grant same sex couples equal rights. The bigotry against gays and lesbians in the Conservative Party is palpable. The support they receive from fundamentalist Christian groups including from the US further robs the Harperites of any credibility on the issue.