myata

GG had the right to make this call in the interests of the country. As the last straw for the current PM to hang on to. I think, overall, it's the right decision, on her part. Not sure how much it'll buy for Mr Harper, in my eyes he's completely discredited himself with his partisan atticks and invented crises. But, if he wishes so, so be it: was right for the GG to have his last wish granted. I'm not so sure he can count on her being as forthcoming with his requests if he tries to bypass the will of the elected House again.

He wouldn't even come close to admitting any responsibility for the crisis he has created out of nothing. Thin air plus buring unsatiable "kill 'em" instinct. I don't know what's left for him now. Is there anybody, other than his staunch partisans, who'd believe anything he has to say? Anybody who'd want to work with him in good will?

That was then. When he promised non-partisan cooperation with all parties for the benefit of the country. And this is now. After he's shown that he's either pathologically incapable of understanding and cooperation, or never intended it in the first place. Which comes to the same conclusion: he has to go, and fast. And most certainly after the mess he's created out of nothing, entirely out of his uncurable spite and inability to work with others, I'd highly doubt he'd even get a shot at another election. I never make predictions though, political ones in particular.

The one really honourable out of this mess would be for Harper to step down. It's his blatant and thoughtless parstisanship that has started the whole mess. His belligirency and pathological inability to admit faults and cooperate with others, rather than press and shove his will on them, that is threatening to escalate this affair into a national and unity crisis. Even now he's asking Governor General to suspend the Parliament that Canadians have elected. Even in his own address he's failed to say openly and clearly what he was going to do. There's nothing good left that this man can do for the country. He cannot be trusted on one word he says. He has to go.

Back to the issue, though: who's really sold out to separatists or souveraignists? Please feel free to stay on topic.

According to CBC, in 1996 somebody named Stephen Harper, was publicly musing how a coalition with Quebec's souvereignists (feel the difference?!) could bring conservatives back into the government. And, according to Mr Duceppe, in 2000, CRAP (remember?) lead by then Conservative leader, now minister Stockwell Day, invited Bloque souveraignists to share in a coalition with a formal letter. And of course, that 2004 letter from the same Mr Harper, now the leader of official oppostion, inviting Governor General to not call the election, but consider "other options" instead. What a record! And now, of course, the same individuals are running low on saliva blaming everybody else of an unholy allegiance with the Separatists from Hell. Is it us? Or them? How long should they be allowed to pollute the epherial atmosphere with their blatant, shameless insinuations, hypocritical nonsense, and plain lies?

Can be said any better: CBC: Schreyer Understand that, respect yourself and your countrymen and stop that brainless howling and wailing. Harper brought it upon himself without any cause or reason, and he has only himself to blame.

Ed Broadbent on Harper's turning on his propaganda machine: CBC: Broadbent on Harper and coalition

By far it won't. It is the normal democratic process: a politician who does not have the confidence of the Parliament has to go. It's the Conservatives themselves who are trying to create an existential crisis out of the fact that their leader is simply not up to the level of responsibility and political skill required by the situation. Only shows their real prize in this game, stick to power at all cost and no matter what, no, definitely not the benefit and well being of Canada.

Popular or not - what would be a "good idea" though, with the guy who just can't seem to understand (pathologically?) the notions of cooperation and non partisan leadership? Let him get his way, with bullying and pusing around, as we have seen on a gazzilion and one occasion over the last years, as if he's a crowned king or like? The trick with the coalition will only work once. If Harper sees that it's an empty threat, he'll be back to his usual routine, pushing, pressing and shoving in no time at all. For better, or worse, the truth is simple: the folks cannot govern in a responsible manner, putting the interests of the country before their own, so they cannot govern. We have to live with the best of what we have left. As heard on some political panel: no one party has won this election; all are in minority. To achieve anything, governing party has to cooperate with at least one opposition party. Harper has shown that he cannot cooperate. He can't have anything done in this House. He's out. Next.

Here's a link to the text of the letter to then GG Adrienne Clarkson: Steele's blog on Globe&Mail. The source is a blog, but given information in it, it shouldn't be too hard to find a more formal reference. Boag on CBC TV quoted similar text.

I'd call it a statement of the fact (indeed, trivial and obvious), but regardless of terminology, I'm glad that you're finally getting the idea. I hope the others will follow.

Yes and I heard it too, from Keith Boag on CBC TV. Shouldn't be too hard to unearth the exact quote. Wonder if they were using the same terminology back then ("coup")?? Or came up with something more pleasant to the ear?

Must be a very different view of "reason" on that right wing conservative side. The simple truth is, again: 1. CPC won a minority mandate. 2. With a minority mandate, CPC has to governm with the confidence of the House. 3. Economic difficulties only emphasized the need for non-partisan, inclusive leadership to provide good governance in the interests of the entire country. 4. But, apparently short of understanding that (i.e.#3), - or why else?? I'm puzzled as can be - Harper continued to play his little macheavellian tricks aimed to diminish and put down the opposition. 5. Which lost him the confidence of the House, without which he cannot govern (see #1 and #2). Ergo: if Harpers party cannot governm as required by the situation and their mandate, somebody else has to do it. What's really funny about this is that by Harper's own, and nobody else's brilliant (from some point of view at least) design, Dion may get to avoid two unpleasant entries in the history books, one as the only Liberal leader to not become a PM, and the other, as the shortest serving PM (if the deal goes through, he'll get to serve till May, when the a new leader will be chosen).

My, but of course, it's fully in the right of everybody's to get rid of their money in whatever way they find appropriate. Giving them to lawyers should be no exception. Good luck! On the serious note, it was real fun listening to over-p...-off conservatives on Ottawa's CFRA this morning. Can't begin to describe how good it was! All 15 or so talking points, in one shot. Unmatched amounts of wailing and howling. Wonder if it had producesed as much excitement, if Harper did it, as he suggested, with the old Liberal minority government?

Indeed, providence works in mysterious ways! Who could have guessed that to get virtually unelectable Mr Dion in the PM chair, Harper himself, who cherishes power above all else, would have to bring it to him on a golden plate, all out of a minor spite, and pathological inability to stop the kicking reflex and get down to business?

Well, no, it's actually quite fair. CPC won most votes, and they got the first call to govern. The problem is that they just aren't interested in a serious, non partisan government in cooperation and with support of opposition, that the country needs at this time. So, unfortunate as it is, the choice is now between spending another $300 million on another elections (the question still hangs whether we really needed the first one?), or, letting the next guys in the line to try their hand. By all common sense, the answer should be clear: the Tories cannot govern in the manner that is called for by the situation, and their mandate, and the election is out of question. Coalition is the only rational exit from this situation, brought about not by necessity or some natural or social development, but purely by pointless brinkmanship of that bunch around Harper, who would never miss a chance to kick their opponent, even when it wouldn't necessarily bring them much good.

Coalition is pressing the economy agenda: CTV: coalition platform

Well, how's clinging to the power at all cost going to gain this government greater confidence with the Parliament? That is the condition, yes, very reasonable and democratic, of the minority government, and Harper has spent that confidence dry with his nastiness and partisan gimmicks. Prolonging his hold onto the power for a few more weeks would, if anything, be very revealing indeed. He'll be telling everybody open text that power is the one and only thing he's there for, not the well being of the country that requires mature, balanced and non-partisan act in this challenging time. And the attack ads would only strengthen already pretty clear picture about their nastiness and partisanship. No, these folks are just not up to the task, they simply aren't getting it.

What's this conservative dumbtalk about "undemocratic" nature of coalitions? Or is it because this time (unlike when they were in opposition), it doesn't suit them? People elected these parties with their standings (the only thing I'd wish for is for the standing to reflect popular vote more realistically), and the parties can take it from there and form any coalitions or allegiances they find appropriate in the current political situation. If people don't like the governance of the coalition, they'll vote it out in the next election. If Harper's folks don't understand that, they're in a poor position to educate us about democracy - giving them the benefit of a doubt that they actually think that and aren't holding us for dumb ass with their talking points.

I agree with that. The meaning of a minority government is that it has to govern while keeping confidence of the opposition. That was the mandate Canadians gave to Harper's party and he has lost it, the confidence, and the mandate, when he decided to play his little nasty games instead of heading a non partisan unified act to address the issues in the economy. Harper lost confidence of the parliment and by extension, of Canada. He has to go. Let people who actually want to govern, rather than kick and humiliate their political opponents, have a go. Canadians will have a say in the next election.

What's that billion dollar government computer security affair that is not working? Hasn't been in the news as much as it should have... In money terms outdoes AdScam by far; or long gun registry; except without any visible result, or meaningful justification anywhere in sight.

Oh yes, and how could I forget to mention that almost genuine indignation with which Mr Harper addressed the "unelected" nature of proposed coalition. I almost believed him ... till somebody on the yesterday's CBC TV polictical comment reminded us, that there's been that one other politician, who, in the times of old Paul Martin's Liberal government, has advised Governor General to "consider other options" rather than call the election requested by Liberals. You'll never guess who it was. Try, though. Maybe this could provide some valuable hints: Mr X and Fixed Election Dates; Mr X and Kyoto Accord

What a pathetic load of bull from Harper's hasty media appearance yesterday: "While we were busy... the opposition came behind our backs.." Busy with what, exactly?? Designing little nasty pinches? Forgetting to come up with an integrated non-partisan strategy to deal with the crisis? "HE (they) made me do it, daddy! Wooooo" Oh cr... The folks simply aren't interested in governing the country for its best interest. Their game is the power and that's all they care for. The strategy was intended to kick the opposition and maybe score a few points for the prospective... yes, majority election. They already shown that they'll call one with no hesiation, crisis, law or whatever. It's just the nature of things. But it looks like little trick backfired. I hope the opposition will have the nerve to kick the playful bunch out, and get down to business addressing real problems. We have 7 days to see.

No, backtracking. Already: CTV: party funding. Economy or not, there's always time for our little games.