Arrogant Liberal Senators

[August1991]

Manitoba Senator Sharon Carstairs told Mike Duffy Live that the Tory government is trying to bully the Senate.

"Unfortunately, for Mr. Harper, senators can't be bullied," she said.

"We want to hear from the public ... particularly on two issues. I am very concerned about the impact of this (bill) on Aboriginal people. Reverse onus bail conditions, for example."

Reverse onus would require people accused of violent crimes to state why they should receive bail, rather than put the onus on prosecutors to prove why the accused should be kept in jail.

"We do have Charter rights and one of them is to be silent, but you can't be silent if you have to, in fact, prove reverse onus," said Carstairs.

She noted that aboriginal people are already disproportionately jailed and the reverse onus requirement may add to their incarceration numbers.

Carstairs said she also wants to hear from social workers about what effect raising the sexual age of consent from 16 to 14 would have on young people living on the streets. She said she is concerned that young prostitutes may be driven underground if the age of consent is raised and that would leave them more vulnerable to exploitation. It could also keep them away from social workers who could help them escape their plight.

CTV

Bully the Senate? The Liberal Senators are the unelected, arrogant, self-satisfied, stuffed shirt bullies in this piece.

----

I happen to think that Afghanistan confidence motion was designed to push NATO members into action and to create divisions among Liberals. It was not designed to defeat the government.

This crime confidence motion is designed precisely to provoke an election. (Even Warren Kinsella understands that if we go into an election on this issue, the Liberals lose.) I have a suspicion that Dion doesn't have control of the Liberal Senate caucus and they may actually provoke an election. After all, the Liberal senators have guaranteed seats in parliament. They don't care about elections.

Last point, designing a confidence motion on the crime bill is not easy. It requires careful understanding of parliamentary procedure. I'm sure Harper has set this up in a way that Dion and the Liberals will look, once again, like Wil E. Coyote.

[Hydraboss]

Wil E. had a better command of the English language.

If the motion passes - Harper wins.

If the motion is defeated and triggers an election - Harper wins.

If the motion is passed and the Senate refuses to comply - Harper wins.

I really wonder why Harper would push this. Weird.

[jdobbin]

Bully the Senate? The Liberal Senators are the unelected, arrogant, self-satisfied, stuffed shirt bullies in this piece.

Last point, designing a confidence motion on the crime bill is not easy. It requires careful understanding of parliamentary procedure. I'm sure Harper has set this up in a way that Dion and the Liberals will look, once again, like Wil E. Coyote.

The Senate can draw this out if they want. They don't even need to set a vote on it. As they said on Politics Today, the government is trying to engineer its defeat before the budget. How transparent.

[jdobbin]

Wil E. had a better command of the English language.

If the motion passes - Harper wins.

If the motion is defeated and triggers an election - Harper wins.

If the motion is passed and the Senate refuses to comply - Harper wins.

I really wonder why Harper would push this. Weird.

If the motion is delayed: Dion wins.

[Hydraboss]

The only thing Dion can do to delay is command his troops not to show up for the confidence motion. This would probably be the best outcome Harper could hope for. Picture Steve going to the polls with yet another "The Liberals under Dion hold the parlimentary process is such disdain that they continually refrained from even showing up to do their elected duties."

Dion already has raised the ire of a lot of voters by pulling this stunt in the past. How else will he delay the motion?

Ever play chess? Dion has four pawns left to stand against Harper's queen, two knights and two rooks. It's not checkmate, but the game is over.

[capricorn]

I really wonder why Harper would push this. Weird.

If you mean engineering an election, IMO an election is exactly what Harper wants at this time.

When Harper first tied the aid package to the budget, I had a feeling he would change his mind and bring in a special vote to have it passed ASAP. The crime bill is the perfect vehicle for Conservative going into a campaign, with tons of ammunition against the Liberals and the Liberal dominated Senate. The Liberals are divided on the Afghanistan mission and there is no indication these divisions will be resolved in the short term. So this results in positive outcomes for Harper:

- Harper looks good for showing compassion for workers thrown out of work and heeding the opposition's demands to enact the aid package

- Canadians want a government tough on crime

- the Liberals will have difficulty using Afghanistan against the government because of their wishy-washy position on the mission.

I think this Parliament is stale and is past its best before date. It's time to seek a mandate from the people. In spite of the polls showing the two main parties tied in popularity, on election day Canadians will pick the leader they feel is best suited to lead the country. Clearly, Canadians prefer Harper as leader. Too many Canadians simply don't see Dion as a leader and don't want him as their Prime Minister.

The Liberals need to dump Dion and install a leader that inspires confidence. By keeping this Parliament alive they are wasting valuable time achieving this goal.

[jdobbin]

The only thing Dion can do to delay is command his troops not to show up for the confidence motion. This would probably be the best outcome Harper could hope for. Picture Steve going to the polls with yet another "The Liberals under Dion hold the parlimentary process is such disdain that they continually refrained from even showing up to do their elected duties."

Dion already has raised the ire of a lot of voters by pulling this stunt in the past. How else will he delay the motion?

Ever play chess? Dion has four pawns left to stand against Harper's queen, two knights and two rooks. It's not checkmate, but the game is over.

There is no confidence motion in the Senate if they delay the bill. They've done it before. They can do it again. Don Newman was trying to find out from Peter Van Loan if the government was going to set a deadline of the end of February. He wouldn't say. However, one thing is clear, the Senate can delay the bill for as long as it takes to debate it and analyze it. The government would not fall on a matter of confidence. The government would have to choose to go to the polls in violation of their promises to wait till 2009.

Victory for the Liberals.

[August1991]

If the motion is delayed: Dion wins.

How does that happen?

This is an odd confidence motion because it appears to be the House asking the Senate to expedite a bill. House procedures are obtuse and Dion better have some good advice about how to proceed.

----

I loved Carstairs desire to consult social workers about juvenile prostitution and the age of consent change. Only an arrogant, out-of-touch Liberal senator could go on national media and concoct such a statement. Let the Liberals have the social worker vote and Harper can have all the others.

[jdobbin]

I think this Parliament is stale and is past its best before date. It's time to seek a mandate from the people. In spite of the polls showing the two main parties tied in popularity, on election day Canadians will pick the leader they feel is best suited to lead the country. Clearly, Canadians prefer Harper as leader. Too many Canadians simply don't see Dion as a leader and don't want him as their Prime Minister.

The Liberals need to dump Dion and install a leader that inspires confidence. By keeping this Parliament alive they are wasting valuable time achieving this goal.

I keep hearing from Tories that a big majority win is on the way. Well, I've seen no evidence of it.

If Harper wins another minority, it will be his own leadership that comes into question. He can't seem to get them to a majority. Worse, the Liberals show no sign of disappearing.

[jdobbin]

How does that happen?

This is an odd confidence motion because it appears to be the House asking the Senate to expedite a bill. House procedures are obtuse and Dion better have some good advice about how to proceed.

----

I loved Carstairs desire to consult social workers about juvenile prostitution and the age of consent change. Only an arrogant, out-of-touch Liberal senator could go on national media and concoct such a statement. Let the Liberals have the social worker vote and Harper can have all the others.

The Senate doesn't have to pass a bill quickly just because the House of Commons requests it. They can delay it just as they have in the past. It will be up to Harper to pull the trigger.

All this bluster coming from the Tory side pushing for an election is just that. They may want to have an election now but it won't happen on the crime bill until long after the budget.

[Hydraboss]

There is no confidence motion in the Senate if they delay the bill. They've done it before. They can do it again. Don Newman was trying to find out from Peter Van Loan if the government was going to set a deadline of the end of February. He wouldn't say. However, one thing is clear, the Senate can delay the bill for as long as it takes to debate it and analyze it. The government would not fall on a matter of confidence. The government would have to choose to go to the polls in violation of their promises to wait till 2009.

Victory for the Liberals.

First, my mistake. I thought you were referring to the Liberals delaying the confidence vote in the HOC.

Second, the Tories set the date that the Senate must pass the bill to March 1, 2008.

Third, it will be interesting to see what would happen when the confidence vote passes and the Senate is instructed to pass the bill. If they don't, what will the HOC do, yell at them louder?

If the Liberal Senate refuses to pass the bill by the March 1 deadline, Harper has even more ammo to take to the electorate, "Those damn Liberals and their Senate refused to pass a bill that protects children from pedophiles. They also have no respect for the House of Commons and the laws that were democratically voted upon by officials elected by the people of Canada."

Harper wins. Dion loses.

[capricorn]

I keep hearing from Tories that a big majority win is on the way. Well, I've seen no evidence of it.

I did not speak of a "big majority" in my post to which you are responding. Is there a reason you raised that?

If Harper wins another minority, it will be his own leadership that comes into question.

It's healthy for a political party to keep the leadership question in mind at all times not just during elections.

the Liberals show no sign of disappearing.

I'm not wishing for the Liberals to self destruct. The reason being I prefer the Liberals in opposition over the NDP or the Bloc.

[jdobbin]

First, my mistake. I thought you were referring to the Liberals delaying the confidence vote in the HOC.

Second, the Tories set the date that the Senate must pass the bill to March 1, 2008.

Third, it will be interesting to see what would happen when the confidence vote passes and the Senate is instructed to pass the bill. If they don't, what will the HOC do, yell at them louder?

If the Liberal Senate refuses to pass the bill by the March 1 deadline, Harper has even more ammo to take to the electorate, "Those damn Liberals and their Senate refused to pass a bill that protects children from pedophiles. They also have no respect for the House of Commons and the laws that were democratically voted upon by officials elected by the people of Canada."

Harper wins. Dion loses.

Actually, the Senate doesn't have to pass the bill by March 1st. If the Tories approach the the Governor-General, it is on their own hook. Confidence motions do no apply to the time it takes to have a bill run its course in the Senate.

Harper can choose to go the Governor-General and say that his government has hit an impasse but he cannot say that he was defeated in a confidence vote.

Harper loses by violating a promise not to call an election before 2009.

Edited February 8, 2008 by jdobbin

[jdobbin]

I did not speak of a "big majority" in my post to which you are responding. Is there a reason you raised that?

It's healthy for a political party to keep the leadership question in mind at all times not just during elections.

I'm not wishing for the Liberals to self destruct. The reason being I prefer the Liberals in opposition over the NDP or the Bloc.

You didn't mention it. It has been mentioned by a few here though even this week.

I see a repeat of a Tory minority. Think that is what Harper has in mind to break the logjam in Parliament?

[Keepitsimple]

The Senate represents the Liberals Old Guard - patronage appointments from the Chretien/Trudeau years. They are not Dion supporters. They have a vested interest to create a situation that leads to an election - if only to get Dion outta there - to be replaced by a more "traditional" Liberal leader - in other words - someone to get them back in power. This is doubly important to Liberal Senators because the Conservatives want to reform the senate and the NDP want to eliminate it. Their cushy jobs are only safe with Liberals in power.

[Hydraboss]

If you mean engineering an election, IMO an election is exactly what Harper wants at this time.

When Harper first tied the aid package to the budget, I had a feeling he would change his mind and bring in a special vote to have it passed ASAP. The crime bill is the perfect vehicle for Conservative going into a campaign, with tons of ammunition against the Liberals and the Liberal dominated Senate. The Liberals are divided on the Afghanistan mission and there is no indication these divisions will be resolved in the short term. So this results in positive outcomes for Harper:

- Harper looks good for showing compassion for workers thrown out of work and heeding the opposition's demands to enact the aid package

- Canadians want a government tough on crime

- the Liberals will have difficulty using Afghanistan against the government because of their wishy-washy position on the mission.

I think this Parliament is stale and is past its best before date. It's time to seek a mandate from the people. In spite of the polls showing the two main parties tied in popularity, on election day Canadians will pick the leader they feel is best suited to lead the country. Clearly, Canadians prefer Harper as leader. Too many Canadians simply don't see Dion as a leader and don't want him as their Prime Minister.

The Liberals need to dump Dion and install a leader that inspires confidence. By keeping this Parliament alive they are wasting valuable time achieving this goal.

Sorry, Cap, but I was being sarcastic.

Should have ended that with "/sarcasm".

[capricorn]

Sorry, Cap, but I was being sarcastic.

Should have ended that with "/sarcasm".

No prob Hydra. Sarcasm or not, your comment which I quoted provided me a lead-in as to my thoughts on why the crime legislation held up in the Liberal Senate for no good reason is the best possible scenario in which Harper could trigger an election. I would rather the government fall on law and order issues than the budget (which won't contain tax cuts) or Afghanistan (which is still an emotional issue for Canadians).

[noahbody]

At least the liberals are consistent. They accomplish little in government; little in the senate. On this issue, the only loser is Canada.

[margrace]

The bottom line on this is that Harper uses black mail to get is non Canadian type government.

[scribblet]

First, my mistake. I thought you were referring to the Liberals delaying the confidence vote in the HOC.

Second, the Tories set the date that the Senate must pass the bill to March 1, 2008.

Third, it will be interesting to see what would happen when the confidence vote passes and the Senate is instructed to pass the bill. If they don't, what will the HOC do, yell at them louder?

If the Liberal Senate refuses to pass the bill by the March 1 deadline, Harper has even more ammo to take to the electorate, "Those damn Liberals and their Senate refused to pass a bill that protects children from pedophiles. They also have no respect for the House of Commons and the laws that were democratically voted upon by officials elected by the people of Canada."

Harper wins. Dion loses.

Harper will have a lot of ammunition against Dion, when you add his refusal to recognize freedom of speech ( K. Martin ) the optics are not good for Dion, now there is this to add fuel to the Liberal fires. They shouldn't be engineering an election with all their problems. (well from their point of view LOL )

Go Harper !!

http://thechronicleherald.ca/NovaScotia/1036743.html

MP to Dion: Change war policy

Thibault wants parties to agree on length of Afghan mission

OTTAWA — Robert Thibault is among a small group of MPs pushing Liberal Leader Stephane Dion behind closed doors to take a more hawkish position on Afghanistan, sources say.

[Topaz]

I'm ready for an election anytime! How can anyone vote for Harper when he's broken so many promises and some of those promises have hurt Canadians. His own accountabilty act still hasn't be completely passed, why because they are using unregistered lobbyists? His Finance Minister paid a friend 120,000 to write a speech for him!! They lied over how long the senate did have the crime bill. Its their duty to represent the average Canadian over what the seating government wants to pass. Do you want to lose your liberties as much as the Americans have? I've watched them in Question Period and in committee and they are smart-mouth you know what people. They never give a direct answer then they turn it around and themselves look like they do no wrong. Harper made friends with the Bloc at first to get bills past now they just stand there and be little them. This shows the character of this government , use them and throw them away. Harprer decided to make Oct '09 an election day but now he wants one sooner. It just show the mistakes this government makes over and over again. The biggest one is the war in Afghanistan and this is HIS war and Canadians are against it. Yes, bring on the election and put these guys out of their misery!

[scribblet]

The bottom line on this is that Harper uses black mail to get is non Canadian type government.

Huh ! It's about time someone stood up to the Liberal Senate, however what on earth is a 'non-Canadian type of government' oh wait, I get it - any gov't a liberal disagrees with

[Argus]

According to Iveson, the crime bill ultimatum is designed to short circuit a Liberal attempt to have an election on Afghanistan.

The Conservatives subsequently concluded that Mr. Dion is determined to go to the polls and decided to try to pre-empt him by bringing forward a motion on their omnibus Tackling Violent Crime bill that is still in the Liberal-dominated Senate after 71 days.

Liberal Gamble on Afghanistan

Iveson also pointed out that when the Dutch publicly reconsidered their Afghanistan mission attacks against them multiplied, as the Taliban tried to influence the decision and they took a lot more casualties. The obvious implication is that if the Liberals force and election on Afghanistan it will cost the lives of Canadian soldiers as the Taliban launch suicide attacks in order to kill as many as possible to influence the election.

Does anyone think there are not Taliban sympathisers in Canada reading the media and communicating with them?

[segnosaur]

Manitoba Senator Sharon Carstairs told Mike Duffy Live that the Tory government is trying to bully the Senate.

...

"We want to hear from the public ... particularly on two issues. I am very concerned about the impact of this (bill) on Aboriginal people. Reverse onus bail conditions, for example."

...

Carstairs said she also wants to hear from social workers about what effect raising the sexual age of consent from 16 to 14 would have on young people living on the streets. She said she is concerned that young prostitutes may be driven underground if the age of consent is raised and that would leave them more vulnerable to exploitation. It could also keep them away from social workers who could help them escape their plight.

You know, I find the arguments put forward by Senator Carstairs to be a little... strange.

First of all, she is complaining about the crime bill including 'reverse onus'. But the thing is, the Canadian criminal code already has several crimes for which reverse onus applies (and those particular sections of the criminal code were in effect when the Liberals were in power). The Tory crime bill does expand the number of situations where reverse onus applies, but the concept (requiring people to prove they are not a threat before they are let out on bail) already exists.

Secondly, she is complaining about the raising of the age of consent, and claiming it will affect underage prostitutes. But why should it matter? We already have laws regarding prostitution (and if I remember correctly there are stronger penalties for johns using underage prostitutes.) So why should a change in the laws regarding consentual sex affect prostitution?

[MontyBurns]

Stupid old Liberal dinosaurs looking out for their criminal friends.