Canada's Harper may force

[Wild Bill]

The results cannot be skewed if a representative cross-section of voters is interviewed. This includes interviews in areas that reflect the actual population makeup of the province. If voters are interviewed in numbers reflecting the actual population, how are the numbers skewed?

Well, if you want a cross section that's useful you have to poll individual ridings, or at least different areas of the province.

You could poll 10,000 people but if they are all in Toronto then the result would look like a Liberal landslide, yet the election result could well be that Toronto has the only Liberal ridings in the province and the Tories did very well over all.

With polls, you get what you pay for. Parties of course will pay for much more riding focused polls than newspapers. They have no obligation to share these more accurate polls with the citizenry. It usually is not in their interest.

[Vancouver King]

Well, if you want a cross section that's useful you have to poll individual ridings, or at least different areas of the province.

You could poll 10,000 people but if they are all in Toronto then the result would look like a Liberal landslide, yet the election result could well be that Toronto has the only Liberal ridings in the province and the Tories did very well over all.

With polls, you get what you pay for. Parties of course will pay for much more riding focused polls than newspapers. They have no obligation to share these more accurate polls with the citizenry. It usually is not in their interest.

It is a given that all major published polling firms conduct interviews strictly on a basis that reflects the actual population profile of the province. Anything less would be unscientific. Do you have any proof that Ipsos-Reid or Nanos, among others, are deliberately misleading their clients and the public, or is this another example of blowing smoke?

[Wild Bill]

It is a given that all major published polling firms conduct interviews strictly on a basis that reflects the actual population profile of the province. Anything less would be unscientific. Do you have any proof that Ipsos-Reid or Nanos, among others, are deliberately misleading their clients and the public, or is this another example of blowing smoke?

They're not misleading anyone! They give according to how much they're paid!

It is far more important to a particular party to have a riding breakdown than an overall combined number. Just think about the logistics and costs of getting an idea of the popular vote across the province and finding out the chances of the Tories carrying Guelph. Guelph people are totally different than those of most of Toronto. Yet Toronto has FAR more people to poll!

Take it as mere smoke blowing if you want. To me it seems just money and simple math. I sincerely hope the Liberals see no need for deeper polls as well.

[normanchateau]

Stephen Harper would kill for an election right now:

http://www.westislandchronicle.com/article...-right-now.html

[Vancouver King]

The article raises an interesting possibility:

What if GG Michaelle Jean looked Harper straight in the eye and said, "Mr. Prime Minister, given that you passed a fixed election date which would seem to apply to the current circumstances and combined with your government's record of considerable legislation passed, I am left a loss to understand your need for a renewed mandate other than political expediency. It is, therefore, my decision to call on the Leader of the Opposition to form a govt that will take the nation to Oct., 2009."

[Wild Bill]

The article raises an interesting possibility:

What if GG Michaelle Jean looked Harper straight in the eye and said, "Mr. Prime Minister, given that you passed a fixed election date which would seem to apply to the current circumstances and combined with your government's record of considerable legislation passed, I am left a loss to understand your need for a renewed mandate other than political expediency. It is, therefore, my decision to call on the Leader of the Opposition to form a govt that will take the nation to Oct., 2009."

Well, that might satisfy your own personal dream and that of some others like you but what effect do you think such an action might have on all the others?

No Governor General in our history has ever done such a thing. Basically because it would be totally arbitrary. At least if an election is called we get to vote on how we feel about the next government. If Harper offended us by calling an early election we could pay him back at the polls.

You are advocating that Micky-Jean would make our choice for us. SHE would choose the next government! In effect, no more democracy. Just some royal fiat from some elitist, appointed figurehead.

I think that this would be political suicide for any GG and any party that profited by such action. If it wasn't, then as a country we would deserve every negative consequence that any such silly-assed action caused to happen.

[gc1765]

... the "fixed election date" Bill had nothing in it to prevent a Prime Minister from going for an election IF PARLIAMENT HAD BECOME DYSFUNCTIONAL! So it would still be legal for Harper to trigger the election.

In other words, the fixed election date law means that the PM can't call an early election...unless the PM wants to call an election, and can rationalize it in some way. Like I said, nothing has changed.

[Wild Bill]

In other words, the fixed election date law means that the PM can't call an early election...unless the PM wants to call an election, and can rationalize it in some way. Like I said, nothing has changed.

From what I heard, Harper's Bill NEVER removed the right of a sitting PM to ask to dissolve a parliament IF IT BECAME INEFFECTIVE!

So if he chooses to do so it might be hypocritical but not illegal. Quelle surprise! Is politics not full of lawyers?

You know, I'm gonna hit google and actually read this damn Bill! I keep hearing quotes about it that don't always make sense.

I realize that it's a terribly objective and thoroughly unpopular thing to do around here but hey, that's just me!

[Wild Bill]

Knew I'd find it!

It's kinda dry of course but it seems quite clear that Harper is within his rights.

Here's a link to a columnist's slant that says it all in plain English:

http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/colu...39-047ffc239fc9

Note this excerpt in particular:

This means that while Bill C-16 is now the law of the land, it is only a parliamentary statute, and clearly does not effect constitutional convention.

And in the Westminster tradition, the governor-general can dissolve Parliament any time at the request of the prime minister.

In other words, if Stephen Harper wants an election, all he needs to do is walk from 24 Sussex Dr. across the a street to Rideau Hall and ask her excellency for a cup of tea and an election writ.

Seems pretty clear to me that this is all perfectly within the PM's power. Whether or not it would be an issue against him in the ensuing election is a matter for voters to decide.

[Ontario Loyalist]

Harper wanted a fixed election date and he got it. I guess the part of the reason for it was to negate all of the intrigues that surrounded possible election calls, yet here we have it worse than before. I can't even remember how long this has been going on now--about as long as the farce south of the border, I believe. Only in Harper's Canada.

Whatever the case: I'm all for an election--the sooner the better... I really don't think Harper realizes just how much support he's lost east of the Manitoba-Ontario border.

[Wild Bill]

Whatever the case: I'm all for an election--the sooner the better... I really don't think Harper realizes just how much support he's lost east of the Manitoba-Ontario border.

You may prove to be right. He has hardly been inspiring in Ontario. The PC's had all but disappeared in Ontario when the parties merged so not much legacy vote there. There were over a million or two Reform/Alliance voters but as I've constantly harped, the new CPC has little or nothing recognizable from the old party except a few names of MP's.

Quebec might be better for him. Sure the BQ will take the lion's share but there are still an awful lot of Liberal seats where they haven't at all forgotten about AdScam. As for the Maritimes, who knows?

Still, just because Harper hasn't inspired us folks from Ontario doesn't mean he won't pick up a few more seats. His biggest advantage is still Dion, after all. It's not enough to have a poor choice if the other one is worse!

And of course, money will be a big factor. The Liberals are not only broke but deep in debt. They used to just hit up the corporations for donations and loans but Chretien made that illegal. Now they have to depend on attracting more donations from ordinary folks and frankly, they're just not used to that! The Tories have a rich tradition of fundraising from their Reform days. Perhaps that's the only tradition the new party kept!

Anyhow, if signs and money are really that important then the Liberals will have some challenges.

[White Doors]

I'm all for it as well. And shock and dismay, I live east of the Ontario/manitoba border!

Whaaa???

[jdobbin]

Seems pretty clear to me that this is all perfectly within the PM's power. Whether or not it would be an issue against him in the ensuing election is a matter for voters to decide.

I've been saying that Harper had the power all along and pretty much everyone on these forums seemed to deny he did.

[Wild Bill]

I've been saying that Harper had the power all along and pretty much everyone on these forums seemed to deny he did.

Yes, you have indeed! You've also been more objective that some as to the chances of a majority win for either party.

There you are, jdobbin! Me and you, back to back against the whole horde!

[jdobbin]

Yes, you have indeed! You've also been more objective that some as to the chances of a majority win for either party.

There you are, jdobbin! Me and you, back to back against the whole horde!

lol I hate those hoards.

I just don't think Dion can overcome the negatives he has with some people in Quebec to win more seats there. The Liberal organization there has to be built from the ground up. The Tories will win the next election with another minority in part because of this weakness.

The thing holding Harper back is Liberals in Ontario and BQ in Quebec. Both parties remain fairly strong in those provinces. Harper's own negative image is holding him back as well. While he is the Conservatives greatest strength, he is their biggest weakness as well.

Edited August 24, 2008 by jdobbin

[Smallc]

Why should Harper play by his own rules?

We won't tax income trusts (stupid promise, but a promise none the less)....oh wait, I guess we have to.

If we were in government, we would eliminate the GST on gas above 85c (another stupid promise)....oh I guess there isn't fiscal capacity for such a thing so we'll just forget I ever said it.

We will have fixed election dates...unless I want an election early.

I tell you, if there was a better choice right now.....

[Wild Bill]

lol I hate those hoards.

I just don't think Dion can overcome the negatives he has with some people in Quebec to win more seats there. The organization there has to be built from the ground up. The Tories will win the next election with another minority.

I thing holding Harper back is Liberals in Ontario and BQ in Quebec. Both parties remain fairly strong in those provinces. Harper's own negative image is holding him back. While he is the Conservatives greatest strength, he is their biggest weakness as well.

Agreed. It is the nature of our country to have large regional differences in our wants and needs from confederation. Rarely is it possible to please everybody.

I guess this is true of most democracies. Where it can fester is when one region perpetually gets the shaft, like western Canada with things like the Crow Rate or the NEP. Or Ontario with its transfer payment burden that seems to be a fixed fee, regardless of its own economic health. Or the Maritimes, where Regional Disparity Programs can stifle real employment, leaving the people caught in a perpetual "10-42" situation.

Maybe some day we'll elect a genius who will make EVERYONE prosper at the same time!

Cue the John Lennon song and start the "Little Orphan Annie" video...

[Stephen Best]

And in the Westminster tradition, the governor-general can dissolve Parliament any time at the request of the prime minister.

In other words, if Stephen Harper wants an election, all he needs to do is walk from 24 Sussex Dr. across the a street to Rideau Hall and ask her excellency for a cup of tea and an election writ.

The question becomes what will Her Excellency do? There's no precedent for a Prime Minister asking the GG to dissolve Parliament with a fixed election date law on the books. Is she, in the Westminster tradition, bound to issue the writ or, given the new legal environment, freed to set a new precedent and suggest the Prime Minister wait until 2009 or until the House of Commons passes a non-confidence motion?

I wonder what advice Her Excellency the Right Honourable Michaëlle Jean has received: honour the law or honour the tradition and flaunt the law.

[normanchateau]

Harper's own negative image is holding him back as well. While he is the Conservatives greatest strength, he is their biggest weakness as well.

Certainly he is their greatest weakness but I don't see how he is their greatest strength. He won the leadership contest only because he was running against the unimpressive Tony Clement and the unproven Belinda Emerson.

Had their actually been some high quality candidates in that leadership race, Canada might today have a CPC majority government. It can still happen but only if there's a new leader at the CPC helm.

[Wild Bill]

The question becomes what will Her Excellency do? There's no precedent for a Prime Minister asking the GG to dissolve Parliament with a fixed election date law on the books. Is she, in the Westminster tradition, bound to issue the writ or, given the new legal environment, freed to set a new precedent and suggest the Prime Minister wait until 2009 or until the House of Commons passes a non-confidence motion?

I wonder what advice Her Excellency the Right Honourable Michaëlle Jean has received: honour the law or honour the tradition and flaunt the law.

Again, if she made the choice for the country and handed the government to the Liberals the talking heads like Mike Duffy and the crew of CBC NW would be all over it! Governments are supposed to be chosen by the people, not by a figurehead.

If she did such a thing I'd bet on two consequences. One is that the Liberals would get beaten up by the time voting day finally did arrive, for benefiting from a rigged situation. The other is that there would be serious call to cancel the position of Governor General, or at least seriously limit it's power.

[gc1765]

In other words, if Stephen Harper wants an election, all he needs to do is walk from 24 Sussex Dr. across the a street to Rideau Hall and ask her excellency for a cup of tea and an election writ.[/i][/b]

Seems pretty clear to me that this is all perfectly within the PM's power. Whether or not it would be an issue against him in the ensuing election is a matter for voters to decide.

Exactly what I have been saying all along. Now the million dollar question, how is that any different than before this fixed election date bill?

[Stephen Best]

Again, if she made the choice for the country and handed the government to the Liberals the talking heads like Mike Duffy and the crew of CBC NW would be all over it! Governments are supposed to be chosen by the people, not by a figurehead.

If she did such a thing I'd bet on two consequences. One is that the Liberals would get beaten up by the time voting day finally did arrive, for benefiting from a rigged situation. The other is that there would be serious call to cancel the position of Governor General, or at least seriously limit it's power.

The Governor-General could ask Dion if he could form a government. If Dion had the support of the NDP and BQ he could govern. However, that's not likely. And, not sure why you're even raising the possiblity.

The dilemma the Governor General faces if Harper asks her to dissolve Parliament is whether or not to do that given the fixed election date law which is unprecedented in the Westminster tradition. She could tell Harper that until Parliament passes a non-confidence motion in his government, he has to govern or repeal the law which is the will of Parliament.

Harper's problem is he wants Parliament dissolved on his terms, not those of the Opposition parties. However, the whole purpose--ostensibly--of fixed election dates was to stop incumbents from taking advantage of election timing.

As usual, Harper doesn't like democratic principles applied to him.

[Stephen Best]

Exactly what I have been saying all along. Now the million dollar question, how is that any different than before this fixed election date bill?

The difference will be in what the GG does. If Harper asks the GG to dissolve Parliament it will be the first time in Canadian history that it has been done where there is fixed election date law in place. One can argue therefore that the precedent of automatically granting the Prime Minister's request is no longer operative. After all, the fixed election date is the will of Parliament, and the Prime Minister still has the confidence of the House. The GG, I submit, could suggest to the Prime Minister if he wants an early election he either introduce a bill repealing the fixed election date, or wait until the House passes a non-confidence motion.

[Oleg Bach]

Exactly what I have been saying all along. Now the million dollar question, how is that any different than before this fixed election date bill?

If you are going to futher stress out the population with an expensive election - you had better be doing it for the benefit of the people. Elections for the benefit of politicains is counter productive and smacks of parasitic usery. Let them step forward and state how the nation will benefit with a new election - It may be best to leave Harper in positioin and educate the boy prince and let his handlers know that we mean buisness and expect conservatism to start conserving what is tried and true and what works and is of service to US -not them!

[Topaz]

Harper's government is in serious trouble and if you have seen any of the ethic committee session on tv you would know why! The Cons are the ones trying to ruin the hearings. They call"POINT OF ORDERS" so many times, as a viewer, I like to tell them what I think of their actions! They are pulling stunts after stunts to throw off these hearings. So when Harper talks about the government not working, its 95% their doing! If we had an election and the tables were turned and the Libs got into a minority government, Harper's bunch would stop anything the Libs wanted to do and nothing would get done. When Harper says we were able to do this and that, really it was the Libs that allowed to do be done. So if Canadians had to pick a party for a majority so things could get done who do you think would get it? The Libs had their scam but those people are gone and an election will also elected new people to their party. To the Cons, they have a fraud charge by Election Canada, a Cadman bribery charge, the Bernier affair, nafta scam, people being fire for no reason, spending sprees and the list goes on! So much for a party that was going to be different and honest. The old saying...if its too good to be true, its usually is, couldn't be any truer!!