Won't back crime bills, MPs say

[jdobbin]

Not up on the technical end of it. Is there such a thing as the oppostion having lost total confidence in the ruling party...and force an election from the weaker side of the house? - also I am not sure what a non-money bill is - explain the term and I will get my un-educated butt out of your hair..

If a minority government loses the confidence on the issue of money in a vote such as a budget, it is an automatic election. Do no pass go, go straight to the polls.

If minority government loses any other bill on crime, immigration or any other matter of bill, it is not an automatic election. It is solely, completely, utterly and irrevocably the decision of the Prime Minister to call an election on those matters. He doesn't have to do any numerous minority governments through our history have lost votes on parliamentary reforms, citizenship changes or simply a bill on lowering the flag for fallen soldiers and it didn't result in the government falling.

[Oleg Bach]

If a minority government loses the confidence on the issue of money in a vote such as a budget, it is an automatic election. Do no pass go, go straight to the polls.

If minority government loses any other bill on crime, immigration or any other matter of bill, it is not an automatic election. It is solely, completely, utterly and irrevocably the decision of the Prime Minister to call an election on those matters. He doesn't have to do any numerous minority governments through our history have lost votes on parliamentary reforms, citizenship changes or simply a bill on lowering the flag for fallen soldiers and it didn't result in the government falling.

So it's in the hands of our senior banking executives - who have run a tight and honourable ship considering they are bankers. I used to resent the banking elite - but now I understand that here is GOOD money and managers. I have faith in the old finacial guard. We are in good shape dispite global upheavel. For the oppostion to lose confidence in the governing party to continue to keep the money supply secure would not just show a non-confidence in the conservatives in these regards but a non-confidence in the very core of Canada and Canada as a nation itself...It would be traitorous to disrupt our banking system for political glory that may very well generate domestic poverty from coast to coast - thanks for the tech lesson.

[scribblet]

The Tories will not call an election, but maybe some people are in on Tory cabinet meetings and have some proof to the contrary. Otherwise, it's sheer speculation in an attempt to paint the Tories as the culprits should the opposition vote against the crime bill (the bill they agreed with amendments) prior to the election.

The word on the street is right, and the word on the street will indeed blame the Liberals if they should force the issue.

[Moonbox]

If a minority government loses the confidence on the issue of money in a vote such as a budget, it is an automatic election. Do no pass go, go straight to the polls.

If minority government loses any other bill on crime, immigration or any other matter of bill, it is not an automatic election. It is solely, completely, utterly and irrevocably the decision of the Prime Minister to call an election on those matters. He doesn't have to do any numerous minority governments through our history have lost votes on parliamentary reforms, citizenship changes or simply a bill on lowering the flag for fallen soldiers and it didn't result in the government falling.

Jdobbin technicalities don't make your point any stronger. A money bill you say? It's fairly easy to slip these sorts of things into the annual budgets just like the CPC put the immigration bill in last year's budget.

It's not hard to turn a policy bill into a money bill. Is that what they need to do to get any policy reform done??

[jdobbin]

Jdobbin technicalities don't make your point any stronger. A money bill you say? It's fairly easy to slip these sorts of things into the annual budgets just like the CPC put the immigration bill in last year's budget.

Actually, that not true. Look up actual money bills. They are solely set up for budgetary expenses. You can slip is aspect of financing but it doesn't get into the nitty gritty of the legislation.

It's not hard to turn a policy bill into a money bill. Is that what they need to do to get any policy reform done??

Once again look it up. An economic statement that has some aspects of the crime bill in terms of police financing can be a money bill. Legislation to change sentencing guidelines is not a money bill.

It is not a technicality that crime bills and immigration bills are not money bills. Budgets usually come once a year, an economic statement happens periodically between budgets.

Nitty gritty legislation as a money bill would meet a lot more resistance than just from the Opposition. Quite frankly, it is unheard of in any country that wishes to be considered stable.

All I hear Conservative supporters saying here is that any vote of opposition on any piece of legislation is a matter of confidence that will send people to the polls. The blame we hear will fall on the Liberals as if they are the only ones who have to bend in this Parliament. It is an absurd claim and the traditions of the government not falling on non-money bills has been in place to stop just this sort of thing from happening.

If Harper wants to go to an election, he will treat a non-money bill as confidence every time. It is he who will decide to go an election.

One thing Conservatives have right is that they will blame Liberals. They would blame Liberals even if Harper got his way too.

[jdobbin]

The Tories will not call an election, but maybe some people are in on Tory cabinet meetings and have some proof to the contrary. Otherwise, it's sheer speculation in an attempt to paint the Tories as the culprits should the opposition vote against the crime bill (the bill they agreed with amendments) prior to the election.

If the crime bill is a confidence motion that the Tories want to go to an election, it is up to them about the election not the Opposition. Nothing compels Harper to go to an election if the legislation does not go through.

The word on the street is right, and the word on the street will indeed blame the Liberals if they should force the issue.

Please show me the citation from word on the street. Certainly the Tories will blame the Liberals but it is up to them if they want to treat all matters of confidence.

[Nocrap]

Actually, the new tough on crime proposals did not sit well with many Canadians, and not just in Quebec. We have to remember that the Conservatives represent less than 37% of the popular vote, and Canadians who voted for other than Conservative, did so because they did not support the Conservative platform or still just do not like Harper. The opposition must oppose bills that their constituents oppose...that's why they were elected. People seem to forget that.

I also don't believe, despite their attitude, that the Cons. really want another election right now. They ran into a lot of trouble and the wave of change that swept across the US could blow them right out of power. I believe they will tread softly.

[Alta4ever]

Actually, the new tough on crime proposals did not sit well with many Canadians, and not just in Quebec. We have to remember that the Conservatives represent less than 37% of the popular vote, and Canadians who voted for other than Conservative, did so because they did not support the Conservative platform or still just do not like Harper. The opposition must oppose bills that their constituents oppose...that's why they were elected. People seem to forget that.

I also don't believe, despite their attitude, that the Cons. really want another election right now. They ran into a lot of trouble and the wave of change that swept across the US could blow them right out of power. I believe they will tread softly.

No they voted for the party that they thought represented them and their veiws best. Do I need to re post the numbers of the popular vote against the liberals the ndp and the bloc, then constrat that against the popular vote against the conservatives to remind you how silly that arguement is.

Conservatives have aa stronger mandate and will govern based apon that.

[eyeball]

Actually, the new tough on crime proposals did not sit well with many Canadians, and not just in Quebec.

In my town the war on drugs is definitely losing traction even though the federal Conservatives won in my region. Its certainly falling flat at things like municipal all-candidate meetings and its probably no coincidence that our town has recently had to increase taxes to pay for RCMP services. Cracking down and getting tough costs money and while its fine and dandy for the federal government to increase the penalties it will fall to the provinces and local governments to actually pay for most of the enforcement, prosecution and imprisonment.

Its quite obvious who the Conservative supporters of the WOD in our local political scene are and its no surprise to many that these are also the very same NIMBY'S who whipped up a bunch of completely unfounded fear and pressured our council to stop a facility to temporarily house mentally ill people in our town from being built. The disgracefully ignorant attitudes that a certain vindictive minority of Canadians have towards the mentally ill flow from the very same wellspring of fear and loathing expressed towards the so-called criminals who chose to do drugs. These people are mostly Conservative supporters and I suspect if people look closely in their own neighbourhoods they will find the same where they live.

This amoral meanspirited vindictiveness of these people is completely out of step with the values most Canadians instictively feel. Its where the rubber really hits in terms of what divides conservatives from the mainstream and I think the Conservatives get tough crime proposals reflects this.

[craiger]

With tories in power my town (or city) has become 2nd murder capital of Canada. Gangs and drugs have never been worse in all history.

almost seems like they create all this chit so they can say they will have something to crack down on. the more I think about it their platform is nothing but a sham!

Edited November 8, 2008 by craiger

[jdobbin]

Conservatives have aa stronger mandate and will govern based apon that.

That's fine. But they are still in a minority. If they want to make non-money bills confidence motions then they are the ones that want to go to an election since nothing compels them to do so by tradition.

It seems Harper realizes going to an election on the crime bill will be hard to pin all the blame on the Liberals and may in fact raise questions as to why he is not prioritizing the economy.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/081107/...rper_parliament

The official suggests Harper isn't eager to immediately push ahead with a series of tough-on-crime proposals, including stiffer sentences for young offenders and reduced use of conditional sentences.

All three opposition parties say they will oppose the measures, even at the risk of defeating the minority Conservative government.

"We are focused on the economy," the official told reporters at a background briefing. "We are not seeking confrontation in areas that are secondary to the economic focus of this government."

For those who said Harper didn't have to cooperate, it looks like they will have to go read the new Tory talking points which apparently have changed tonight.

Edited November 8, 2008 by jdobbin

[noahbody]

It seems Harper realizes going to an election on the crime bill will be hard to pin all the blame on the Liberals and may in fact raise questions as to why he is not prioritizing the economy.

Actually, it was just proven you were wrong to wildly speculate. Unless you have a cite for Harper's intentions to "pin all the blame on the Liberals."

[jdobbin]

Actually, it was just proven you were wrong to wildly speculate. Unless you have a cite for Harper's intentions to "pin all the blame on the Liberals."

I said from the beginning of this that it was up to Harper to set a different tone. It looks like he had set up a trial balloon to see if he could bully the Liberals as in the last session and get away with it. Dion said no and rightly said the focus should be on the economy.

I don't need a cite for a personal opinion on pinning the blame on the Liberals. We saw it all last Parliament and initially in this campaign and just in the last weeks, Harper said he was going to make the crime bill a priority and a confidence measure. That seems off the table.

So who backed down?

[Alta4ever]

That's fine. But they are still in a minority. If they want to make non-money bills confidence motions then they are the ones that want to go to an election since nothing compels them to do so by tradition.

It seems Harper realizes going to an election on the crime bill will be hard to pin all the blame on the Liberals and may in fact raise questions as to why he is not prioritizing the economy.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/081107/...rper_parliament

For those who said Harper didn't have to cooperate, it looks like they will have to go read the new Tory talking points which apparently have changed tonight.

You know and I know that that how you see this and how the general public see this will differ widely.

[eyeball]

With tories in power my town (or city) has become 2nd murder capital of Canada. Gangs and drugs have never been worse in all history.

almost seems like they create all this chit so they can say they will have something to crack down on. the more I think about it their platform is nothing but a sham!

Galvanizing events, like train wrecks, also happen in slow motion.

[Alta4ever]

Galvanizing events, like train wrecks, also happen in slow motion.

So the policies of the last 30 years have nothing to with the current state if affairs, just the last 3 years where no crime or punishment was pushed through until this past year?

Don't you think that you should beyond 2 to three years, it usually takes a good five years before you see any real results of policy.

[Smallc]

Crime bills aren't going to be pushed forward. The economy comes first.

[eyeball]

So the policies of the last 30 years have nothing to with the current state if affairs, just the last 3 years where no crime or punishment was pushed through until this past year?

Don't you think that you should beyond 2 to three years, it usually takes a good five years before you see any real results of policy.

Are you saying the war on drugs will be won any day now? Am I supposed to believe this is some sort of civil version of a "surge" that Harper is proposing?

[jdobbin]

You know and I know that that how you see this and how the general public see this will differ widely.

I have no idea what you are saying.

[Argus]

I have no idea what you are saying.

Let me enlighten you and the other lefties.

Murder on a Bus

When it comes down to arguments about crime, you do NOT want to be the soft hearted, hand-wringing types weeping for the welfare of violent criminals, and their "rights" and standing onstinately up as their protectors before the Tories wanting to hammer them with the sword of justice. Because all that does in many people's eyes is put you on the side of the vermin in stories like the above.

Edited November 13, 2008 by Argus

[Keepitsimple]

Let me enlighten you and the other lefties.

Murder on a Bus

When it comes down to arguments about crime, you do NOT want to be the soft hearted, hand-wringing types weeping for the welfare of violent criminals, and their "rights" and standing onstinately up as their protectors before the Tories wanting to hammer them with the sword of justice. Because all that does in many people's eyes is put you on the side of the vermin in stories like the above.

These are precisely the type of crimes that the large majority of Canadians fair justice for....and these are the crimes that Conservatives are targeting....unmitigated, violent crime and repeat violent offenders......and for heaven's sake, let's stop using the term Life in Prison. The current Young Offender's Act actually allows for a Life sentence if you commit the most heinous crime.......but you can apply for parole after 7 years and the maximum you can serve is 10 years. As sad as it is, the only thing that would wake up the hand-wringing Left is to have one of their loved ones senselessly and violently murdered....and subsequently see the criminal plea-bargain to a lesser offense and get paroled after 3 or 4 years.

Edited November 13, 2008 by Keepitsimple

[wulf42]

Really, perhaps we should take the Liberals up on this, and let them bring on another election

GLORIA GALLOWAY

From Wednesday's Globe and Mail

November 5, 2008 at 4:21 AM EST

OTTAWA — Opposition MPs, including Liberals who have worked on justice issues, say they would plunge the country into another federal election before agreeing to a slate of Conservative proposals that would see convicted criminals treated more harshly.

The measures, including tougher penalties for young offenders and the reduced use of conditional sentences that allow criminals to serve their time at home, are likely to be among the first tests of Liberal willingness to challenge Stephen Harper's new minority government.

How pathetic! the Liberals defending the scum of the Earth but it is not surprising, i guess that is why they were completely smoked in the election......lol. Violent criminals who kill and murder in our society should be taken out at first light.. put in front of a wall and shot! It is high time to get extremely tough on criminals including bringing back the death penality and as far as the young offenders act goes? scrap it! If a kid 14 and up can murder then he or she should spend the next 30 years without any possibility of parole in prison.

[jdobbin]

Let me enlighten you and the other lefties.

I think you righties should know that even Harper is not making the crime bill a priority. Is he soft on crime?

Edited November 14, 2008 by jdobbin

[jdobbin]

How pathetic! the Liberals defending the scum of the Earth but it is not surprising, i guess that is why they were completely smoked in the election......lol. Violent criminals who kill and murder in our society should be taken out at first light.. put in front of a wall and shot! It is high time to get extremely tough on criminals including bringing back the death penality and as far as the young offenders act goes? scrap it! If a kid 14 and up can murder then he or she should spend the next 30 years without any possibility of parole in prison.

Bring back the death penalty for the 14 year olds!

Yes, we know how most on the right feel.

[jdobbin]

These are precisely the type of crimes that the large majority of Canadians fair justice for....and these are the crimes that Conservatives are targeting....unmitigated, violent crime and repeat violent offenders......and for heaven's sake, let's stop using the term Life in Prison.

If Harper believes this is a government priority over the economy then by all means make it a confidence vote and go to an election this December.

Edited November 14, 2008 by jdobbin