Won't back crime bills, MPs say

[jdobbin]

You keep harping on that when we haven't even seen any legislation. It could actually be part of an omnibus bill which includes money for more police, for crime victims, perhaps to build a new prison or so... money anyway.

A crime bill can include all those things and not be a money bill. A money bill solely deals with matters of taxation and appropriation according to Westminster Guideline.

There is not a constitutional expert around that would link a money bill to a crime bill.

[jdobbin]

No, I am just saying that if he does - the Liberals will back down toute suite. Are you saying otherwise?

Am I being unclear?

And I'm saying that if Harper does decide to make every motion a confidence motion, the Liberals won't be able to back down each time to the bullying. It served a purpose for some Liberal contender to sandbag Dion but now it will reflect on them personally to give Harper a blank check.

I suspect even if the Liberals did support all Harper does, he still calls an election before the Liberal leadership vote.

Better to go if the bill is a take it or leave it confidence motion that won't allow for any amendments or improvements.

[Alta4ever]

And I'm saying that if Harper does decide to make every motion a confidence motion, the Liberals won't be able to back down each time to the bullying. It served a purpose for some Liberal contender to sandbag Dion but now it will reflect on them personally to give Harper a blank check.

I suspect even if the Liberals did support all Harper does, he still calls an election before the Liberal leadership vote.

Better to go if the bill is a take it or leave it confidence motion that won't allow for any amendments or improvements.

If thats the case I hope virtually every bill is a confidence bill, becasue the libs would be pounished in an election before May if the were preceived to bring down the government. If they are the party with the choice after the bloc and the NDP have made their position known, the general public will blame the libs. You know it I know it, thats why you are spinning it.

[jdobbin]

If thats the case I hope virtually every bill is a confidence bill, becasue the libs would be pounished in an election before May if the were preceived to bring down the government. If they are the party with the choice after the bloc and the NDP have made their position known, the general public will blame the libs. You know it I know it, thats why you are spinning it.

If Harper calls an election early for a non-money bill, he will try to blame the Liberals. You are hoping that it will stick but it will be Harper that calls the election in the end. Blame won't necessarily be isolated to the Liberals.

[Alta4ever]

If Harper calls an election early for a non-money bill, he will try to blame the Liberals. You are hoping that it will stick but it will be Harper that calls the election in the end. Blame won't necessarily be isolated to the Liberals.

'

He won't call the election, the fact that a confidence motion has been voted down would place the onus squarely on the opposition parties. Unless he ignored it like Paul Martin did, and continued to cgovern without confidence. I would just imagine what you would say then. Your little spin doesn't reflect how the masses think.

[White Doors]

And I'm saying that if Harper does decide to make every motion a confidence motion, the Liberals won't be able to back down each time to the bullying. It served a purpose for some Liberal contender to sandbag Dion but now it will reflect on them personally to give Harper a blank check.

I suspect even if the Liberals did support all Harper does, he still calls an election before the Liberal leadership vote.

Better to go if the bill is a take it or leave it confidence motion that won't allow for any amendments or improvements.

The backed down each and every time last session, what would be different this time?

They have no leader and they are up to their eyes in debt.

I don't think he will make every vote a confidence motion but I certainly hopes he is able to implement the policies that the CPC ran on and if the Liberals decide to play chicken then we all know who will steer off into the ditch first. lol

I don't think the Liberals will have any choice but to back (or be absent) from virtually any legislation that Harper decides to pass, confidence motion or not, and they have no one to blame but themselves. The sooner they get some introspection and stop blaming the evil CPC for all their ills, the sooner they are again able to be a viable party.

Keeping these parlour games going will only hurt themselves in the long-term. The Liberals need to take their party back from the left wing fringe that seems to have been dominating since Chretien stepped down and go back to their centrist ways. Until then these shrieks of righteous indignation will only further serve to besmerch their already tarnished brand.

Edited November 5, 2008 by White Doors

[jdobbin]

The backed down each and every time last session, what would be different this time?

The difference is it suited the Liberals to let Dion twist in the wind while leadership candidates tried to get elected in their bylection.

They have no leader and they are up to their eyes in debt.

True. But Harper will call an election in the next six months anyway. They'll have to fight the election anyway.

I don't think he will make every vote a confidence motion but I certainly hopes he is able to implement the policies that the CPC ran on and if the Liberals decide to play chicken then we all know who will steer off into the ditch first. lol

The chicken will be if Harper tries to put legislation in various areas and says no changes are possible, invoke cloture and call a vote and say confidence applies. It is brinkmanship and hyperpartisan.

I don't think the Liberals will have any chocie but to back (or be absent) from virtually any legislation that Harper decides to pass, confidence motion or not and they have no one to blame but themselves. The sooner they get some introspection and stop blaming the evil CPC for all their ills, the sooner they are again able to be a viable party.

Since it very likely Harper will call an election at the soonest opportunity, it serves the Liberals no good to give him a blank check.

Keeping these parlour games going will only hurt themselves in the long-term. The Liberals need to take their party back from the left wing fringe that seems to have been dominating since Chretien stepped down and go back to their centrist ways. Until then these shrieks of righteous indignation will only further serve to besmerch their already tarnished brand.

The thuggery of Harper on confidence motions only last so long as he thinks it will not lead to an election.

The Liberals probably expect an election any time now. It is how Harper works.

[Argus]

I seem to recall a few bills requiring compromise and amendments from the Opposition to pass. Some were defeated and didn't actually trigger an election. Back then, a confidence vote on money bills was actually the standard.

The minority governments of Tory government of Bill Davis also went by money bills by which the standard of confidence was measured.

Harper made all bills confidence motions which is not standard for our system.

The unshakeable reality is that a government or an opposition compromise based on their relative strengths. When the polls are up for the government, they push in hopes of getting the opposition to vote them out. When the polls are up for the opposition, they push in hopes of forcing the government to the polls. The Liberals have been unlucky to be in poor positions in both minorities, that's all. Were the positions reversed I hardly expect they would show the slightest generosity towards the opposition. They certainly never have in the past.

[jdobbin]

'

He won't call the election, the fact that a confidence motion has been voted down would place the onus squarely on the opposition parties. Unless he ignored it like Paul Martin did, and continued to cgovern without confidence. I would just imagine what you would say then. Your little spin doesn't reflect how the masses think.

Confidence traditionally applies to money bills. You are spinning so that it applies to everything.

Harper called the last election. I expect he will call this one too. He has the boot on the throat of the Liberals and it doesn't matter if they support his bills or not, he will call the election regardless.

[Argus]

A crime bill can include all those things and not be a money bill. A money bill solely deals with matters of taxation and appropriation according to Westminster Guideline.

There is not a constitutional expert around that would link a money bill to a crime bill.

Perhaps you are correct, but if the Liberals force an election over an omnibus crime bill the majority of Canadians supprort - including the immigrant community - the resulting election will be largely about crime and punishment, and I don't think the Liberals want that.

[jdobbin]

The unshakeable reality is that a government or an opposition compromise based on their relative strengths. When the polls are up for the government, they push in hopes of getting the opposition to vote them out. When the polls are up for the opposition, they push in hopes of forcing the government to the polls. The Liberals have been unlucky to be in poor positions in both minorities, that's all. Were the positions reversed I hardly expect they would show the slightest generosity towards the opposition. They certainly never have in the past.

Which is why I say the Tories will call an election before the leadership vote. It doesn't serve the Liberals any good if they support or don't oppose Tory bills. Harper will look for the earliest opportunity to call an election. I have no idea what premise but it will be about blame even if he gets his way.

[Alta4ever]

Confidence traditionally applies to money bills. You are spinning so that it applies to everything.

Harper called the last election. I expect he will call this one too. He has the boot on the throat of the Liberals and it doesn't matter if they support his bills or not, he will call the election regardless.

It may traditional be linked to money bills but they can make anything a confidence matter.

[White Doors]

I expect he will call this one too. He has the boot on the throat of the Liberals and it doesn't matter if they support his bills or not, he will call the election regardless.

I disagree. I think he will govern for as long as he feels he can pass legislation effectively.

I think this could be a longer standing minority than the last session. Ultimately, it will be up to the Liberals.

If the Liberals stop dancing when Harper says 'Dance' then there could be an election.

Either way, I don't see the Liberals not dancing for the forseable future and I certainly can't see Harper putting away his six-shooter soon either.

Everyone else can sit back with a glass of lemonade and watch the show.

Edited November 5, 2008 by White Doors

[jdobbin]

Perhaps you are correct, but if the Liberals force an election over an omnibus crime bill the majority of Canadians supprort - including the immigrant community - the resulting election will be largely about crime and punishment, and I don't think the Liberals want that.

The Liberals supported most of the crime bills that came before the House. They didn't abstain. They voted for them. If Harper wants to throw some peas in with the soup, he should expect some amendments. Those amendments don't necessarily eviscerate the bill. Some actually improve the legislation. If he wants to go to an election over that or if certain elements of the bill are unpalatable, he should consider compromise.

Shouting coward across the floor each time the Liberals voted for something doesn't move the process forward.

[jdobbin]

I disagree. I think he will govern for as long as he feels he can pass legislation effectively.

I think he sees the potential to destroy the Liberals so they cease to exist as a party. You think he is content letting the Liberals cave on all legislation until they get a new leader? Why would he do that when he can end the party once and for all.

I think this could be a longer standing minority than the last session. Ultimately, it will be up to the Liberals.

If the Liberals stop dancing when Harper says 'Dance' then there could be an election.

Either way, I don't see the Liberals not dancing for the forseable future and I certainly can't see Harper putting away his six-shooter soon either.

Everyone else can sit back with a glass of lemonade and watch the show.

I expect Harper will call the election as fast as he can. He stands to benefit the most.

[White Doors]

Then we will agree to disagree.

In my opinion Frank McKenna not running for the leadership did more damage to the Liberal rebuilding than anything Harper could do. And if someone of the political philosophy of an Ignatief doesn't win they they will have made their own noose, stuck their head in it and kicked out the chair all by themselves.

Saying otherwise is askin to blaming the sheriff for not busting down the door soon enough to bring the already stiff body down from the rafters.

The Liberals will have to become a fine old dance partner and rebuild gradually in fund raising and re-positioning.

Anything else and they will either have hung themselves or be shot by the sherrif.

Edited November 5, 2008 by White Doors

[jdobbin]

It may traditional be linked to money bills but they can make anything a confidence matter.

Which is what I have said all along. I said Harper would call the last election because he would say it was about confidence even when he got his way and there was no vote.

He will call and election as fast as he can. What good does it do the Liberals if they go along with his legislation and just rubber stamp it and Harper calls an election in April? He will say he needs a new mandate because the Liberals are not a good Opposition. He will say anything really to justify going.

I was told it was ridiculous that Harper would call the last election himself. Is it so beyond the realm that he will find any way to call the next even if he is getting his way from a damaged and complacent Opposition?

Tom Flanagan says the goal is to the end the Liberals as a party. Completely. Utterly. Gone. Never to come back. Is Harper going to wait 6 months to do that and let them get a new leader, reform their finances and create a new platform? Doubtful.

[jdobbin]

Then we will agree to disagree.

In my opinion Frank McKenna not running for the leadership did more damage to the Liberal rebuilding than anything Harper could do. And if an someone of the political philosophy of an Ignatief doesn't win they they will have made their own noose, stuck their head in it and kicked out the chair all by themselves.

McKenna's French skills were questioned recently. Even some of his allies were saying he has functional French but was less than bilingual. I think the expectation in the languages rise with each new leader.

My guess is Ignatieff is the man to beat... again. This time there will likely not be a choice from Quebec that people might default to.

Saying otherwise is askin to blaming the sheriff for not busting down the door soon enough to bring the already stiff body down from the rafters.

The Liberals will have to become a fine old dance partner and rebuild gradually in fund raising and re-positioning.

Anything else then they will either have hung themselves or be shot by the sherrif.

I don't think Harper wants a dance partner. He doesn't want a re-built Liberal party. He wants to kill it and the way to do that is to try and get an election by any means possible in the next little while. He will taunt, goad, call coward. He will make things confidence motions till the cows come home. And even if he gets his way, he will call an election himself and blame the Liberals for it.

[Bryan]

I think he sees the potential to destroy the Liberals so they cease to exist as a party.

He's not the only one.

[craiger]

He's not the only one.

I disagree.. I strongly feel he seen a future deficit. It would have destroyed his whole party's platform based on fiscal managment.

He played it smart he acused all party's of running a deficit when he directly did the same a week later.

[jdobbin]

He's not the only one.

Which is why I see him calling an election before the leadership convention even if he got everything he wanted in terms of legislation.

[Alta4ever]

Which is why I see him calling an election before the leadership convention even if he got everything he wanted in terms of legislation.

That would make him stupid, and harper is not a stupid man, he will not call an election on his own, because he knows that the conservatives would loose big, and you know this.

[Bryan]

Which is why I see him calling an election before the leadership convention even if he got everything he wanted in terms of legislation.

Calling one himself, no I don't see that. Forcing the Liberals to have no choice but to vote him down, I'd bet on it. I'd also bet on the CPC figuring out a wedge issue they know has public support, but that the Liberals will hate, and the public will be angry at the Liberals for opposing it.

[craiger]

Calling one himself, no I don't see that. Forcing the Liberals to have no choice but to vote him down, I'd bet on it. I'd also bet on the CPC figuring out a wedge issue they know has public support, but that the Liberals will hate, and the public will be angry at the Liberals for opposing it.

I disagree.. I strongly feel he seen a future deficit. It would have destroyed his whole party's platform based on fiscal managment.

He played it smart he acused all party's of running a deficit when he directly did the same a week lat

[Alta4ever]

I disagree.. I strongly feel he seen a future deficit. It would have destroyed his whole party's platform based on fiscal managment.

He played it smart he acused all party's of running a deficit when he directly did the same a week lat

The fiscal year isn't over, and we won't know until late feb whether or not this year was run on a deficit budget. All that was announch was that a b udget was run over the summer months. Your putting the cart before the horse.