Coalition Government

[johhny]

The crisis exists whether or not you can see it. The Conservative Government has lost the confidence of the House of Commons. If they can't regain in the next week, they will be defeated. It will be up to the Governor General to decide what happens. If another party presents a viable alternative, she is pretty much bound to at least consider the idea.

To me it seems like a form of proportional representation wich I feel has been long time coming, majority of citizens disagree with torie platforms so to me this has been a god send for the people of this country

[BornAlbertan]

I prefer to vote for my governments instead of having back room deals done ot create them. There is no great war looming nothing that requies a swift change of government, we have time for another election if the opposition feels that they have no confidence in the current government.

That is my sentiment exactly and I am just too damn angry to convey it with such....eloquence

I would be angry if the conservatives and reform did this back in the day just I am now.

[Smallc]

To me it seems like a form of proportional representation wich I feel has been long time coming, majority of citizens disagree with torie platforms so to me this has been a god send for the people of this country

I'm not really in favour of PR. I am in favour of following the constitution as it is currently set out. If people want a change in constitution, we can do that later, but right now, we have to follow what is set out.

[jdobbin]

I prefer to vote for my governments instead of having back room deals done ot create them. There is no great war looming nothing that requies a swift change of government, we have time for another election if the opposition feels that they have no confidence in the current government.

But I'm sure you would have thought it was brilliant, completely brilliant, when the Tories tried to do in 2004.

[Smallc]

What precisely is the crisis that allows them to seek to set such a huge precident, westminister rules or not?

So how would you propose that the government govern without the confidence of the house? As I have said, if the government falls, its up to the GG. If someone else presents a viable alternative, she will have to consider it being as we just had an election.

Edited November 29, 2008 by Smallc

[jdobbin]

yeah, they didn't vote for an NDiberal bed buddy fuck fest though.

Minorities require parties to work together to survive.

The Liberals and NDP are working together to form a government since they have lost confidence in the present government.

It is how our system is set up.

The "coalition" would be an identity unto itself.

Actually, it wouldn't. The parties remain separate.

Edited November 29, 2008 by jdobbin

[jdobbin]

A coalition lead by who, someone who belongs to a party which had the worse showing in its history during an election less than two months ago and holds only 25% of the seats in parliament? As much as I would hate another one, I think an election would be preferable.

Guess that decision is not up to you.

[Oleg Bach]

Is it just me but would a coaltion be very American in structure? If it took place and worked we would have a sort of Dem Rep arrangement...a two party system that is one.

[jdobbin]

Is it just me but would a coaltion be very American in structure? If it took place and worked we would have a sort of Dem Rep arrangement...a two party system that is one.

What coalition governments in the U.S. are you referring to?

[BornAlbertan]

Actually, it wouldn't. The parties remain separate.

So then we have a government with absolutely no solidarity.

SOUNDS GOOD.

Sometimes order can only be achieved throu chaos.

Maybe this might be a good thing...let them kill each other.

[Slim MacSquinty]

So how would you propose that the government govern without the confidence of the house? As I have said, if the government falls, its up to the GG. If someone else presents a viable alternative, she will have to consider it being as we just had an election.

My question is what is the alternative plan that this coalition is proposing that is so superior to the conservatives that allows them to play this game? We all know the reason is the political funding, but of course they aren't going to say it out loud instead they are using an excuse. So if the conservatives who have the confidence of the provincial liberals in Ontario for their action on the auto sector, which is the most often example used by the opposition, are not able to secure their confidence what the hell is their plan that would justify suplanting the duly elected government to allow them to purport having confidence, after all in the end its me and you they have to convince?

Instead of carefully abusing the rules meant to avoid governemental crisis, share with us the superior plan, none has been offered, don't you think we deserve this?

[jdobbin]

Maybe this might be a good thing...let them kill each other.

I suppose that you can hope for that result.

One thing is clear: the objective of pushing the Tories out of office according to the rules put forth from Canada's founding remain democratic. Harper tried the same thing himself in 2004. He should have seen this coming instead of bullying and saying to the Opposition that they will bend over and like it.

[jdobbin]

My question is what is the alternative plan that this coalition is proposing that is so superior to the conservatives that allows them to play this game? We all know the reason is the political funding, but of course they aren't going to say it out loud instead they are using an excuse. So if the conservatives who have the confidence of the provincial liberals in Ontario for their action on the auto sector, which is the most often example used by the opposition, are not able to secure their confidence what the hell is their plan that would justify suplanting the duly elected government to allow them to purport having confidence, after all in the end its me and you they have to convince?

The Governor General doesn't have to ask that question. All she has to ask is if the Opposition is prepared to try and form a government.

It is about confidence and Harper has squandered it on his bullying.

Instead of carefully abusing the rules meant to avoid governemental crisis, share with us the superior plan, none has been offered, don't you think we deserve this?

There is no abuse of the rules. Harper was prepared to use them in 2004. Was it abuse then or just brilliant, simply brilliant policy by Harper.

[BornAlbertan]

The Governor General doesn't have to ask that question. All she has to ask is if the Opposition is prepared to try and form a government.

It is about confidence and Harper has squandered it on his bullying.

There is no abuse of the rules. Harper was prepared to use them in 2004. Was it abuse then or just brilliant, simply brilliant policy by Harper.

As a conservative...I say it would be abuse. The seizure of power by a non-elected body is a circumvention of democracy IMO.

[jdobbin]

As a conservative...I say it would be abuse. The seizure of power by a non-elected body is a circumvention of democracy IMO.

Then you should have been furious for Harper for even attempting it in 2004.

[Smallc]

Instead of carefully abusing the rules meant to avoid governemental crisis, share with us the superior plan, none has been offered, don't you think we deserve this?

John McCallum says they will release a plan. This isn't only about party financing as that has been taken of of the table, though that is part of the problem. There are other issues. First, the opposition now knows they can't trust the government to put partisanship aside. Also, his attempt to take away union rights is not very popular with the left. The party financing is also a factor, partly because of hypocrisy. The money they intended to save by eliminating it was about the amount they have to spend on their extra ministers. Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, the governments lack of quick action on the current economic crisis (slammed by every economist that I have seen on TV today) is completely unacceptable. Charles Adler put it nicely today. He said that the Conservatives have given the opposition a gun and a choice. They can either shoot themselves or the Conservatives. Seems like an easy choice to me, and probably to them as well.

[Smallc]

The seizure of power by a non-elected body is a circumvention of democracy IMO.

I was under the impression that all the MPs in the house were elected.

[johhny]

I suppose that you can hope for that result.

One thing is clear: the objective of pushing the Tories out of office according to the rules put forth from Canada's founding remain democratic. Harper tried the same thing himself in 2004. He should have seen this coming instead of bullying and saying to the Opposition that they will bend over and like it.

A taste of his own medicine I love it! What comes around goes around lol

[Wilber]

So then we have a government with absolutely no solidarity.

SOUNDS GOOD.

Sometimes order can only be achieved throu chaos.

Maybe this might be a good thing...let them kill each other.

Could very well be that we degenerate into one of those countries where the life of governments is measured in weeks and months instead of years as alliances ebb and flow. A coalition today will depend on three parties with little in common maintaining a common ground. The likelihood of that happening over an extended period of time is slim as is the likelihood of it accomplishing very much. In good times that might not be such a bad thing for awhile but right now it is pretty scary.

[jdobbin]

Could very well be that we degenerate into one of those countries where the life of governments is measured in weeks and months instead of years as alliances ebb and flow. A coalition today will depend on three parties with little in common maintaining a common ground. The likelihood of that happening over an extended period of time is slim as is the likelihood of it accomplishing very much. In good times that might not be such a bad thing for awhile but right now it is pretty scary.

Or we could be like Switzerland where there has been a coalition since the 1950s. Take your pick.

[Smallc]

Could very well be that we degenerate into one of those countries where the life of governments is measured in weeks and months instead of years as alliances ebb and flow.

I don't think that will happen. What this may end up in is a possible joining of the NDP and Liberals in the future (if their plan works out) and even a Conservative split if people get mad enough at Harper over this. Jdobbin's idea is also a possibility.

Edited November 29, 2008 by Smallc

[BornAlbertan]

How can you guys compare a coalition government with a non-confidence vote?

If it goes to an election...ok...fine...I once again get to have a say...but the conservatives NEVER tried anything like a coalition government.

Edited November 29, 2008 by BornAlbertan

[eyeball]

I'm not really in favour of PR. I am in favour of following the constitution as it is currently set out. If people want a change in constitution, we can do that later, but right now, we have to follow what is set out.

I've been in favour of anything but the status quo for so long I wanted reforms before the so-called Reformer's even began thinking about what it was they wanted, which wasn't much given what we finally got.

Forget later, now could be even better a time as any. A great many people are obviously fed up with waiting for the constitution to change and now the future ain't what it used to be - its about freakin' time.

[Smallc]

How can you guys compare a coalition government with a non-confidence vote?

One can be caused by the other in this case. Its not about what you think is right, its about the Constitution and the decision of the Governor General.....and it all depends on whether or not the Government falls.

[Smallc]

I've been in favour of anything but the status quo for so long I wanted reforms before the so-called Reformer's even began thinking about what it was they wanted, which wasn't much given what we finally got.

Its not about what you want though (no offense or anything). I think that maybe we should let the people decide, but then again I'm not sure if they would know what they're deciding. Best to leave it to the elected government I would say.

Edited November 29, 2008 by Smallc