What the Governor General Has to Do!

[TomS]

Not in recent memory. You must think that they will win massively in Quebec.

I would expect more seats everywhere including Quebec, but also Toronto. Now that Canadians can see a crystal clear choice between a Seperatist/Socialist coalition lead by the worst performing Liberal leader in history, or the Conservative government I am confident in the outcome. The oppsition parties aren't confident in the outcome or they would go to the people.

[jdobbin]

I would expect more seats everywhere including Quebec, but also Toronto. Now that Canadians can see a crystal clear choice between a Seperatist/Socialist coalition lead by the worst performing Liberal leader in history, or the Conservative government I am confident in the outcome. The oppsition parties aren't confident in the outcome or they would go to the people.

Then Harper should call an election today. Do it. Anything else is cowardice. No need to wait for to a vote. Call the Governor General today.

[johhny]

What you're seeing is a first -- and perhaps a last. Prime Minister Stephen Harper, his pride sacrificed before the fall, is in full white-flag-waving surrender mode.

[IMASINNER]

Never mind that 63% (or so) of Canadian voters DIDN'T vote for Harper...

No but 63% of Canadian voters didn't vote for a coalition government backed by a Quebec nationalist party either. that's why there should be a vote.

[johhny]

He's been reduced in status to that of a mere political mortal, scrambling to save his skin as a bully suddenly vulnerable to defeat from his weakling political rivals --and from inside his own party.

[Slim MacSquinty]

Ok here is the history of the only actual coalition government in Canada:

The strengthening of party affiliation and the development of the apparatus of a party system since Confederation have made coalitions more difficult to negotiate. At the national level, the only coalition has been Sir Robert BORDEN'S 1917 UNION GOVERNMENT. Faced with strong opposition to conscription and with other major difficulties during WWI, Borden sought to broaden his wartime political base by bringing several conscriptionist Liberals and other public figures into his government. In the December 1917 general election, this government won a decisive victory over Sir Wilfrid Laurier's Liberals. The Union coalition did not long survive its triumph: the end of the war brought many Liberals back to their old affiliation, while other Unionists supported the new PROGRESSIVE PARTY.

With Borden's resignation in 1920, even the pretense of coalition disappeared. The Union government illustrated the dangers of coalition: after 1917, French Canadians associated coalitions with conscription. Indeed, during WWII, proposals for coalitions or a "National Government" came from those who also called for a stronger war effort and conscription. Since WWII there have been few proposals for federal coalition governments

You can see that this example did not involve usurping the power of a duly elected government and was brought about by an ELECTION so they actually gave a damn what the electorate thought. If this coalition seizes power it will be the biggest political disaster in Canadian history and should bring shame on the participants.

It would appear that this was premeditated perhaps even before the election was decided, had they been considering a coalition then they should have presented themselves that way to the electorate. But of course they did not have the guts fearing a backlash from the voters. This they may yet have to do.

Interesting to note question period in the house involved much cat calling from the opposition side of the house.

The stock market had its worst single percentage loss since 1987 today, expect more of the same and the dollar to follow, won't that be good for the economy. This will be horrible for the ecomony, the rest of the world, and business in general are going to run, remember this is not an elected Liberal government, this is a coalition of the NDP and Liberals totaling only 114 seats, the remaing 41 seats required for a majority are held by the separatists. Therefore 86 seats of the total 163 of the coalition are held by socialists/ separatists, what sort of policy are you going to expect? The Liberals are going to have to make some very big compromises to keep this working, this is not the same as electing a Liberal government and this will be a fiscal/ economic mess.

There first proclamation has been to report a $30 Billion dollar slush fund to be spent how, are we just going to give it away? How exactly will it stimulate the economy? It would appear they spent a lot more mental energy figuring out how to steal power than run government.

[TomS]

Then Harper should call an election today. Do it. Anything else is cowardice. No need to wait for to a vote. Call the Governor General today.

Harper doesn't have the ability to call an election, thats the GGs' job, but since the seperatist/socialist coalition is offering to govern without the consent of the people, i'm not sure what the GG will do.

[johhny]

Other things Stephen Harper is willing to do to avoid losing power:.

* Announce emergency plan to personally shovel everybody’s driveway this winter.

* Those clothes in your dryer – do those need folding?

* Admit he was never really writing that goddamn hockey book.

* Launch splashy ad campaign highlighted by slogan: “Stéphane Dion: Not Only a Leader, But Also Very Handsome.”

* Install donkey wheel under 24 Sussex – when house disappears like island in Lost, then who’ll have the upper hand you sniveling weasels? HA HA HA!!!!

[johhny]

Will release tapes/ transcripts of teacher’s meeting in staff room for affected students.

[IMASINNER]

He is managed to give up parliment to a party in the condition you described. Legally and with the blessing of the people.

I agree that its a legal move (albeit an outdated, dangerous legal move), but to say this has the blessing of the people is factually inaccurate and irresponsible. In the last election the people were voting for a party to take power. This is a group of completely different minded parties aligning togther to topple an elected government (I agreeit's not a coup)

I don't have the numbers and neither do you, but I bet if they were to let the people vote on this coalition government, the people would not give it's blessing. Combining the amounts of seats the LPC, NDP, and Bloc received and calling a coalition government the will of the people is just plain false.

[johhny]

I agree that its a legal move (albeit an outdated, dangerous legal move), but to say this has the blessing of the people is factually inaccurate and irresponsible. In the last election the people were voting for a party to take power. This is a group of completely different minded parties aligning togther to topple an elected government (I agreeit's not a coup)

I don't have the numbers and neither do you, but I bet if they were to let the people vote on this coalition government, the people would not give it's blessing. Combining the amounts of seats the LPC, NDP, and Bloc received and calling a coalition government the will of the people is just plain false.

Like a conservative would say " I don't see it that way".

[madmax]

Despite my objection to their response, as far as Harper's provocation I would agree with you! Manning would never have done such a thing.

Harper put them in the position of a cornered rat! They had no out. It was stupid to expect them to meekly accept it. Perhaps this coalition coup and installing Dion is political suicide. It's still a better choice!

Well said.

[IMASINNER]

Like a conservative would say " I don't see it that way".

You can say it anyway you want, like anyone you want, but if that's the response it seems to me you got nothing.

[Slim MacSquinty]

You Harper haters might be contrite today, but no one elected this coalition, and certainly if the electorate had its way its is almost certain that we would never see a government the majority of which comes from the NDP and BQ.

As much as you may hate Harper and as much as he may have made a tactical error, we are looking into the abyse of political instability that most certainly will have impacts you or the ursurpers have not considered.

Selfish and self serving, not a way to run a country.

[ThatGuy]

I think the GG has to go with the coalition, especially if they staple Harper's 2004 request to it.

They are using his playbook. I love it.

Edited December 1, 2008 by ThatGuy

[ThatGuy]

You Harper haters might be contrite today, but no one elected this coalition, and certainly if the electorate had its way its is almost certain that we would never see a government the majority of which comes from the NDP and BQ.

As much as you may hate Harper and as much as he may have made a tactical error, we are looking into the abyse of political instability that most certainly will have impacts you or the ursurpers have not considered.

Selfish and self serving, not a way to run a country.

The BQ isn't included in the coalition, they are just more accepting of its ability to deliver stimulus to the economy.

18 Liberals and 6 NDP will sit in cabinet.

[g_bambino]

no one elected this coalition

Really? Who's in there pretending to be an MP?

[Slim MacSquinty]

The BQ isn't included in the coalition, they are just more accepting of its ability to deliver stimulus to the economy.

A government is more than just a stimulus package, do you expect the BQ is going to support this just based on it s good intentions for the country they wish to destroy?

How naive is that. They will expect to carry weight (or more accurately accept spoils) in proportion to the seats they posses.

This is not what the PEOPLE voted for don't you get it!

[ThatGuy]

The BQ isn't included in the coalition, they are just more accepting of its ability to deliver stimulus to the economy.

A government is more than just a stimulus package, do you expect the BQ is going to support this just based on it s good intentions for the country they wish to destroy?

How naive is that. They will expect to carry weight (or more accurately accept spoils) in proportion to the seats they posses.

This is not what the PEOPLE voted for don't you get it!

I was just saying why the BQ would back a coalition, not whether the BQ is a good/bad entity.

As for what the people voted for, you are right, they voted in a CPC minority. Unfortunetly, Harper surrounded himself with Mike Harris failures that helped form a group that acted as if they were a majority. It is entirely constitutional and democratic in the sense of law. You may disagree with the process, but I mean, Harper was ok with the idea in 2004 when he was on the other side of things. These are turbulant times, sometimes things happen.

[capricorn]

Like a conservative would say " I don't see it that way".

Well that's better than calling someone an idiot, wouldn't you say?

[capricorn]

The BQ isn't included in the coalition, they are just more accepting of its ability to deliver stimulus to the economy.

Duceppe admitted he would use this opportunity to move his agenda forward which is to get the best deal for Quebec.

Don't forget that a government deals with more than the economy, i.e. foreign affairs, immigration etc. So this coalition would have their fingers in every single pie.

[Slim MacSquinty]

I have searched, and connot find a precident for this action even in the history of British Parliment, there have been three coalitions in the last hundred years but never like this and generally they have, by design, gone to the polls soon after forming the coalition knowing they needed to have the support of the people to have the moral authority to run the government.

In two cases, as in the only Canadian example, the government caucus was split and the government had to go outside their own ranks for support to pass legislation, In every case they took the coalition to the polls.

Perhaps the GG does have to ask if they can form a coalition to win confidence of the house, however she may also have the authority to limit their term forcing them to get an elected mandate for the coalition, certainly precident would say they do. Then the Liberals and the NDP would have to campaign as a coalition with a common platform.

Who ever said it was the end of the Liberals may in fact have been right.

[madmax]

The BQ isn't included in the coalition, they are just more accepting of its ability to deliver stimulus to the economy.

18 Liberals and 6 NDP will sit in cabinet.

The BQ has simply switched sides. If the BQ were not to support the Coalition of the LPC/NDP, then the CPC would be happy to have their "Support".

In the meantime, the CPC can't even get the support of a former Conservative MP/sitting independent. This is very bad for Harper.

[madmax]

I have searched, and connot find a precident for this action even in the history of British Parliment, there have been three coalitions in the last hundred years but never like this and generally they have, by design, gone to the polls soon after forming the coalition knowing they needed to have the support of the people to have the moral authority to run the government.

The coalition will go to the polls in 2011. And if you found 3 coalitions in the UK, you have found Precedent.

[capricorn]

Who ever said it was the end of the Liberals may in fact have been right.

Why don't they just change their name to the Labour Party? It has a certain international flavour to it.