Harper to prorogue parliament AGAIN?

[Keepitsimple]

Published today, here is a Nanos poll on the Afghan Detainee issues. Make of it what you will but here's my cut.....only half of Canadians seem to be aware of the issue. Of that half, only 37% believe the Conservatives knew that detainees would be tortured. That makes up only 18% of the total people in the poll. So...as several people have said, it's not high on the Canadian political radar....

Awareness Question: Have you heard or not heard about the Afghan detainee issue?

Canadians (n=1,003)

Heard, 48.8%

Not Heard, 51.2%

Credibility Question: [Heard of Afghan detainee issue only] Based on what you have heard and know, please rate the credibility of the following in terms of the Afghan detainee issue where 1 is no credibility and 5 is complete credibility:

Canadians who had heard of Afghan detainee issue (n=489)

Mean Scores

Canadian Armed Forces, 3.35 out of 5

Opposition Liberal Party, 2.66 out of 5

Opposition New Democrat Party, 2.65 out of 5

Conservative government, 2.48 out of 5

Opposition Bloc Québécois Party, 2.37 out of 5

Believability of Positions/Statements Question: Some people say that the Conservative government passed Afghan detainees to Afghan security forces knowing they might be tortured. Others say that the Conservative government would never knowingly pass detainees to Afghan security forces if they thought they might be tortured. Which of these two views best reflects your personal opinion?

Canadians (n=1,003)

The Conservative government passed Afghan detainees to Afghan security forces knowing they might be tortured, 37.8%

The Conservative government would never knowingly pass detainees to Afghan security forces if they thought they might be tortured, 36.3%

Unsure, 25.9%

Quebecers (n=251)

The Conservative government passed Afghan detainees to Afghan security forces knowing they might be tortured, 43.4%

The Conservative government would never knowingly pass detainees to Afghan security forces if they thought they might be tortured, 35.6%

Unsure, 20.9%

Link: http://www.nikonthenumbers.com/topics/show/149/37634

Edited December 30, 2009 by Keepitsimple

[bloodyminded]

Insipid post. Why do the kooks on the right always try to fall back on the you don't support the troops gambit?

Anyone who uses that argument is either stupid, or dishonest. I sincerely believe there are no other options.

Personally, I think it is the second one.

[William Ashley]

reported it just happened....

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/091230/national/parliament_suspend

[g_bambino]

Liberal House Leader Ralph Goodale called the move "a shocking insult to democracy."

The move is a little odd, but a "shocking insult to democracy"? I expect Mr. Goodale will be exercising his democratic right to table a non-confidence motion against the government come March, then.

[c/e]

Edited December 30, 2009 by g_bambino

[JaysFan]

I heard on the radio this morning that Harper will act like a cowardly bitch (female dog), and run with his little tail between his legs to the governor general today to ask for ANOTHER prorogation of parliament. He seems really frightened that the Afghan commitee will discover the extent of his and Peter MacKay's violations of the Geneva convention. This government is determined to hide the truth from the Canadian people.

It's official.

Democracy in Canada is dead.

Unfortunately for Canada Stephen Harper isn't.

What a waste of skin.

[Smallc]

How does a prorogation result in the death of democracy?

[capricorn]

The move is a little odd, but a "shocking insult to democracy"?

Did Goodale think it was a shocking blow to democracy when Chretien prorogued for two months in 2003 to make way for Paul Martin

Prime Minister Jean Chrétien prorogued Parliament on Thursday, making it possible for Paul Martin to take the helm on Jan. 12, when the Commons and the Senate are expected to be called back.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2003/11/12/liberals031112.html

The Liberals were too chicken to bring down the government now they're crying in their beer.

[JaysFan]

Even the right wing feels this is an affront to democracy.

Taken from Connie Fournier's thread.

They are discussing this on tghe EBAY board of all places.

Bills going to die!!

Read this poster's comments!!!

18-Dec-2009 1:49 PM Report

I've read several articles on the possibility that Harper might try this.

-------------------------------------------------

It has been just a year since Stephen Harper went to the Governor General to have Parliament prorogued in order to thwart a vote of confidence that was poised to topple his government. According to reports in the media, he is being pressured by senior advisors to do the same again.

The primary reasons to do this are two-fold. While this time his government is in no immediate danger, proroguing Parliament requires that all House and Senate committees be disbanded, and then reconstituted with new membership when the new session begins.

Given the hits that the Conservative support has taken in the polls over the ongoing Afghanistan torture hearings, having that committee disbanded serves the immediate purpose of stalling the investigation from the daily news reports as the new committee membership would be forced to start from scratch, or at least dedicate a significant period catching up on the existing documentation and testimony.

The other upside for Stephen is that, by the time the new session began the Conservatives will finally have achieved majority membership in the Senate following two Liberal retirements in early January. At present the Liberal majority means that Senate Committees are still Liberal dominated and are viewed as obstructionist by the Conservatives. Without an election or prorogue, the makeup of those committees will not change, no matter that the Conservatives will have a Senate majority. Proroguing allows new Committes dominated by Conservatives to be constituted with the hope that this will ease passage of bills throught the Senate.

There are, of course, also downsides to prorogue. Any bills which have not passed royal assent are killed by a prorogue, in effect - given that there are 40 still in various stages of passage - undoing almost 60% of the work which Parliament has done over the past year. Stephen will have to find a way to explain to the voters why several pieces of legislation which he and other members of his team pushed as being critically important to pass quickly turned out to have been OK to kill for purposes of political expediency. These bills include the ending of conditional sentencing, the consumer protection act, the overhaul of the sex offender registry, a crackdown on white collar crime and child pornography, and the ending of the long gun registry. The message to Canadians will be clear, that the Conservatives put increasing their power over public safety, and this is a message which the opposition parties will be rightfully able to use in the next election cycle.

The perception that the government used a political trick to try and push the Afghanistan torture inquiry off the front pages may also backfire as it will only be seen as more evidence that the government is obstructionist on the issue. That only lends further credence to the notion that it is hiding something from the public. As the evidence has continued to mount, it is doubtful that public opinion will shift in any way but further towards assuming dishonesty by the government on this issue. Even now, to assume that the government had no idea that transferred detainees were being abused requires you to accept that the responsible Ministers were shielded from a raft of reports and requests on this very issue from our diplomatic corp, the Red Cross, our Nato allies, and from internal military reports. The notion that none of it climbed up into ministerial briefing papers is ludicrous.

It also seems that their attempts to demonize Colvin are likely to backfire even more as well. Besides the multitude of senior diplomats which have come out to support him, he has clearly decided that he could not allow his reputation to be so impugned without response. Most telling, and certainly most absolutely true was one paragraph in his response:

"I am not a whistleblower. Rather, I am a loyal servant of the Crown who did his job in Afghanistan to he best of his abilities, working through internal and authorized channels. [...] I testified in Parliament because I was summoned by the Committee and legally compelled to speak the truth. I feel it is my duty as a public servant, when commanded to appear before the Parliamentary Committee, to give evidence that is full, frank and fair. I feel duty bound to be frank and thorough in responding to the Committee's inquiries."

That much is certainly true. He never leaked to the media. Never tried to push the investigation. Never displayed any disloyalty to his position or to his country. He appeared only when officially called, spoke what he believed to be true, and then tried to go back to doing his job. It was the government that tried to make him out to be a disingenuous and dishonest provocateur, which has only made his testimony more and more compelling as subsequent revelations have demonstrated it to be accurate.

And this is perhaps the most compelling reason why it may be foolish for Harper to have Parliament prorogued. It seems, at this point, that the Afghanistan issue has taken on a life of it's own and so prorogue may do nothing to contain the ongoing media investigation. What the government may not want is for that to be the only ongoing investigation as they then totally lose control of trying to manage the issue. On the other hand, Harper may also believe as Laurie Hawn suggested that Canadians don't care about what went on in Afghanistan prisons and so take the heat on this issue. If so, it might well be the riskiest strategy that this government has taken to date.

Edited December 30, 2009 by JaysFan

[Smallc]

It doesn't really matter what people feel. This is a part of our system, and at the moment, there's absolutely no reason for the Governor General to refuse the request.

[William Ashley]

Did Goodale think it was a shocking blow to democracy when Chretien prorogued for two months in 2003 to make way for Paul Martin

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2003/11/12/liberals031112.html

The Liberals were too chicken to bring down the government now they're crying in their beer.

OK, though - what is the reason for March? To stem off allegations of war crimes doesn't seem a really good reason, in right, although it could be a good call for wrong. Although do remember when the majority tried to act last year he also prorouged. If it isn't an election its a prorouge.. how many days have these guys actually worked? 5, 6? Every time a new session is called all former business is whiped clear. Already shortening the 8 month commons sitting to like 7 PLUS they only sit like 5 days a month. All that business that was unfinished has to be reintroduced. Talk about baby steps.

[JaysFan]

It doesn't really matter what people feel. This is a part of our system, and at the moment, there's absolutely no reason for the Governor General to refuse the request.

She's a spineless waste of oxygen and tax payer dollars herself.

I can think of a 100 good reasons to refuse the request.

The only people who could defend Harper's actions are his apologists and those with their heads up their arse.

We really need a good grassy knoll and book depository in this country.

[William Ashley]

How does a prorogation result in the death of democracy?

All the bills that were voted on go down the toilet.

[William Ashley]

It doesn't really matter what people feel. This is a part of our system, and at the moment, there's absolutely no reason for the Governor General to refuse the request.

Except not having a valid reason for requesting it?

[William Ashley]

Or the cost involved in reintroducing and backstalling all this stuff,, sheer paper waste.

[Smallc]

All the bills that were voted on go down the toilet.

And most get reintroduced.

[Smallc]

She's a spineless waste of oxygen and tax payer dollars herself.

We all have opinions. That doesn't mean they're all based on anything meaningful. Given precedent, there is absolutely no reason for her to refuse the request. There is in fact reason for her to grant it, given that the prorogation has been used for transitions in the past. The Liberals used it to transition from leader to leader. The Conservatives are going to use it to transition from a Senate minority to a Senate majority (or at least a plurality, I'm not sure which it is).

[wulf42]

We really need a good grassy knoll and book depository in this country.

That is not a very nice thing to say about our PM!

Edited December 30, 2009 by wulf42

[Sir Bandelot]

Is it too late?

Parliament suspended until March 3

It shocks my conscience... someone get me a marijuana cigarette...

Edited December 30, 2009 by Sir Bandelot

[capricorn]

OK, though - what is the reason for March? To stem off allegations of war crimes doesn't seem a really good reason, in right, although it could be a good call for wrong.

If the Conservatives were tanking in the polls, one could argue that it is to run from the Afghan detainee issue. But as reflected in recent polls, the Conservatives continue to be in in the lead. There is no substantive outrage in the electorate that this is a ballot issue. So it's something else. It's as simple as suggested by Smallc, i.e. to gain a Conservative majority in the Senate. I would add that the removal of a distraction from the Olympics is high up there as another motivation. Are those motives self serving? Yes they are. That's typical of how politicians act when they want to remain in power. They're all the same.

All that business that was unfinished has to be reintroduced. Talk about baby steps.

That unfinished business would have been met with a stone wall of opposition in the Senate, regardless of the will of Parliament and often driven by partisanship. How productive is that? If there is to be a stone wall, let it come in the House of Commons for proper ground floor debate.

Let the Conservatives come back to Canadians and the House with a plan for a new Parliament. The opposition could certainly use the proroguing period to regroup and form a strategy to hold the Conservatives' feet to the fire. Let's hope they're up to challenge.

[Argus]

She's a spineless waste of oxygen and tax payer dollars herself.

I can think of a 100 good reasons to refuse the request.

Let's hear a few.

[Argus]

"Support the troops! Support the troops! Oh sweet Christ in Heaven, why can't you just support the troops?"

Or at least not support the Taliban like so many of you on the Left do.

[g_bambino]

It doesn't really matter what people feel. This is a part of our system, and at the moment, there's absolutely no reason for the Governor General to refuse the request.

That's right; it would invoke a constitutional crisis if she refused. Harper should face the House and be responsible for his actions when parliament is reconvened.

[Argus]

We really need a good grassy knoll and book depository in this country.

Weeee! It's Psychoman to the rescue of democracy! If only we had more political assasinations our democracy would be so much healthier!

Cause everyone knows that murder is the best tool of freedom lovers.

[g_bambino]

She's a spineless waste of oxygen and tax payer dollars herself.

We really need a good grassy knoll and book depository in this country.

And we really need for ignorant boobs like you to be escorted to the exit.

[Argus]

And most get reintroduced.

And this time they won't get held up in the senate.