Harper to prorogue parliament AGAIN?

[Smallc]

You're referring to consumer safety legislation which was passed unanimously by the elected parliament?

Yes, the one that contained the part that the elected parliament missed that was written in a way that would allow any government inspectors to enter anyone's home without a warrant for almost any reason - that legislation. It didn't contain that part anymore, and that is what the Senate is for.

[ToadBrother]

yet with all the opportunities the opposition had they did not force an election, they pass the bills in the house only to try to change them in commitee, aways from the eyes of the public. The opposition has been very cowardly this fall.

You do realize, I hope, that committees are where the legislative grunt work is normally done, right? And nothing is stopping journalists from attending committee meetings, so this idea that they're secret is absolutely wrong. I suspect you know it is, but you need to be inflammatory (or, to put it more bluntly, mildly dishonest) in your portrayal of what's going on.

[Smallc]

Are you saying the opposition in the House isn't doing its job?

It isn't all the job of opposition in the house.

[Smallc]

clearly... butterball Harper likes his perogys!

Oh good, now they can reintroduce the recall legislation...and maybe this time no one will oppose it's sweeping powers - until it makes its way to a court challenge.

[Smallc]

Yes heaven forbid bills passed by the majority of the house make to law unchanged.

That's not how our system is set up. I think some Conservatives need to realize that and get over it.

[Smallc]

Not to mention, some of the ones the Senate messed with were passed unanimously by the House.

That doesn't mean anything. It's completely irrelevant.

[ToadBrother]

That's not how our system is set up. I think some Conservatives need to realize that and get over it.

Indeed: http://www.parl.gc.ca/compendium/web-content/c_g_legislativeprocess-e.htm#2e

The sheer ignorant crapola that comes out of some peoples' mouths (or in our case, fingers) just amazes me. It's like they fell asleep during the civics and government sections of social studies and truly don't have the foggiest idea how our system works. I mean, anyone who bitches about legislative committees altering legislation is either being dishonest or is an utter and complete ignoramus.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Indeed: http://www.parl.gc.ca/compendium/web-content/c_g_legislativeprocess-e.htm#2e

The sheer ignorant crapola that comes out of some peoples' mouths (or in our case, fingers) just amazes me. It's like they fell asleep during the civics and government sections of social studies and truly don't have the foggiest idea how our system works. I mean, anyone who bitches about legislative committees altering legislation is either being dishonest or is an utter and complete ignoramus.

One of the few parts about our system I have any use or respect for is the committee work.

[eyeball]

Riiiiight, and who exactly would show up? The whiners, bitchers, complainers and nutjobs calling for grassy knolls and such. The great mass of people who are too busy working, and are relatively content with how things are being run, would ignore such gatherings.

Where do you get off calling anyone a whiney bitch?

One thing about a citizen's assembly is that it probably wouldn't be able to knock off with pay for 3 or 4 months whenever the mood struck it. As for ignoring one's responsibility to participate it should be mandatory and so should remaining in Parliament until it's job is done.

Lazy stupid bastards. As far as I'm concerned that also goes for the opposition who should all be marching on the GG's office and insisting that if Harper is no longer up to the job that Parliamentarians choose someone from amongst themselves who is and get on with it.

Edited December 31, 2009 by eyeball

[ToadBrother]

One of the few parts about our system I have any use or respect for is the committee work.

And more to the point, that's their purpose, and they are not held in secret (save certain committees that might be dealing with sensitive information). CPAC used to show interesting committee work (don't know if they still do, it's been about five years since I watched it), but most certainly their activities are recorded, journalists are welcome and I think even members of the public can get in. The same applies to Senate committees.

This is like the "the Coalition is a coupe" crapola that was put out last year. These people have no knowledge whatsoever of our system of government. They're whipped up into a storm by what ever group of demagogues runs the PR/spin wing of the party they seemed to have dedicated their wits and critical faculties to, and bleat out the most extraordinarily stupid noises. But this one, bitching about a Senate committee altering legislation, just takes the cake. Committees do that, and the Senate is the upper chamber of our bicameral Parliament, and thus, under our Constitution, dating back to 1867, they're doing their job. And it don't cut it to bitch and whine about our undemocratic Senate when one of Harper's main reasons for proroguing Parliament is so he can stack the Senate and reconstitute those committees to do what he wants. If it's not okay for the Senate to review legislation now, then why will it be okay in March?

So not only are these guys pretty blindingly stupid, they're absolute and utter hypocrites on top of it. The Senate's job in our system is not simply to do what the Commons tells it to do. It's job is to be a body of sober second thought, as is the upper chamber in most bicameral legislatures.

Idiots. Just complete and utter idiots. I'd love to think they were just being duplicitous, but I honestly think they have no idea how our government functions.

Edited December 31, 2009 by ToadBrother

[eyeball]

Often,when people are confronted with something that reflects poorly on their particular viewpoint,they choose to ignore "the inconvenient truth".

I'll write it again:

Apparently,Trudeau prorogued parliament 4 times in 4 years.For those keeping score,Trudeau 4,Harper 2.

Why no comment from the left?

Two fewer wrongs don't make it any less right.

For those of us who can actually add and subtract its the politicians 6 and Canadians 0.

[Smallc]

Idiots. Just complete and utter idiots. I'd love to think they were just being duplicitous, but I honestly think they have no idea how our government functions.

But how do you really feel?

[ToadBrother]

But how do you really feel?

I'd love to say it, but I think I might get a lifetime ban from the Internet

[Smallc]

CPAC used to show interesting committee work (don't know if they still do, it's been about five years since I watched it)

They do in fact show committees from both houses of Parliament (though I rarely watch them). Right now, CRTC hearings from last month are being shown...just thought I'd check for you.

[ToadBrother]

They do in fact show committees from both houses of Parliament (though I rarely watch them). Right now, CRTC hearings from last month are being shown...just thought I'd check for you.

Well, they are pretty boring. Most committees don't have the drama of Question Period. In fact, most Parliamentary work doesn't, but the news is only really all that interested in political theater, so people seem to come away with the notion that all MPs do is make lots of noise and bang on things.

[Smallc]

Yes, people are rather surprised when I tell then that what you see on TV (QP) only happens for 45 minutes a day.

[Verbal]

I didn't vote since the issue has already been resolved but I have to wonder...

If this is how he behaves with a minority, what will he be like with a majority?

Harper seems to have lost any sense that he is accountable to the electorate.

[Smallc]

Oh no, he's a populist, so he knows that he's accountable to the electorate. Unfortunately, he's forgotten that he's accountable to parliament.

[Alta4ever]

You do realize, I hope, that committees are where the legislative grunt work is normally done, right? And nothing is stopping journalists from attending committee meetings, so this idea that they're secret is absolutely wrong. I suspect you know it is, but you need to be inflammatory (or, to put it more bluntly, mildly dishonest) in your portrayal of what's going on.

No body said secret, but you and I both know that the media pays very little attention to the commitees. But I would love to hear your explanation why a bill that passes the house, one voted for by the opposition is then set back by the senate, to have those very opposition members that voted for it gut it, and pass something that doesn't resemble something that voted for in the first place?

[Smallc]

I'll explain it. That's the Senate's job. There's a reason that bills have to pass both houses.

[Alta4ever]

I'll explain it. That's the Senate's job. There's a reason that bills have to pass both houses.

Funny how the bills were not substancially changed when the liberals were in power......

[ToadBrother]

No body said secret, but you and I both know that the media pays very little attention to the commitees.

That's because they're boring. The media hardly pays attention to any of the goings on of Parliament other than the Speech from the Throne, the tabling of the budget, Question Period and the scrum. So it's not just committees that don't get much attention, most of the work of Parliament is too procedural, repetitive and boring to get much attention. I have to admit, having watched a legislative committee a couple of times in my life on CPAC that there probably doesn't exist a better cure for insomnia.

But I would love to hear your explanation why a bill that passes the house, one voted for by the opposition is then set back by the senate, to have those very opposition members that voted for it gut it, and pass something that doesn't resemble something that voted for in the first place?

Because the Senate is not bound by the Commons. That's kinda the nature of a bicameral legislature (for another example, see the differences between the health care reform bills tabled by the US Senate and the US House of Representatives). I'd rather have it that way than to just have the Red Chamber as a simple rubber stamp to the Commons, which is clearly what Harper wants.

Welcome to Bicameral Parliamentary Democracy 101. This is the way the game has been played for nearly 150 years in our country (and a lot longer in Westminster). Time for some catch up there, ol' boy. You might even learn yerself somethin' other than "Harper good, Liberal Senators baaaaad..."

Edited December 31, 2009 by ToadBrother

[ToadBrother]

Funny how the bills were not substancially changed when the liberals were in power......

Are you under the impression that when the Liberals get into power and the Senate is dominated by Conservatives that they won't be a pain in the arse either? You really don't know much about anything, do you?

[Alta4ever]

I have missed what I am asking or want to misdirect, I am asking why opposition MPS will vote to pass a bill in the then when they get it in commitee completely change it. If it was such an uacceptible bill that it needed to be gutted in commitee, why pass it through the house?

[ToadBrother]

I have missed what I am asking or want to misdirect, I am asking why opposition MPS will vote to pass a bill in the then when they get it in commitee completely change it. If it was such an uacceptible bill that it needed to be gutted in commitee, why pass it through the house?

Because that's kinda of how the system works, particularly in a Minority Government. Gutting it in Committee means there's no chance of the Government declaring the whole thing a Confidence Motion to bully the Opposition. Since minority governments are pretty damned rare, I'd say sit back and enjoy it, because I suspect that we'll be back to a majority (probably Conservative) within the next year or two, and then you can go back to snoozing through all the Committee work.