Harper to prorogue parliament AGAIN?

myata · January 22, 2010

Let's see how much of he'll manage to keep come election time. Those %% points have tendency to drip through Iggy's fingers like water. Guess not in the least because everybody is still trying to figure out what he's about.

nicky10013 · January 22, 2010

Let's see how much of he'll manage to keep come election time. Those %% points have tendency to drip through Iggy's fingers like water. Guess not in the least because everybody is still trying to figure out what he's about.

Can't argue with anything you've said. I've been saying for a while now that they need to release a platform so they can present themselves as a viable alternative. I heard there could be a few policy announcements tomorrow at the rally so we'll see.

William Ashley · January 22, 2010

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.

Check the polls recently...

capricorn · January 22, 2010

In fact if chance presents itself I'd like to ask some hard questions as to what they, opposition parties, in particular the one that leads the opposition are going to do to defend the role of Parliament.

On the question of the power of the PM to prorogue, the opposition has pretty well voiced where they stand.

NDP Leader Jack Layton is condemning Stephen Harper’s decision to suspend Parliament and wants new laws that would limit a prime minister’s ability to shut down the House of Commons “on a whim.”
The NDP said today it would propose legislation to limit the powers of prorogation “so the Prime Minister cannot abuse it.”

“The government should only prorogue Parliament on a vote in the House of Commons,” Layton said today as he wrapped up a caucus strategy session.

In a minority Parliament that would mean that a Prime Minister could only prorogue proceedings with the consent of some opposition members.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/753480--opposition-fights-back-on-prorogation?bn=1

"Prorogation is part of our constitutional system, but to use it every time you’re in a tight spot seems to me a flagrant abuse of a constitutional power, and that’s why Canadians are angry about it," Mr. Ignatieff said Monday, after speaking with Nova Scotia Community College students in Dartmouth.
Mr. Ignatieff said there is a legitimate time to shut down Parliament when a government has gone through its legislative program, and it’s time to "reset."

http://thechronicleherald.ca/Metro/1161893.html

The new laws Layton want might open a can of worms if they required Constitutional amendment.

Ignatieff favours the status quo.

The Bloc is opposed to Harper using prorogation but I don't see that they have a position on any potential changes to the process or if they're OK with the status quo.

Yet, I think there's no harm asking them again as it's been over a week since they made their views public. Who knows, maybe they have since developed different perspectives.

In terms of concrete ideas outside the prorogation matter to defend the role of Parliament I haven't read anything from any of the parties.

Oops, edit to remove the incomplete sentence.

Edited January 22, 2010 by capricorn

ToadBrother · January 22, 2010

The new laws Layton want might open a can of worms if they required Constitutional amendment.

Prorogation is explicitly a Reserve Power of the Sovereign. Anything that alters that would require a constitutional change.

Or, in other words, Parliament can't just pass a law altering the Sovereign's powers. The law would be unconstitutional.

Edited January 22, 2010 by ToadBrother

capricorn · January 22, 2010

I heard there could be a few policy announcements tomorrow at the rally so we'll see.

If Ignatieff makes any kind of policy statement(s) at the rally that would detract from the prorogation issue. The opposition will keep the focus on the PM proroguing Parliament because that's the thrust of the demonstration.

William Ashley · January 22, 2010

So if its non-partisan why is Ignatieff attending?

To join with the rest of Canada in non partisan disgust of what Steven Harper did to the good hearted Canadians of the world.

Ingatieff: Canadian and American Citizen First Liberal first too but second for now.

OHHH GOD!!!!!

I just realized the only alternative to Steven harper is an american!!

CANADA IS DOOMED..

where is the razor?!!!

My MP is American too.. I'm starting to see a trend here.

I still have that flight clearance to try for, so I really don't mean it like that. Americans are some people too, but when was the last time a Canadian was the president of America? Sure a Britain is the head of state of Canada, but really? Sure Harper is a wanna be who sells out to American intersts..

Ithink I have a glimmer of hope that ignatieff might actually win the election now.

I'm not entirely certain it is hope though.. I'm confused.

Harper - an american - layton or a seperatist, or may.

Bloc doesn't run in my riding, and my ndp mp is american too.

what is the world coming to for patriotic pronationalistic canadians?

I'm not even pagan.

I thought MP's had to denounce all foreign allegiances? How can Ignatieff or my MP even be MP's if they swear an oath of allegiance to the flag of america?

For christs sake they are both eligible to be CIA agents as american citizens.

It sucks that it would come to the crux of hitlarper or the CIA running Canada.

True I fly an american flag in my garage(although it would be against US flag laws... ) Is this what Canadians want... Americans running the parliament and government?

I just relaized dual citizenship is not entirely uncommon.

Stéphane Dion was also french.

Could dual citizenship be a point of conflict of interst...

eg. Michel Jean is also a Haitian dual citizen, isn't she?

I geuss the practice is somewhat normal in government,

..........

Edited January 23, 2010 by William Ashley

bush_cheney2004 · January 22, 2010

...My MP is American too.. I'm starting to see a trend here.

I still have that flight clearance to try for, so I really don't mean it like that. Americans are some people too, but when was the last time a Canadian was the president of America? Sure a Britain is the head of state of Canada, but really? Sure Harper is a wanna be who sells out to American intersts..

If it makes you feel any better, the governor of Michigan was born in Canada, and so was William Shatner....we love him, and he's from Quebec!

William Ashley · January 23, 2010

If it makes you feel any better, the governor of Michigan was born in Canada, and so was William Shatner....we love him, and he's from Quebec!

No biggie I renounced my citizenship, sadly citizenship laws in Canada don't allow me to, so after starting my own state, I am a dual citizen of sorts too. I do try to make good on the oath of allegiance though (it is the pro nationalist in me)... even if it is from the perspective of doing what I think is best. I one branch of my family comes from NY actually, but I think there are two or so generations - due to changes in US citizenship laws, I think my grandfather would have to peittion for it, and my father would have to live in the US for a number of year before being eligible, and I think I would also have to live in the US which is pretty much an imposibility since I'm threatened with arrest if returning to the US without preclearance. None the less I think it is an issue. Although I'm honestly wondering what the hell the Liberal party is thinking when the last two leaders they've had have been dual citizens. It isn't a clincher, but the principle is a little foul.

I just find the techinical aspect of someone elegible to be a CIA agent (and federal employee of the US), as the PM of Canada. A frenchman is a little bit more acceptable.. even with them being a former seperatist.

Over a 10th of the house of commons is foreign born nationals. Oddly though this is 5x more than the percentage of Canadian citizens in ratio who are eligible dual citizens.

I love this from an older article "Three of the foreign-born MPs' citizenship status remains unknown."

Edited January 23, 2010 by William Ashley

bush_cheney2004 · January 23, 2010

No biggie I renounced my citizenship, sadly citizenship laws in Canada don't allow me to, so after starting my own state, I am a dual citizen of sorts too. I do try to make good on the oath of allegiance though... even if it is from the perspective of doing what I think is best.

Your government has created a renouncement application kit...how funny is that? :lol:

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/citizenship/renounce-how.asp

I just find the techinical aspect of someone elegible to be a CIA agent (and federal employee of the US), as the PM of Canada. A frenchman is a little bit more acceptable.. even with them being a former seperatist.

I can see the advantage of that, especially for the CIA. CSIS isn't allowed to kill anybody.

nicky10013 · January 23, 2010

If it makes you feel any better, the governor of Michigan was born in Canada, and so was William Shatner....we love him, and he's from Quebec!

Actually, there's been speculation that Chester A. Arthur was born in Canada.

William Ashley · January 23, 2010

Your government has created a renouncement application kit...how funny is that?

http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/citizenship/renounce-how.asp

I can see the advantage of that, especially for the CIA. CSIS isn't allowed to kill anybody.

You have to adopt another citizenship which is recognized by Canada, hence the reason I couldn't leglaly from Canadian law change my citizenship to my own state.

They just lock you away remove your rights and drug you if you claim self deriving sovereignty on record.

Edited January 23, 2010 by William Ashley

Hydraboss · January 23, 2010

To join with the rest of Canada in non partisan disgust of what Steven Harper did to the good hearted Canadians of the world.

Ingatieff: Canadian and American Citizen First Liberal first too but second for now.

OHHH GOD!!!!!

I just realized the only alternative to Steven harper is an american!!

CANADA IS DOOMED..

where is the razor?!!!

My MP is American too.. I'm starting to see a trend here.

I still have that flight clearance to try for, so I really don't mean it like that. Americans are some people too, but when was the last time a Canadian was the president of America? Sure a Britain is the head of state of Canada, but really? Sure Harper is a wanna be who sells out to American intersts..

Ithink I have a glimmer of hope that ignatieff might actually win the election now.

I'm not entirely certain it is hope though.. I'm confused.

Harper - an american - layton or a seperatist, or may.

Bloc doesn't run in my riding, and my ndp mp is american too.

what is the world coming to for patriotic pronationalistic canadians?

I'm not even pagan.

I thought MP's had to denounce all foreign allegiances? How can Ignatieff or my MP even be MP's if they swear an oath of allegiance to the flag of america?

For christs sake they are both eligible to be CIA agents as american citizens.

It sucks that it would come to the crux of hitlarper or the CIA running Canada.

True I fly an american flag in my garage(although it would be against US flag laws... ) Is this what Canadians want... Americans running the parliament and government?

I just relaized dual citizenship is not entirely uncommon.

Stéphane Dion was also french.

Could dual citizenship be a point of conflict of interst...

eg. Michel Jean is also a Haitian dual citizen, isn't she?

I geuss the practice is somewhat normal in government,

..........

Are you, like, one of Oleg's kids? Seriously. Are you?

capricorn · January 23, 2010

I was thinking the same thing.

jbg · January 23, 2010

I was thinking the same thing.

One of WhoWhere's kids more likely.

myata · January 23, 2010

On the question of the power of the PM to prorogue, the opposition has pretty well voiced where they stand.

Thanks, that was informative. Looks like (for the first time in my -recorded- elections history) I'm voting NDP this time around (as promised, whichever party will propose a real and meaningful democratic change). I think that everybody who wants to see real change happen would have few alternatives to doing the same. Showing the finger to the big behemoths is our only chance to see anything happen. And as I already attempted to explain, leaving the things as they are will be dangerous for our democracy, at least on the federal level.

Argus · January 23, 2010

Check the polls recently...

The Tories go up and down in the polls, but one thing has remained constant for years. In every survey where Canadians are asked which leader would make the best Prime Minister Harper wins, hands down. He gets a higher vote margin than his party does in voter preferences, which means even people who say they'll vote Liberal or NDP or Green when asked, still have to admit Harper is a better man for the job than their guy.

How sad for you people.

Argus · January 23, 2010

Are you, like, one of Oleg's kids? Seriously. Are you?

This is a guy who claimed the other day that some mysterious powers, perhaps the moderators, are editing his posts after he posts them to make him look bad.

cybercoma · January 23, 2010

Quite the opposite. He prorogued parliament to protect Canadians from the first coalition government that would have included seperatists, who's sole purpose is to break up the country.

And he prorogued parliament the second time, to save the Canadian military from political attacks from the opposition parties. Who seem to hold Canada responsible for the roughing up of some terrorists by a foreign government.

Pathetic.

In both cases, the majority of Canadians are on the side of the conservative government. Despite what groups highschool and college students may join on facebook.

While I agree with the first proroguing of parliament, the second is inexcusable.

Read what you wrote again: "Save the Canadian military from political attacks." That is ridiculous. If the government has a good reason for the Canadian military to be where it is and doing what it is doing, the government ought to stand up to criticism from the opposition. A government that cannot represent itself and cannot answer questions about its programs, missions, and accountability is not a government that I can support, regardless of party. The government that cannot defend itself and justify its ideas in the face of criticism is no government at all.

It pains me to say it because I like a number of the things the Conservatives have done since they've been in power. This, however, has no excuse. Especially considering Harper called the Governor-General on the phone this time. Appalling. Get back to work and respond to the representatives of the public. If you can't do that, I, as a past supporter, don't want you representing me anymore.

blueblood · January 23, 2010

While I agree with the first proroguing of parliament, the second is inexcusable.

Read what you wrote again: "Save the Canadian military from political attacks." That is ridiculous. If the government has a good reason for the Canadian military to be where it is and doing what it is doing, the government ought to stand up to criticism from the opposition. A government that cannot represent itself and cannot answer questions about its programs, missions, and accountability is not a government that I can support, regardless of party. The government that cannot defend itself and justify its ideas in the face of criticism is no government at all.

It pains me to say it because I like a number of the things the Conservatives have done since they've been in power. This, however, has no excuse. Especially considering Harper called the Governor-General on the phone this time. Appalling. Get back to work and respond to the representatives of the public. If you can't do that, I, as a past supporter, don't want you representing me anymore.

I think its just bad marketing about the prorogation blowing up in Harper's face. To me it makes sense with the olympics so close and the fact that winter break was originally supposed to still be on.

If Harper wants to somewhat fix this in the future, cut short the summer break to make up for lost time.

As for polls they bounce around a lot, anyone remember the numbers the last time parliament was prorogued because of the coalition? I'd say a lot of people were supportive of the tories at that point in time.

These moves are all marketing, you win some you lose some. I don't see the big deal, parliament will resume in March, and there will still be democratic elections at least every 5 years. For those saying democracy is gone in Canada because of this is flat out ignorant.

cybercoma · January 23, 2010

If parliament wanted to take an extended break for the Olympics, it not only ought to have been posed that way, but also it ought to have been voted on by the house, not decided by the Prime Minister.

Born Free · January 23, 2010

Shady, on 20 January 2010 - 02:47 PM, said
He prorogued parliament to protect Canadians from the first coalition government that would have included seperatists, who's sole purpose is to break up the country.

Harper wasnt in the least trying to protect Canadians. He was only trying to protect his PM post.

Lets us not forget this letter by Harper in 2004 to the Govenor General suggesting a possible coalition which included the separatists...

"We respectfully point out that the opposition parties, who together constitute a majority in the House, have been in close consultation. We believe that, should a request for dissolution arise this should give you cause, as constitutional practice has determined, to consult the opposition leaders and consider all of your options before exercising your constitutional authority...".

cybercoma · January 23, 2010

For those saying democracy is gone in Canada because of this is flat out ignorant.

Democracy is gone. A dangerous precedent has been set. Whenever a government does not want to answer questions from parliament (the representatives of the public) they can just shut it down, work on a marketing campaign, flood the television networks with their ads, doctor public opinion, and resume discussions at a time that suits them better. Oh, it's democracy by definition, but it's a cheap tactic being used to avert accountability and responsibility to the people.

blueblood · January 23, 2010

Democracy is gone. A dangerous precedent has been set. Whenever a government does not want to answer questions from parliament (the representatives of the public) they can just shut it down, work on a marketing campaign, flood the television networks with their ads, doctor public opinion, and resume discussions at a time that suits them better. Oh, it's democracy by definition, but it's a cheap tactic being used to avert accountability and responsibility to the people.

And ultimately its up to the people come election time. If this is a big issue, then have the opposition punt the gov't and let the people decide what they want. There will be plenty of time to punt come march.

Harper has to wear this prorogation come next election, he's as accountable as he's ever been. PMPM had to wear the sponsorship scandal.

When march comes around and they're back sitting this story will have run out of legs.

capricorn · January 23, 2010

Democracy is gone.

This statement is so over the top. Democracy does not begin and end with Parliament. I have been viewing televised reports of the anti-prorogation rallies and what I see there is democracy in action in its finest form. Parliament is prorogued but that act has not shut down democracy. As blueblood said, the people will speak again come election time.