Will proroguing Parliament hurt the Tories' political success?

[Rue]

I think it makes perfect sense to pay members of Parliament hundreds of thousands of dollars not to work,

Also I think it makes perfect sense everytime the party in power gets experiences political difficulties to

simply suspend parliament and not talk about those difficulties and its vision for remedying them.

I mean if you want an accountable government and a democracy move to Afghanistan.

Oh no wait I am confused.

I meant Iran.

Um no, I meant China.

No no I meant Zimbabwe.

[nicky10013]

After a couple weeks preparation, here is what Michael Ignatieff said Friday - Liberals want to examine documents "whether Canada complied with International law and whether it has respected human rights - and a document about the conduct of our troops in the field". Ignatieff is no Stephane Dion. Ignatieff is a distinguished Harvard professor, with an excellent command of the English language, and with his carefully chosen words, there is no confusion as to what he said.

We have finally smoked out the Liberals . Although denying all along, that in their probing of the detainee issue, they were not challenging or condemning our brave men and women in the military, we now learn from words of Ignatieff himself, that Liberals want to probe and examine "the conduct of our troops in the field."

How many times has it been pointed out to members of the media, that when the Liberals and Richard Colvin said our troops "detained and handed over for severe torture a lot of innocent people" this was an unsubstantiated and unproven direct attack on our troops. When Colvin said "all the Afghans we handed over were tortured" not a single solitary Liberal challenged Colvin's statement. How many members of the media agreed with General Hillier that statement was "ludicrous" and absurd? After three years of probing and investigation, finally a case where a Taliban prisoner was attacked with a shoe, in the process of the turnover to the Afghhan officials on the battlefield. That doesn't lead one to believe or is proof, there was systemic abuse of prisoners turned over by our Canadian troops.

After Friday's statement by Ignatieff, Canadians no longer will have to depend on the media to interpret the motives of the Liberals, or question their political agenda, as Canadians now know what is behind the Liberal probing and accusations, now that Ignatieff has definitively told the world - Liberals "want to examine the conduct of our troops in the field."

Wouldn't Canadians be a little more assured, that the Liberal support for out troops is genuine, and 100%, if they would make some effort, or expend a fraction of their time, looking and probing, into the conditions that our troops are operating under, and are conducting a war in, rather than total concentration of their concern on the well being of the Taliban.

We remember James Carville, political advisor to Bill Clinton, famous words "it is the economy stupid" in pointing out something that was obvious, so if anyone now asks what is the preoccupation or witch hunt of the Liberals in these detainee hearings, one can paraphrase Carville, and emphatically now state it is "the conduct of our troops in the field stupid."

Not this crap again. You're reaching, and it's painfully obvious.

[wyly]

After three years of probing and investigation, finally a case where a Taliban prisoner was attacked with a shoe, in the process of the turnover to the Afghhan officials on the battlefield. That doesn't lead one to believe or is proof, there was systemic abuse of prisoners turned over by our Canadian troops.

that's because you're selective to evidence you want to believe... notes from that incident were quite clear it happened routinely, that was the point of them taking pictures of the detainee before they turned him over to the afghans, they wanted visual proof of torture...every country in NATO was aware what was happening to detainees...there has been a cover up and we've been lied to...and this from a government that promised accountability and transparency...

[wyly]

I, for one, am glad the media is into this. I want to listen to ALL sides, even the Tories which I have and don't believe them. The opposition parties, the media and even the military which said at least, one Taliban was tortured leans more to the cover up than anything. This Tory government has been getting away with a lot of doings and I said about a year ago, give them enough rope and they will hang themselves and this could be it.Something seems to happen to people in power, the more they are given power they seem to feel they are unstoppable and can do whatever they want. Well, in Canada, Canadians won't stand for a power freak as PM, no matter what party are!

it's an acumulation of incidents...our Parliament is being turned into a Presidency of the PMO...

[DrGreenthumb]

Not this crap again. You're reaching, and it's painfully obvious.

Yes reaching and cross-posting, and copying and pasting this tired crap to several threads. Just because you repeat something over and over again does not make it true. NOBODY is criticising the troops the criticism is against the dishonest Conservative government. Stop hiding behind our troops you friggin coward.

edited to add: not directed at nicky but at the coward hiding behind our troops. I just didn't want to reply directly to that post and in doing so repost peterb's tired crap again.

Edited January 10, 2010 by DrGreenthumb

[Sir Bandelot]

it's an acumulation of incidents...our Parliament is being turned into a Presidency of the PMO...

It makes sense really, when you think aboot it. Harper wears knee-pads that are made in USA.

- One of the few things they still make these days

[Bugs]

This is what Rex Murphy says ... to precis, he traces the prevailing standards in the cynical use of these Parliamentary procedures back to Chretien. It's true -- Chretien called an election just because he caught the newly elected Stockwell Day flat-footed. He cancelled the Somalia Inquiry. Rex points out that Harper carries on that tradition ... which is not a very proud one.

And then he sets out how mainstream Canadians feel about the current state of Parliament. We pick up on his just at the point where his melancholy drone has us swirling our cognac, and taking a sniff.

Question Period is a verbal equivalent of the World Wrestling Federation, all hype and confected theatrics. Members have as little regard for their own dignity, or for that of their opponents, as is possible to conceive. They dance with half-truths when it serves their purpose, launch reckless attacks on the first hint of scandal, play act to the cameras in and out of the House, manoeuvre and scheme and work the ropes at every opportunity. Rarely does a member, a minister, or a prime minister save his or her best efforts for actual presentation in the nation’s highest democratic chamber. They’re off to some photo-op background for the big announcements, save the “important” speeches for partisan gatherings, and strain to be out of Parliament when what they have to say or do really counts.

In other words, by their behaviour within the chamber, and by what they choose to showcase outside of it, they have given us the real reading on their “respect for Parliament.” Their actions show how little they are really concerned about its precious dignity.

Read more: http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2010/01/09/rex-murphy-crocodile-tears-for-the-quot-dignity-quot-of-parliament.aspx#ixzz0cLSwUNTO

The Liberals miss their chance because they offer no alternative. They don't offer the prospect of any improvement in any direction. That's my opinion. If Canadians want a majority government, at this point, are they going to go to the Liberals? They're a confused bunch of dreamers, caught up in their own bonfire of the vanities.

As an example, the Conservatives compromised on their budget when the Liberals had a electorally compelling reason to stimulate the economy. They should be able to take a lot of credit for at least some of the stimulus results. They could be taking some credit for forcing it on the government -- instead, they carp about what was done, or they deflect attention elsewhere. Meanwhile, Canadians busily juicing local businesses, hiring contractors, and getting some tax-free repairs made to their houses. People give the Conservatives credit for this.

The Liberals don't have a distinct position on anything -- or am I wrong? They play almost exclusively to the media. The Liberals should not be heading towards an election until they have an issue. Beating a dead horse so poll numbers dip is not an issue.

The Liberals haven't used their time in opposition wisely. Are they learning now? I don't know, what do you think?

[Wilber]

It's hurt them with me. I'm about to the point where I would vote NDP for the first time, not because I want them to form a government but just because I don't want to see either the Tories or the Liberals with a majority.

[nicky10013]

This is what Rex Murphy says ... to precis, he traces the prevailing standards in the cynical use of these Parliamentary procedures back to Chretien. It's true -- Chretien called an election just because he caught the newly elected Stockwell Day flat-footed. He cancelled the Somalia Inquiry. Rex points out that Harper carries on that tradition ... which is not a very proud one.

And then he sets out how mainstream Canadians feel about the current state of Parliament. We pick up on his just at the point where his melancholy drone has us swirling our cognac, and taking a sniff.

The Liberals miss their chance because they offer no alternative. They don't offer the prospect of any improvement in any direction. That's my opinion. If Canadians want a majority government, at this point, are they going to go to the Liberals? They're a confused bunch of dreamers, caught up in their own bonfire of the vanities.

As an example, the Conservatives compromised on their budget when the Liberals had a electorally compelling reason to stimulate the economy. They should be able to take a lot of credit for at least some of the stimulus results. They could be taking some credit for forcing it on the government -- instead, they carp about what was done, or they deflect attention elsewhere. Meanwhile, Canadians busily juicing local businesses, hiring contractors, and getting some tax-free repairs made to their houses. People give the Conservatives credit for this.

The Liberals don't have a distinct position on anything -- or am I wrong? They play almost exclusively to the media. The Liberals should not be heading towards an election until they have an issue. Beating a dead horse so poll numbers dip is not an issue.

The Liberals haven't used their time in opposition wisely. Are they learning now? I don't know, what do you think?

The reason for the Liberals holding back isn't because of the media it's because of the Conservatives. The minute the platform is released is the minute Harper starts running ads about how Ignatieff and his team of Americans advisors wants to bring us closer to socialism or something or other. I think they should release it, too. However, the reason isn't for the media.

At this point, the Liberals and the opposition have forced more policy on the government than the government has come up with. At the end of 2008 they ran on no platform. They were forced into stimulus by the Liberals and into EI reform by the NDP. The only piece of meaningful legislation that the Tories brought out was some tough on crime bill that everybody labelled useless. The Tories must not have thought much about their own agenda or else, no matter what people were asking in committees, they wouldn't have torpedoed their own agenda.

I doubt a platform would convince people either way. As I've said multiple times, bringing up Chretien or the platform argument for not voting for the Liberals are a tame and underhanded way of declaring your partisanship.

"The Conservatives are my guys but they're really not better than the other guys so I've got to come up with an outdated/non-existant reason as to why I can't vote for them."

If you're a conservative partisan, admit it. Not a big deal.

Edited January 11, 2010 by nicky10013

[bush_cheney2004]

It makes sense really, when you think aboot it. Harper wears knee-pads that are made in USA.

- One of the few things they still make these days

Maybe, but Mr. Ignatieff actually uses them.

[Keepitsimple]

This is really all about the Detainee "issue". As much as the opposition and certain pundits are railing on about an abuse of Parliament and an affront to democracy - it's really about their attempt to make the Detainee issue bigger than it is. If there was NO detainee issue, proroguing would indeed be a "routine issue" and no one would be complaining. In fact though, the detainee issue will still be active when Parliament resumes - although the committee will perhaps have a different makeup. But to Canadians, they'll see that proroguing was not an attempt to completely end the enquiry......and in the final analysis, all that we've found out so for for sure is that an Afghan jailer beat another Afghan with a shoe. When the dust settles, the Afghan detainee issue will be shown for what it is - a tempest in a teapot - a partisan mudslinging venue. Canadians will get a chance to join all the dots together before the next election....they'll see that proroguing wasn't a big deal...they'll see that the detainee "issue" wasn't a big deal.....and they'll see once again that the Liberals were just flustering and blustering - devoid of any concrete ideas of their own and still lacking a leader. Short term pain.....long term gain.

[Topaz]

This is really all about the Detainee "issue". As much as the opposition and certain pundits are railing on about an abuse of Parliament and an affront to democracy - it's really about their attempt to make the Detainee issue bigger than it is. If there was NO detainee issue, proroguing would indeed be a "routine issue" and no one would be complaining. In fact though, the detainee issue will still be active when Parliament resumes - although the committee will perhaps have a different makeup. But to Canadians, they'll see that proroguing was not an attempt to completely end the enquiry......and in the final analysis, all that we've found out so for for sure is that an Afghan jailer beat another Afghan with a shoe. When the dust settles, the Afghan detainee issue will be shown for what it is - a tempest in a teapot - a partisan mudslinging venue. Canadians will get a chance to join all the dots together before the next election....they'll see that proroguing wasn't a big deal...they'll see that the detainee "issue" wasn't a big deal.....and they'll see once again that the Liberals were just flustering and blustering - devoid of any concrete ideas of their own and still lacking a leader. Short term pain.....long term gain.

Again I have to ask, do you care if the seating government lies to Parliament and to Canadians??

[ToadBrother]

This is really all about the Detainee "issue". As much as the opposition and certain pundits are railing on about an abuse of Parliament and an affront to democracy - it's really about their attempt to make the Detainee issue bigger than it is. If there was NO detainee issue, proroguing would indeed be a "routine issue" and no one would be complaining. In fact though, the detainee issue will still be active when Parliament resumes - although the committee will perhaps have a different makeup. But to Canadians, they'll see that proroguing was not an attempt to completely end the enquiry......and in the final analysis, all that we've found out so for for sure is that an Afghan jailer beat another Afghan with a shoe. When the dust settles, the Afghan detainee issue will be shown for what it is - a tempest in a teapot - a partisan mudslinging venue. Canadians will get a chance to join all the dots together before the next election....they'll see that proroguing wasn't a big deal...they'll see that the detainee "issue" wasn't a big deal.....and they'll see once again that the Liberals were just flustering and blustering - devoid of any concrete ideas of their own and still lacking a leader. Short term pain.....long term gain.

Affronts to democracy rarely seem like big deals, and always have these sorts of short term justifications. The 2008 prorogation, which is a big deal, has now given Harper license to flee from the majority of MPs who he so clearly fears. It's sad that he has nothing to fear from his supporters.

And where's the long term gain in this? Spell it out precisely for me? How does defying the will of the majority of Members of Parliament in fact give any gain at all? Well, other than not having to answer questions and basically keep one's government safe. Seems to me short-term gain for long-term pain.

I'll ask you bluntly. Do you think a government should have the right to defy Parliament?

Edited January 11, 2010 by ToadBrother

[Wild Bill]

I doubt a platform would convince people either way. As I've said multiple times, bringing up Chretien or the platform argument for not voting for the Liberals are a tame and underhanded way of declaring your partisanship.

"The Conservatives are my guys but they're really not better than the other guys so I've got to come up with an outdated/non-existant reason as to why I can't vote for them."

If you're a conservative partisan, admit it. Not a big deal.

We've argued this before. Just because you can say that the Conservatives are bad does not automatically make Liberals good! Just because YOU say they are now different doesn't make them good! They may be different but that might mean bad in a different way! You just don't seem to be very logical in your argument.

Those of us who spent decades watching the Liberals do things that we didn't respect are not going to throw all that experience away just because YOU tell us to! The Liberals will have to prove themselves before it would make sense for us to believe it.

Meanwhile, you may have pointed out some negatives about the Cons but so far they have a LONG way to go to top the Liberals!

This is not partisanship. This is just common sense! Any salesman knows its not enough to knock his competition. He also needs to offer something better about his own products! So far all you give is that the Cons have some faults and expect us to consider them equivalent to all we've seen with the Liberals.

Even if you were right, tie goes to the incumbent!

How about giving us GOOD reasons to vote Liberal? Reasons that would appeal to the type of voter who has given up on the Liberals as an option? Many of us voted Liberal at some time in our lives. Can you give us a reason to go back to them?

I realize it's easier to just keep taking shots at the Conservatives but it might be a more positive approach.

[ToadBrother]

How about giving us GOOD reasons to vote Liberal? Reasons that would appeal to the type of voter who has given up on the Liberals as an option? Many of us voted Liberal at some time in our lives. Can you give us a reason to go back to them?

I realize it's easier to just keep taking shots at the Conservatives but it might be a more positive approach.

I doubt there is a good reason to vote Liberal. Now that prorogation has morphed into a way to run like hell from Parliament, you can bet the next government, unless it's a majority, regardless of stripe, will use it, with all the pathetic justifications that go along with it.

I'm hoping there's an independent candidate in my riding who isn't a complete wing-nut, because that's where I'd like to park my vote next time. I tell, you a House filled with independents might be a horrible, messy affair, but it sure would be a sight bit better than a pack of mindless sheep dominated by Machiavellian players (well, except Layton, who has all the scheming properties of a wet noodle) who have no knowledge of our constitution or of our history. I can't even quite figure out why most of these people run, unless it's for the perks and pension, because there's so little evidence in the last few years of any desire to govern.

Edited January 11, 2010 by ToadBrother

[August1991]

Now that prorogation has morphed into a way to run like hell from Parliament, you can bet the next government, unless it's a majority, regardless of stripe, will use it, with all the pathetic justifications that go along with it.

Oh cripes, Harper is not running from Parliament. Canada, as far as I know, is still a democracy.

Unlike Martin, Harper has not defied Parliament. Harper has not suffered a voted defeat in Parliament.

Rather, by making a big noise about this, the anti-Harper forces (including Liberals who should know better) are just pointing out how ineffectual they are - for anyone who is paying attention.

And most people simply don't care about "prorogation".

But no matter what the pronunciation, it can be fairly said that the Canadian public has largely pronounced on its federal government this decade of low-voter turnout, minority governments, unnecessary and unwanted elections. They're just not much interested.

I say this from evidence gathered in recent travels east and west among a wide variety of Canadians, from unemployed forestry workers along the Miramichi to hockey fans from all parts of the country who gathered in Saskatoon these past two weeks.

It may not be scientific, but surely it is every bit as valid as a poll that asks, no kidding, if people agree with the statement: "The elected House of Parliament is the proper place to conduct the business of the nation and suspending Parliament is anti-democratic" - and finds that nearly two-thirds say "yes." Ask them if they give a rat's ass about what's going on in Ottawa and you might find much of that missing third covered as well, minus that Facebook gang that is calling for "anti-prorogation rallies" - just try saying that out loud - across the country on Jan. 23.

Ibbitson

I know that for angry anti-Harperites this is hard to understand but they fall into an honourable Canadian tradition. There were once anti-Trudeauites and anti-Chretienites.

Perhaps Harper will one day earn the badge of muse, as Ibbitson quotes F. R. Scott on King:

"Let us raise up a temple / To the cult of mediocrity, / Do nothing by halves / Which can be done by quarters."

When will the Liberals, in desperation, hurl the epithet "mediocre" at Harper?

[ToadBrother]

Oh cripes, Harper is not running from Parliament. Canada, as far as I know, is still a democracy.

What do you call the 2008 prorogation?

And most people simply don't care about "prorogation".

Which is to say "apathy assures our actions". It's true that your favorite party can probably get away with just about anything because so many don't care that Harper is a coward using a reserve power to illude the will of that body which is supposed to be supreme, and has so many willing apologists astroturfing various media sources to spread the word that "no one cares".

WEll, I care pal, and I aint' no damned liberal, so your pathetic attempt to turn this into a partisan issue bounces off of me.

But I'm still waiting for you, or any of the Conservative apologists to provide a precedent anywhere in the Commonwealth or old British Empire for a government in a position to lose a confidence motion using prorogation to evade the will of Parliament.

Edited January 12, 2010 by ToadBrother

[nicky10013]

We've argued this before. Just because you can say that the Conservatives are bad does not automatically make Liberals good! Just because YOU say they are now different doesn't make them good! They may be different but that might mean bad in a different way! You just don't seem to be very logical in your argument.

Those of us who spent decades watching the Liberals do things that we didn't respect are not going to throw all that experience away just because YOU tell us to! The Liberals will have to prove themselves before it would make sense for us to believe it.

Meanwhile, you may have pointed out some negatives about the Cons but so far they have a LONG way to go to top the Liberals!

This is not partisanship. This is just common sense! Any salesman knows its not enough to knock his competition. He also needs to offer something better about his own products! So far all you give is that the Cons have some faults and expect us to consider them equivalent to all we've seen with the Liberals.

Even if you were right, tie goes to the incumbent!

How about giving us GOOD reasons to vote Liberal? Reasons that would appeal to the type of voter who has given up on the Liberals as an option? Many of us voted Liberal at some time in our lives. Can you give us a reason to go back to them?

I realize it's easier to just keep taking shots at the Conservatives but it might be a more positive approach.

My job isn't to tell you why to vote Liberal. That's Michael Ignatieff's job. My only purpose here is to say that people's excuses for voting conservative are thus far dumb as there are no reason to differentiate between both parties with the excuses given. I've got a personal bias but I haven't told anyone to vote Liberal or Conservative. Check that, I told someone that if they want to get Harper out, vote Liberal strategically but that's hardly a ringing endorsement.

My only argument has been that if you're a partisan, don't hide behind ludicrous anti-liberal reasons that could just as easily be anti-conservative reasons. Just admit you're a consesrvative.

[Wild Bill]

My only argument has been that if you're a partisan, don't hide behind ludicrous anti-liberal reasons that could just as easily be anti-conservative reasons. Just admit you're a consesrvative.

Well, I guess I can't do any hiding. I'm not a conservative! If anything, I'm a classic liberal.

Not my fault the modern liberal party is anything but that!

[blueblood]

My job isn't to tell you why to vote Liberal. That's Michael Ignatieff's job. My only purpose here is to say that people's excuses for voting conservative are thus far dumb as there are no reason to differentiate between both parties with the excuses given. I've got a personal bias but I haven't told anyone to vote Liberal or Conservative. Check that, I told someone that if they want to get Harper out, vote Liberal strategically but that's hardly a ringing endorsement.

My only argument has been that if you're a partisan, don't hide behind ludicrous anti-liberal reasons that could just as easily be anti-conservative reasons. Just admit you're a consesrvative.

Here's my reasons why I vote blue:

Party that has Best ag policy

party that has tax cuts as a pillar

party that understands rural canada

Party that has actually accomplished somthing in Ottawa

Party policy that screws over Criminals

Party that believes in not punishing success

Don't sound like dumb reasons to me.

[nicky10013]

Here's my reasons why I vote blue:

Party that has Best ag policy

party that has tax cuts as a pillar

party that understands rural canada

Party that has actually accomplished somthing in Ottawa

Party policy that screws over Criminals

Party that believes in not punishing success

Don't sound like dumb reasons to me.

They are to me but that's my bias talking and not my original critique. My problem is with the people who say, "gee, I'm not voting Liberal because they run negative ads." My only message was to come up with reasons better than that.

[Smallc]

I guess that means understanding urban Canada in unimportant .

[nicky10013]

I guess that means understanding urban Canada in unimportant .

When only 87% of Canada lives in an urban setting, why would they matter?

Edited January 12, 2010 by nicky10013

[August1991]

What do you call the 2008 prorogation?

....

Which is to say "apathy assures our actions".

On the contrary, you have no understanding of Canadian history, French or English. You don't know about the Patriots or those who died abroad.

Ordinary Canadians will take action, when it matters. For the moment, this is merely Liberal (desperate) politics.

====

(I feel sick making this post. ToadBrother is an apparent nationalist of a "country" whose history s/he doesn't even know.) I have struggled to learn the English language and yet I take no pride in speaking English. I am not a Nationalist. To me, English Canadian nationalists have an odor of failure.

Edited January 12, 2010 by August1991

[waldo]

Ordinary Canadians will take action, when it matters. For the moment, this is merely Liberal (desperate) politics.

Harper perogy (x2) is certainly (desperate) politics... the kind of Harper Conservative desperation that sets the precedent for minority governments to wantonly evade confidence votes or to skirt accountability. The real desperation shows in Harper's latest response to the significant and growing Canadian public outrage... Harper actually had the gall to suggest in an interview with Business News Network, that market stability is bettered with the perogy move - that minority government, in itself, is perceived by markets as unstable:

In fact, it is Parliament in a minority situation that is perceived by markets as unstable... The games begin when Parliament returns... The government can take our time now to do the important work to prepare the economic agenda ahead

is the Economist's criticism of the Harper Conservatives perogy precedent... as you say, "Liberal (desperate) politics?

I seem to recall the Conservatives (particularly the Blogging Tories) really pumping up the 2008 Facebook group/numbers that rallied "against the Coalition". In that regard, is the 165K (and counting) Facebook group against the latest Harper Conservative Perogy... as you say, "Liberal (desperate) politics?

is the latest collective protest action taken by political scientists, legal scholars and university philosophers against the Harper Conservative Perogy... as you say, "Liberal (desperate) politics?

Edited January 12, 2010 by waldo