Harper Cabinet shuffle, Jan 2010

[Jerry J. Fortin]

Media event, nothing more. Harper is a very damned astute political opponent for the other leaders. I am not really very sure how Mike and Jack will respond to this but Harper is an absolute predator in the field, I don't think the other guys are even in the game yet, let alone the same league as Steve.

More and more the guy seems more like King Ralph. His big claim to fame of course was the ability to find out where the band is playing, then run out in front and start swinging the stick and calling the ball! This guy is DANGEROUS...! Its a very slick move on Steve's part.

[myata]

Media event, nothing more. Harper is a very damned astute political opponent for the other leaders. I am not really very sure how Mike and Jack will respond to this but Harper is an absolute predator in the field, I don't think the other guys are even in the game yet, let alone the same league as Steve.

More and more the guy seems more like King Ralph. His big claim to fame of course was the ability to find out where the band is playing, then run out in front and start swinging the stick and calling the ball! This guy is DANGEROUS...! Its a very slick move on Steve's part.

Indeed, the problem isn't with Harper really, it's with Mike (and Jack, etc).

[Jack Weber]

I have to say that Harper is probably the most ruthless political tactician since Trudeau....

[ToadBrother]

I have to say that Harper is probably the most ruthless political tactician since Trudeau....

I dunno about that. Trudeau could deliver majorities. I think Harper is a lot more like Chretien, but stuck in a shitty electoral cycle that seems doomed to deny anybody the majority for at least another election.

[Jack Weber]

I dunno about that. Trudeau could deliver majorities. I think Harper is a lot more like Chretien, but stuck in a shitty electoral cycle that seems doomed to deny anybody the majority for at least another election.

True...There was no BQ in the '70's.I don't think Trudeau would be able to deliver majorities back then had there been a BQ coupled with the 1970 October Crisis,however.I remember reading how most of the Conservative MP's at the time were either in awe of Trudeau's debating skills,or simply scared shitless of him.

The fact of the matter is that even with the inherent weakness that the opposition is filled with,Mr.Harper cannot attain his majority.Partly because he has a tendancy to show his NeoLiberal,NCC hand at the worst possible time.Also,partly because of the seemingly intractable ideological regionalism of the country.

Edited January 19, 2010 by Jack Weber

[eyeball]

I dunno about that. Trudeau could deliver majorities. I think Harper is a lot more like Chretien, but stuck in a shitty electoral cycle that seems doomed to deny anybody the majority for at least another election.

Is there any reason to believe this inability to secure a majority could be a permanent condition for a least a generation?

[ToadBrother]

Is there any reason to believe this inability to secure a majority could be a permanent condition for a least a generation?

That's awfully hard to say. The Tories certainly came close to the necessary numbers last fall to at least contemplate a majority. It's certainly a harder mountain to climb now than it was a generation ago, but not insurmountable. It really depends on the leadership. Harper, I think, takes too many chances, and while his boldness has paid off at times, at other times (like basically blowing a substantial lead) it drops him back down. At some point his party will start asking "Is this all we get?"

I don't know if Iggy has what it takes either, he seems too much the other way, sticking to a singular strategy (ie. "we're toppling the government every day!" for the spring and summer of last year) to the point where he begins to look like a crank.

As much as we all love to praise minorities as more democratic, they're also messy, ugly and often underhanded affairs, and these last six years have shown this in spades. I think, unless the parties can find some new entente in the upcoming session, we're going to see it get even uglier, and in a way, more ludicrous and over the top. I suspect by fall or spring of next year, Canadians will be ready to get rid of this most dysfunctional of Parliaments.

Edited January 19, 2010 by ToadBrother

[myata]

I have to say that Harper is probably the most ruthless political tactician since Trudeau....

Too bad his strategic skills is no match to his brilliant tactics. Take that most recent shot in the foot, just when it started to look right and promising. I wonder (when they'll start asking those questions).

[eyeball]

As much as we all love to praise minorities as more democratic, they're also messy, ugly and often underhanded affairs, and these last six years have shown this in spades. I think, unless the parties can find some new entente in the upcoming session, we're going to see it get even uglier, and in a way, more ludicrous and over the top. I suspect by fall or spring of next year, Canadians will be ready to get rid of this most dysfunctional of Parliaments.

Perhaps we've only seen a messier, uglier side of the people who are trying to force the system to work in their own individual and parties favour.

Thanks for your thoughts. You have had some impact on some of my more concretized notions about our Parliamentary system and I can see the good in our Parliament as it was generally intended and why you value it so much. I just wish I could muster some faith in Parliament's ability to function as intended. The misuse of it makes it hard. The traditions of Parliament are important but probably not as important as the vision that went into building Parliament itself. I still think there are way's to make regionalism work within a constitutional framework and confederation but not under the present circumstances.

I think people learn more about the things that are really important only after these things are absent. I don't see any political leader on the national stage with any real vision but I do see a few regional leaders where I live with some. I'd be happy to start with that and trust enough Canadians would feel the same way in their regions to do the same. Why can't we base a national unity on the strength of smaller more local achievements and appreciation for locals having achieved them mostly on their own?

I guess the provincial layer of government would get in the way of that or claim credit for it.

It certainly feels like something has to give in the country but what, where and who is a bit of a mystery. Ottawa, Parliament in particular, seem like an over-ripe pustule that's about to burst.

[ToadBrother]

It certainly feels like something has to give in the country but what, where and who is a bit of a mystery. Ottawa, Parliament in particular, seem like an over-ripe pustule that's about to burst.

I don't know about overripe, but it has certainly been a pustule. The root of the problem is that the parties have become a kind of extortion racket. MPs feel they have little choice but to go along with the central authority. There's far too much money flowing from the party leadership into the individual ridings. I worked with a guy who used was the campaign manager for the Liberals in my riding many years ago, and he told me about the kind of control even thirty five years ago that the party insisted on having. Go off message, and suddenly money for signs and literature becomes harder to get. Once your in the House, it's basically drummed into your head that the only reason you even managed to reach the Hill is because the big boys at the top got you the spot.

The best fix for our Parliament would be a nice solid rump of forty or fifty independents. In our current parliamentary climate, they'd be gods on Earth.

But in general, minority governments are always these kind of horse trading rackets. Everyone fondly remembers Medicare, and assumes that somehow that's the norm, but it isn't. The norm for minority governments is that they're shortlived, messy and rather shambolic affairs. Lots of secret deals, underhanded tricks, failed coalitions, and so forth. Everyone waxes between brotherly love and extreme partisanship, sometimes in rather short order. Because we have no tradition of coalition governments, it ends up being a vote to vote version of Survivor.

Edited January 19, 2010 by ToadBrother

[Moonlight Graham]

Is there any reason to believe this inability to secure a majority could be a permanent condition for a least a generation?

Good lord man, a generation??? No way, things can change very quickly in politics. I'm not a "Liberal", i don't affiliate myself with any party - actually i think they all mostly suck, but i think the ideology of most Canadians falls into left-of-center, which is Liberal Party territory. I think the Liberals are therefore the natural governing party of Canada federally (as much as i hate to say that), unless another left-of-center party comes along.

It took a huge sponsorship scandal to knock out the Liberals from their decade+ reign. I sense a lot of people want to vote Liberal again, but the leaders since Martin have just been garbage and people seem somewhat content with a Conservative minority right now.

But get a decent leader for the Liberal Party and there's a good chance to see a Liberal majority within 2 elections.

[madmax]

Harper is a very damned astute political opponent for the other leaders.

Moving an incompetent Minister such as Rait from one Ministry to another is not astute.

[Jack Weber]

Moving an incompetent Minister such as Rait from one Ministry to another is not astute.

No...But it heads off at the pass any criticism about the Con's not having women in cabinet.Clearly,in rait's case it's just window dressing.

[capricorn]

Thanks to the previous posters on this thread. This is a refreshing discussion.

I'm not a "Liberal", i don't affiliate myself with any party - actually i think they all mostly suck, but i think the ideology of most Canadians falls into left-of-center, which is Liberal Party territory. I think the Liberals are therefore the natural governing party of Canada federally (as much as i hate to say that), unless another left-of-center party comes along.

Moonlight, this is an interesting observation. I do think though that Canadians have been moving from left of centre to the middle ground. With that in mind, it's been said that Harper is trying to move his party closer to the centre where he knows the majority of votes reside. In doing so he is accused of abandoning conservative principles and there's merit in that opinion. So he's doing it by taking baby steps. Instinctively, he knows the Conservative Party will be in big trouble whenever the Liberals finally get their act together. If Harper is too hasty in this repositioning and gets branded by mainstream Canadians as a troublemaker/instigator, what have you, rather than a leader with Canada's welfare at heart, he will fail.

[William Ashley]

I dunno about that. Trudeau could deliver majorities. I think Harper is a lot more like Chretien, but stuck in a shitty electoral cycle that seems doomed to deny anybody the majority for at least another election.

I honestly don't understand how him stating his cabinet isn't effective is him being politically astute. Usually cabinet shuffles are just an excuse to burry mounds of past errors. It isn't in anyway flattering.

Hopefully Canadians will question the need for parliamentary secretaries in departments that already have ministers.

This in his whole fiscal restraint and "reduction on spending" meanwhile he creates some more offices and expenses that didn't exist before.

So much for crawling back spending.

Edited January 20, 2010 by William Ashley

[Topaz]

The PM has shuffled this ministers,it looks like his originals are back. Day will be the guy to cut spending and to make Canada's deficit all better, yeah right!BTW, remember the song, "Do the shuffle"? I wonder if the oppositions will use the music on their website or Rick Merger. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/100119/national/harper_cabinet_shuffle

[Jerry J. Fortin]

The PM has shuffled this ministers,it looks like his originals are back. Day will be the guy to cut spending and to make Canada's deficit all better, yeah right!BTW, remember the song, "Do the shuffle"? I wonder if the oppositions will use the music on their website or Rick Merger. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/100119/national/harper_cabinet_shuffle

Stock had a two edge sword in Alberta. It cut both ways, hurt the citizens and the party. Harper should know this, I think he does. Please keep in mind that the budget is the be all and end all of government spending, and Stock won't be writing that. He will have some very wide discretionary powers to mess around with and I do believe he will use them to muddy up the water to some degree.