When dalton prorogues

[William Ashley]

Well, first, proroguing doesn't require a month off. Second, Parliamentarians don't only work while parliament is in session.

Prorogation is used in multiple nations. In almost every country, there isn't enough legislative business in the country for Parliament to sit all year long. People would be sitting twiddling their thumbs.

Like hell there isn't.

This country is incredibly poorly administered, and a very large majority of existing laws violate the country's constitution. That is a problem. Fixing the laws they already got is a start before even thinking about introducing new ones.

Fact is a prorogue is more than a recess... so don't say they need a break. A recess IS NOT a prorogue.. a prorogue destroys the legislative agenda.

Edited February 16, 2010 by William Ashley

[Moonbox]

Well, first, proroguing doesn't require a month off. Second, Parliamentarians don't only work while parliament is in session.

I think you missed my sarcasm in my last post...

Prorogation is used in multiple nations. In almost every country, there isn't enough legislative business in the country for Parliament to sit all year long. People would be sitting twiddling their thumbs.

It's only because the government chooses to not have enough to do. Parliament isn't an assembly line, and we NEVER run out of problems to look after.

Multiple nations' governments also swindle their people for millions and go soft of corruption. The fact that other governments do it is hardly a point for its legitimacy.

[Smallc]

Multiple nations' governments also swindle their people for millions and go soft of corruption. The fact that other governments do it is hardly a point for its legitimacy.

I'm not talking about Zimbabwe. I'm talking about our closest neighbour and at least one of our major founding countries. Prorogation is necessary. It allows a government to have focus in each session of a legislature. Whether you think it's useful or not isn't the point.

[Moonbox]

I'm not talking about Zimbabwe. I'm talking about our closest neighbour and at least one of our major founding countries. Prorogation is necessary. It allows a government to have focus in each session of a legislature. Whether you think it's useful or not isn't the point.

I wasn't talking about Zimbabwe either. I was talking about us and those same neighbours.

Prorogation is not at all necessary. Life would go on in Canada without it.

[g_bambino]

Prorogation is not at all necessary.

Please explain, then, how parliament would work around the absence of prorogation.

[Moonbox]

Please explain, then, how parliament would work around the absence of prorogation.

Parliament would remain in session until either an election or recess. WOW! That was hard to answer wasn't it!?!?!?

[g_bambino]

Parliament would remain in session until either an election or recess.

And how would the legislative agenda be set not knowing when the next election would be? What changes to votes of non-confidence do you propose once the number of Throne Speeches has been reduced to only one possibly every few years?

[sp]

Edited February 17, 2010 by g_bambino

[Moonbox]

Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't realize that you couldn't do anything without a formal agenda. Parliament has always functioned within the agenda and never added anything or subtracted anything in between...that's how you're saying it is, right?

Here's an idea...crazy as it may be:

Give another Throne Speech and set a new agenda at the end of the previous one.

I wish it worked that way in the real world. "Sir I met my target for the year yesterday. I'm going to take the rest of the year off with pay. Thanks."

Edited February 17, 2010 by Moonbox

[William Ashley]

And how would the legislative agenda be set not knowing when the next election would be? What changes to votes of non-confidence do you propose once the number of Throne Speeches has been reduced to only one possibly every few years?

[sp]

Well what happens is the PM announces his intentions.. what a marvel idea...

you know that elections didn't even need to be called until a maximum term was instated, since canada is at war in afghanistan technically the government can deny elections as they see fit provided the GG agrees.

Fact is that there is absolutely no need for a throne speach, and it is little more than a technicality.

[Smallc]

Give another Throne Speech and set a new agenda at the end of the previous one.

So...do the same thing as prorogation, but don't call it prorogation.....

[William Ashley]

So...do the same thing as prorogation, but don't call it prorogation.....

Dude don't play dumb, a 2 month prorogue after a month recess is 3 months with no parliament

also the erasure of all the government bills ain't exactly nothing. It is something.

If you plan on reintroducing those bills then how the hell is it a different agenda?

Total abuse, total abuse.

You are forgetting very quickly that this shutdown deprived a lot of rights of Canadians for access to the truth, and a chance for the lies to be shown in how corrupt and conniving the CPC is.

Just another game of taking advantage of canadians short term memories.. playing time .. waging ignorance time and time again. Well NO this person will not forget the countless abuses of power and insults that the CPC has done to the people of Canada.

Edited February 17, 2010 by William Ashley

[Moonbox]

So...do the same thing as prorogation, but don't call it prorogation.....

Nice try, except you don't need to prorogue to give another Throne Speech or set a new agenda. I feel like I'm talking to a brick wall here.

[g_bambino]

Give another Throne Speech and set a new agenda at the end of the previous one.

You mean as it is right now. Well done, by coming up with our present system as a replacement for our present system you've just revealed that you've no idea about our present system.

[g_bambino]

Dude don't play dumb, a 2 month prorogue after a month recess is 3 months with no parliament

also the erasure of all the government bills ain't exactly nothing. It is something.

Heed your own advice, sir. The existence of prorogation and the length of prorogation are not the same thing; the latter could be more regulated, as it is, I believe, in the UK.

[Moonbox]

You mean as it is right now. Well done, by coming up with our present system as a replacement for our present system you've just revealed that you've no idea about our present system.

How often is the Throne Speech? Does parliament get prorogued at the end of EVERY parliamentary session? If so, then I apologize, but from what I gather, that's not the case.

If that's not the case, then you have your answer on how our system survives without being able to prorogue.

[Smallc]

Nice try, except you don't need to prorogue to give another Throne Speech or set a new agenda.

So how would you begin a new session? There is a set way that parliament has to work.

[Smallc]

How often is the Throne Speech? Does parliament get prorogued at the end of EVERY parliamentary session?

As far as I can tell...yes.

http://www2.parl.gc.ca/MarleauMontpetit/DocumentViewer.aspx?Sec=Ch08&Seq=7&Lang=E

Edited February 18, 2010 by Smallc

[Moonbox]

In this case I feel I must eat my words fellas, because apparently that's exactly how it works. T

Oops

The next question is whether or not we need extended breaks in between parliamentary sessions. This is more the issue I have with the process, and I in most cases I refuse to believe that MP's work equally as hard in their own constituencies when they're not in parliament.

Edited February 18, 2010 by Moonbox

[g_bambino]

The next question is whether or not we need extended breaks in between parliamentary sessions.

We could perhaps benefit from a more structured parliamentary schedule. I believe the UK parliament sticks to a set programme that repeats itself each year, barring any loss of confidence in the government or other intervening circumstances.