Will the Harper Government Survive This Week?

TimG · March 24, 2011

But it strikes as a stronger form of hypocrisy to declare the evils of coalitions with separatists when one was doing a helluva lot of nudge-nudge-wink-wink with the GG four years before along those same precise lines.

Unfortunately, I can't find any newspaper clippings from 2004. The only commentary on this event around today is from biased sources. In any case, if I was going worry about hypocrasy from policians I would have to give up voting long ago. I don't see why you are so exercised about this. Harper is correct to point out that any coalition beholden to seperatists will be bad for Canada in many ways. The constitutionality is irrelevant.

ToadBrother · March 24, 2011

Unfortunately, I can't find any newspaper clippings from 2004. The only commentary on this event around today is from biased sources. In any case, if I was going worry about hypocrasy from policians I would have to give up voting long ago. I don't see why you are so exercised about this. Harper is correct to point out that any coalition beholden to seperatists will be bad for Canada in many ways. The constitutionality is irrelevant.

Harper may be correct to point it out, but that didn't stop him when he thought he had Martin by the b*lls from considering hopping into bed with them. At the end of the day, as I've said repeatedly, the Bloc has a significant number of seats in the House and unless someone wins a majority, business will have to be done with them. I'm not suggesting a coalition is the way to go, because I have few illusions that a formal coalition is going to solve all the problems of the world as some romantics around here think. I had in 2008, and still do today have serious concerns of the stability of such a coalition, particularly on the Liberal side.

But I do caution that the mood has changed since 2008-2009. While I don't think a majority of Canadians would be pleased with a coalition, I do not think it would produce quite the same allergic reaction as it did two years ago.

Harry · March 24, 2011

Another one appears to be breaking tonite (sic)??? <slurp> Come on <slurp> spill it...

It appears that the Public Service Commission of Canada has now started an investigation into the Harper government for appointing Conservatives close to Defence Minister Peter MacKay to senior positions in the ACOA (Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency). Governments are not supposed to politicize the public service. It seems like almost every day now another Conservative scandal erupts. Let's hear it for the whistleblowers, whoever they are. Keep it up.

Evening Star · March 24, 2011

Unfortunately, I can't find any newspaper clippings from 2004. The only commentary on this event around today is from biased sources. In any case, if I was going worry about hypocrasy from policians I would have to give up voting long ago. I don't see why you are so exercised about this. Harper is correct to point out that any coalition beholden to seperatists will be bad for Canada in many ways. The constitutionality is irrelevant.

Not from 2004 but:

http://www2.macleans.ca/2008/11/28/a-trip-down-minority-government-memory-lane/

capricorn · March 24, 2011

It appears that the Public Service Commission of Canada has now started an investigation into the Harper government for appointing Conservatives close to Defence Minister Peter MacKay to senior positions in the ACOA (Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency).

Link please.

ToadBrother · March 24, 2011

It appears that the Public Service Commission of Canada has now started an investigation into the Harper government for appointing Conservatives close to Defence Minister Peter MacKay to senior positions in the ACOA (Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency). Governments are not supposed to politicize the public service. It seems like almost every day now another Conservative scandal erupts. Let's hear it for the whistleblowers, whoever they are. Keep it up.

Where are you hearing this? While on the face of it, it's like saying "Breaking news, politicians lie during election campaigns!", at the same time if this is for real, it certainly comes at a very inopportune time for the Tories, and may explain some of the reticence over going to the polls. If the Opposition is trying to frame this election on ethics, a story like this would certainly give the strategy better legs to run with.

Edited March 24, 2011 by ToadBrother

TimG · March 24, 2011

Not from 2004 but:

I asked about the Liberal reaction - not the Harper govt. I already conceded he is hypocrit on this point but he is taking the correct position now (that a government cannot be beholden to a seperatist party). Edited March 24, 2011 by TimG

capricorn · March 24, 2011

Where are you hearing this?

I found the article and I'll post the link for Harry.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/Front/9020276.html

Now I'll go read it.

ToadBrother · March 24, 2011

I asked about the Liberal reaction - not the Harper govt. I already conceded he is hypocrit on this point but he is taking the correct position now (that a government cannot be beholden to a seperatist party).

I can't think of any articles about it, and I'm going from memory. I was in the ER for several hours waiting for finger to be stitched up after a lost battle with a utility knife, and watched the whole coalition collapse unfold as rumors swirled that Harper was going to the Governor General. I recall that there were reports of Dion being eaten alive by the Liberal caucus, and there were at least a couple of Liberal MPs who were openly questioning the whole thing. Wish I could remember who off the top. What was very clear, however, was that while Duceppe and Layton seemed capable of delivering their caucuses with bows tied around them, a lot of Liberal MPs were madder than hell about the whole damned thing; Dion managing to stay on as Liberal leader and PM no less, despite the fact that pretty much everyone wanted him gone, having to live with the thought of actually sharing cabinet with the hated NDP, and having to rely upon the Separatists' commitment not to pull the plug for a guaranteed length of time.

ToadBrother · March 24, 2011

I found the article and I'll post the link for Harry.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/Front/9020276.html

Now I'll go read it.

By and large they seem to be from the MacKay camp. It will hurt the Tories a bit, probably, but I'd say that if MacKay had any leadership aspirations remaining to him after the beating he took over the Afghan detainee issue, he can kiss them goodbye.

Harry · March 24, 2011

Link please.

Sure, here it is.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/Front/9020276.html

And don't forget to watch this http://www.aptn.ca/

about Bruce Carson on Friday, eh!

It's going to be quite a day, the last day of quite a week.

The week in which Harper got suckered by Jack Layton resulting in losing control of Canada's political agenda.

capricorn · March 24, 2011

Sure, here it is.

http://thechronicleherald.ca/Front/9020276.html

Thank you.

And don't forget to watch this http://www.aptn.ca/
about Bruce Carson on Friday, eh!

My, my. You are on top of things, aren't you.

BTW Harry, welcome to the forum.

Jack Weber · March 24, 2011

Is it just me,or is it becoming probable that these ethical issues could be like Death by a Thousand Cut's for the Tories??

This one with MacKay is kinda seedy,but it's not that bad...However,it does get piled onto the growing pile of really seedy things...

I wonder if this is the arrogance that seems to happen to all governments that have been in power for a fairly long time,and in the Conservative case,been able to govern as if it had a defacto majority?

I remember the last days of Mulroney's government and it seemed like the RCMP had taken up residence with the Prime Minister...

Edited March 24, 2011 by Jack Weber

Harry · March 24, 2011

Thank you.

My, my. You are on top of things, aren't you.

BTW Harry, welcome to the forum.

Thanks for the welcome capricorn, nice to be here.

It should be an interesting 5-6 weeks. My hunch is that it's going to be quite a different election this time.

August1991 · March 24, 2011

Oh give me a break. I mean, what do you take us all for, idiots? The whole point of the letter was to tell the GG that the Opposition were ready and willing to take on the responsibility of government. We can debate what exactly the three leaders might have had in mind, but the fact that all three of their names was on it tells the entire story.
I don't know why the Tory supporters continue in this ludicrous kind of hair splitting argument. It insults everyone's intelligence.

TB, there is a huge difference between the letter Harper signed and sent to the GG in 2005 and the press conference Dion/Layton/Duceppe held in 2008.

But anyway, as I say, this is neither here nor there and it's all water under the bridge.

At the moment, we are entering a campaign in which any discussion of a coalition is the kiss of death to Ignatieff and the Liberals. So, if you want to try and argue that Harper once wanted to organize a coalition, go ahead and argue the point. All that you will succeed in doing is injecting the word "coalition" into the campaign, and that word is the end of Ignatieff's political career.

Want proof? Harper is going to use the word coalition in every stump speech and Ignatieff will do his best to avoid letting the word cross his lips.

Edited March 24, 2011 by August1991

Evening Star · March 24, 2011

Is it just me,or is it becoming probable that these ethical issues could be like Death by a Thousand Cut's for the Tories??

Seems quite possible. The Opposition should work the in-and-out issue too.

August1991 · March 24, 2011

Is it just me,or is it becoming probable that these ethical issues could be like Death by a Thousand Cut's for the Tories??

Almost all of these supposed scandals are minor and convoluted. They only concern political junkies who hate Harper. This explains why the Toronto-based anglo MSM has followed them. (They have barely been reported in the French media.)

Among the broader population, people just don't care. Unless something serious breaks, the election is not going to turn on these mini-scandalettes.

Jack Weber · March 24, 2011

Almost all of these supposed scandals are minor and convoluted. They only concern political junkies who hate Harper. This explains why the Toronto-based anglo MSM has followed them. (They have barely been reported in the French media.)

Among the broader population, people just don't care. Unless something serious breaks, the election is not going to turn on these mini-scandalettes.

Well August...

I hate to break the news to ya...But more than 3/4 of this country is full of the dreaded Anglos...

And I can guarantee that the vast majority of those 3/4 don't give a rats furry hind quarters about what the French press thinks.And seeing as Quebec,at least Federally,is a secessionist waste land..Why would anyone outside of Quebec care??

The Bloq is going to win the majority of seats in the province...Film at 11...

I agree with you that alot of these are not huge "scandals" singularily,with the exception of the Contempt of Parliament issue...That is a big one...But they seem to be mounting up.And if history tells us anything,there is a snowball effect to bad news surrounding seedy behaviour with any party in power...

The only issue about them is how to frame the narrative...The Adscam stuff was fairly straight forward and it had the requisite sleaze and government connections that it stuck.These issues are more procedural and a little harder to frame into a concise messgae...

Nevertheless,new things seem to keep popping out in more rapid succession,and eventually it's going to stick...

The question is,"Will it stick during a 36 day campaign?"

Jack Weber · March 24, 2011

Seems quite possible. The Opposition should work the in-and-out issue too.

The problem is the in/out issue,while palying fast and loose with the rules,is hard to make aconcise message out of..

The Contempt of Parliament issue is the one that would probably stick the best...Actually,it's a toss up with anything involving hookers!!...

For example,The CeeB reported tonight that the PBO's estimates on the cost of the fighters was backed up by the Pentagon,making the Conservative estimates for the cost of the planes even more goofy...

Why was the committee not given the full and proper costing??

Evening Star · March 24, 2011

The problem is the in/out issue,while palying fast and loose with the rules,is hard to make aconcise message out of..

Definitely agree about the contempt issue... But do you really think Canadians are too dumb to understand the in/out issue?

Jack Weber · March 24, 2011

Definitely agree about the contempt issue... But do you really think Canadians are too dumb to understand the in/out issue?

No...But in a 30 second commercial or at an all candidates meeting or in a televised debate...It's hard to explain in a short time...

August1991 · March 24, 2011

And I can guarantee that the vast majority of those 3/4 don't give a rats furry hind quarters about what the French press thinks.And seeing as Quebec,at least Federally,is a secessionist waste land..Why would anyone outside of Quebec care??

Jack, I have a rule of thumb: if a federal story/scandal doesn't attract the attention of both the English/French media, then it's not really a federal issue.

Jack Weber · March 24, 2011

To continue this partial thread drift...

I agree that some of the name calling gets to the level of grade 5 students from time to time, but I don't want to see MLW reduced to some university-politically-correct-debate club. I prefer to use the forum as I would if I were sitting at a lounge having a beer and discussing politics (memories of college). Every once in a while things get heated and words are said that "offend" someone else. Boo hoo. It's called discourse. It's the intensity of some of the arguments (not JUST discussions) that keep a lot of us coming back for more. If I wanted politically correct conversation, I'd join a mensa board.

For instance: I can easily call Jack a complete friggin idiot that couldn't find his eastern ass with both hands.

He wouldn't report me, but chances are he'd respond with something in the strain of "whatever, you traitorous Alberta inbred neo-con. You and your ilk should be found swinging from a rope from the tree in the center of that dirt path you call main street in the cultural desert you call Alberta. Now go earn me some more equalization money, you knave!"

or something like that.

I would say to you, lighten up and forget all but the most grievous of insults. This too shall pass.

Incredible!!!

More agreement!!!

But a point of order...

I never use the word knave...It's far too aristocratic...

Harry · March 24, 2011

TB, there is a huge difference between the letter Harper signed and sent to the GG in 2005 and the press conference Dion/Layton/Duceppe held in 2008.

But anyway, as I say, this is neither here nor there and it's all water under the bridge.

At the moment, we are entering a campaign in which any discussion of a coalition is the kiss of death to Ignatieff and the Liberals. So, if you want to try and argue that Harper once wanted to organize a coalition, go ahead and argue the point. All that you will succeed in doing is injecting the word "coalition" into the campaign, and that word is the end of Ignatieff's political career.

Want proof? Harper is going to use the word coalition in every stump speech and Ignatieff will do his best to avoid letting the word cross his lips.

There is so much BS constantly coming out of Harper's mouth.

At Duceppe's scrum today he said:

If Harper is not just being a hypocrite and is really so concerned about the economy being so precarious that it would be jeopardized by a six week election campaign, and the suspension of the government, Harper should do the same thing as he did in 2004, and go to the GG and ask him to offer the opposition a chance to form a new government, instead of having an unnecessary and potentially harmful election.

Don't you just love Duceppe?

Jack Weber · March 24, 2011

There is so much BS constantly coming out of Harper's mouth.

At Duceppe's scrum today he said:

If Harper is not just being a hypocrite and is really so concerned about the economy being so precarious that it would be jeopardized by a six week election campaign, and the suspension of the government, Harper should do the same thing as he did in 2004, and go to the GG and ask him to offer the opposition a chance to form a new government, instead of having an unnecessary and potentially harmful election.

Don't you just love Duceppe?

The Secessionist has a point...