revolt ignited among 20+ Tories MP

[Sleipnir]

"It may not rank alongside the storming of the Bastille but a gathering of 20 or so Conservative MPs Monday night is the closest the ruling caucus has come to revolution during its seven years in power."

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/03/26/john-ivison-backbench-revolt-the-closest-thing-to-a-revolution-harpers-seen-yet/

When the bill to criminalize selective abortion failed to pass the committee to be voted upon, well that was the straw that broke the camel's back. Not exactly a revolution within the party as seen with the Australian Labor Party. However, stranger things have happened in politics and it no exception to Canada (think the NDP result in 2011 election, who would have even predicted that at the beginning of that election?).

Could the rope that bind the merger of the Reform and PC somehow started to unravel and will continue to do so (perhaps Reform 2.0 and PC 2.0)? Or is it one of those political hiccups that will soon pass over like a nasty hang-over?

Edited March 27, 2013 by Sleipnir

[Boges]

"It may not rank alongside the storming of the Bastille but a gathering of 20 or so Conservative MPs Monday night is the closest the ruling caucus has come to revolution during its seven years in power."

http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/03/26/john-ivison-backbench-revolt-the-closest-thing-to-a-revolution-harpers-seen-yet/

When the bill to criminalize selective abortion failed to pass the committee to be voted upon, well that was the straw that broke the camel's back. Not exactly a revolution within the party as seen with the Australian Labor Party. However, stranger things have happened in politics and it no exception to Canada (think the NDP result in 2011 election, who would have even predicted that at the beginning of that election?)

Could the rope that bind the merger of the Reform and PC somehow started to unravel ? Or is it one of those political hiccups that will soon pass over like a nasty hang-over?

For those that think uniting the left will be easy, there will be issues like this to deal with if that happens.

Harper has to crack the whip here because there's no real broad appeal for any change to abortion rules or lack there of.

Might I add that there are pro life Liberals. Does anyone think Chretien would have allowed them to vote with their conscience?

[RNG]

Serious question. When is the last time a leader allowed party members to speak out against the party line with impunity? I seem to remember one short-lived Saskatchewan NDP government that tried that.

[shortlived]

I agree this is why partisan politics fails within a party system.

Of course the guy has the chance of sitting as an independent, but when are independents allowed to do anything?

Or in forming their own party from among their 20 some odd members, which would still be larger than the block and green party..

I think the chances of that are slim... conservatives are sheep. ok yes I said that in jest, I don't think they are really sheep. But I do think I would be surprised to see them get the balls to just form their own party.

Either he sits as an independent, he forms his own party with his supporters, or he continues his life as a backbencher for the next couple of years, unless he is turfed from caucus for rocking the boat... or they let the debate and vote happen....

none the less who knows, unless it happens its just raising awareness of certain members and free publicity while the liberal leadership thing is happening.

Edited March 27, 2013 by shortlived

[Bryan]

This doesn't bother me at all. The only credible opposition we have in this country is among other Conservatives. As long as the argument is over which Conservative policies we are going with, we're doing alright in my book.

It would be a mistake to see any of this as a sign of waning for the Conservatives. The only criticisms of substance are among those who think that Harper isn't conservative enough -- it certainly doesn't follow that they'd make an even less conservative choice instead.

[August1991]

For those that think uniting the left will be easy, there will be issues like this to deal with if that happens.

Key point.

The essence of Leftism is the lack of choice. Leftists want us to send children to a single State school system, to go through a single State health system. Leftists want the State to organize, rationalize our affairs.

The Left wants a single State solution, and yet (oh, the irony!) the Left is constantly divided among themselves. They argue among themselves without end.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gb_qHP7VaZE

Harper has to crack the whip here because there's no real broad appeal for any change to abortion rules or lack there of.

Maybe he will. But I think the public understands that these MPs do not represent the Conservative Party. They are simple MPs, with a viewpoint. Edited March 27, 2013 by August1991

[The_Squid]

Who do these MPs serve: their constituents or the Prime Minister?

[eyeball]

Far be it from me to support whatever other goofy issues these yahoos' are pissed about but as far as challenging the overarching authoritarianism of the PMO goes, power to them.

Edited March 27, 2013 by eyeball

[Sleipnir]

Or in forming their own party from among their 20 some odd members, which would still be larger than the block and green party..

Or they could join the CHP, the seemingly only federal pro-life party.

[eyeball]

Is there such a thing as a pro-Parliament party?

What will Harper really be cracking down on when he crushes this revolt, the issue of abortion or the issue of representation? I'm betting the importance of the latter will be lost in the luridness of the former.

[August1991]

Is there such a thing as a pro-Parliament party?

What will Harper really be cracking down on when he crushes this revolt, the issue of abortion or the issue of representation? I'm betting the importance of the latter will be lost in the luridness of the former.

Leftist journalists/posters will portray Harper as a dictator, imposing his opinion. In fact though, Harper will tolerate the opinion of Conservative MPs because he needs their votes in parliament.

Meanwhile, Leftists in Canada will present a single, no-choice State-dictated system of health care, education and union membership as if this were "progressive" and civilized.

----

But as I say, the irony of political theory is that Leftism is ultimately based on a single State solution while Leftists invariably argue among themselves.

Edited March 27, 2013 by August1991

[Moonlight Graham]

I found this very interesting from the OP article:

In the House of Commons Tuesday, Mr. Warawa raised a point of privilege, calling on the Speaker, Andrew Scheer, to intervene in what he called an infringement of his rights as an MP. He implied the Conservative Party whip, Gordon O’Connor, had blocked his opportunity to use an SO31 (the usually eye-glazing members’ statements before Question Period) to speak to the House.

Mr. O’Connor responded by saying that all parties allocate SO31 opportunities. “Put simply, this is a team activity and your role [the Speaker] is referee. It is not your given job as referee to tell the coach or the manager which player to play at any given time. That is a question for each team to decide,” he said.

That would normally have been enough notice for Conservatives concerned about career-advancement to shut their pie-holes. But we are at that stage in the life of this government where there are a sufficient number of Conservatives who feel they have nothing to lose. Leon Benoit, who has been a member for nearly 20 years, is clearly one such, and rose next to complain that he too has seen his rights infringed. “I am not allowed to speak on certain topics,” he said. “I have had SO31s removed and I have been told that if I have one on a certain topic, I will simply not be given SO31s. I believe this is infringing on my right as an MP to freedom of speech and to represent my constituents.”

[eyeball]

Leftist journalists/posters will portray Harper as a dictator, imposing his opinion. In fact though, Harper will tolerate the opinion of Conservative MPs because he needs their votes in parliament.

Meanwhile, Leftists in Canada will present a single, no-choice State-dictated system of health care, education and union membership as if this were "progressive" and civilized.

----

But as I say, the irony of political theory is that Leftism is ultimately based on a single State solution while Leftists invariably argue among themselves.

You're just plain nuts.

[shortlived]

Or they could join the CHP, the seemingly only federal pro-life party.

They could, if the CHP took them. Question is do they support the other CHP policies, if so, well the solution is obvious and good luck with reelection.

Miracles have happened right..

It would be one for the history books thats for sure.

Edited March 27, 2013 by shortlived

[scribblet]

Thought you would all be happy with cracking down on anti abortionists. Naturally, the PM is wrong if he does, and wrong if he doesn't.

[Mighty AC]

I've argued that, on average, our electoral system leaves half the country without representation. MPs represent their voters and platform not their constituency. However, when a party behaves like this our limited representation declines further.

It is a tough and unstable position to be in. Con leaders want the support of the far right Reformer/Wildrose types without scaring away moderate centre/right voters. How long will the more extreme conservative types remain muzzled before they re-form the Reform?

[Keepitsimple]

Harper's no dummy. He's letting Warawa speak out about muzzling him on "abortion" so that Harper can make it clear (again) where he and the party stand on the issue - and that under no circumstances will he allow the abortion debate to be re-opened - whether it's the back door, side door or through the window. Warawa is probably onside with this approach - he gets to go on CBC and put forward his position in a thoughtful way.....while Harper and the party expose the Hidden Agenda for what it always was - a crock. Brilliant!

Edited March 27, 2013 by Keepitsimple

[Boges]

Yeah, the only time a left winger would come out in support of pro lifers if they are disagreeing with the PM. If the PM allowed these MPs to speak I'm sure there'd be accusations that this is part of the PM's hidden agenda to take away a woman's right to choose.

Didn't Saint Jack whip his party on the Gun Registration vote.?

[Mighty AC]

I'm fine with a party having set positions on certain core issues and forcing those that represent it to adhere to those positions. However, the CPC is muzzling its members on a number of fronts. At least at one point the party even required MPs to attend pre-committee meetings to learn their positions and talking points.

It is well known that many CPC MPs have very conservative or even regressive social views that may scare off a large number of would be voters. I understand why Harper would want to muzzle his party, it makes sense politically. However, it also worsens the representation problem already created by our electoral system and essentially eliminates the point of local MPs. This kind of top down approach to governing is the opposite of what the Reformers pushed for and will not be tolerated indefinitely.

Edited March 27, 2013 by Mighty AC

[RNG]

This kind of top down approach to governing is the opposite of what the Reformers pushed for and will not be tolerated indefinitely.

It better be tolerated or the CPC will be shooting itself in the foot like the Wildrose Party did in Alberta and the Republicans have been doing for two election cycles or more in the states.

[Argus]

It better be tolerated or the CPC will be shooting itself in the foot like the Wildrose Party did in Alberta and the Republicans have been doing for two election cycles or more in the states.

The problem is there is still a miasma around the conservatives, caused by a concerted effort on the part of the opposition and parts of the media, to portray them as anti-choice, anti-immigrant, anti-french, anti-minority, etc. etc. So one or two yahoos opening their mouths on something stupid can easily be used to cast a bad light on the entire party. In point of fact, the party itself has been staunchly middle of the road, regardless of what anyone else might think.

Edited March 28, 2013 by Argus

[Argus]

You're just plain nuts.

On the other hand, the NDP doesn't have to worry about people with different opinions. Such people are never permitted into the NDP in the first place. It's understood that you have no independent mind in the NDP caucus. Your votes belongs to the great leader on all issues. Any opposition, any public statement which puts an individual MP against his party's chosen philosophy on any given issue will result in the immediate expulsion of that MP.

[RNG]

The problem is there is still a miasma around the conservatives, caused by a converted effort on the part of the opposition and parts of the media, to portray them as anti-choice, anti-immigrant, anti-french, anti-minority, etc. etc. So one or two yahoos opening their mouths on something stupid can easily be used to cast a bad light on the entire party. In point of fact, the party itself has been staunchly middle of the road, regardless of what anyone else might think.

Sad, but true. The problem here as well as Alberta and America is why do fiscal conservatives seem to end up wallowing in generally unpopular socially "conservative" causes? And thus the self-inflicted shooting of feet.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/03/26/conservative-mps-accuse-harper-government-of-muzzling-them-on-abortion/

"Green Party Leader Elizabeth May said Warawa’s point of privilege is one of the most important she has heard.

“It cuts to the core of what is wrong with parliamentary democracy,” said May.

“We are not here as teams. The principle of Westminster parliamentary
democracy is that we are here are representatives of our constituencies
and our constituents. Incidentally, we are merely members of political
parties.”

This kind of thinking could very well see myself actually supporting this women. The Lady has a point, a very valid one. Its time to rethink some things, and just maybe Harper will end up eating some crow.

[Peter F]

I doubt that very much. Parties will form naturally in a parliamentary system; they have to to get anything done.