On Guard for Thee Posted August 4, 2015 Report Posted August 4, 2015 Only if the PM relinquishes it. He's still the PM until he does so, even if he loses the election. He can even advise the GG that he intends to try to continue to govern anyway. He could try that I suppose, if he was stupid. If the election is deemed fair, he has no choice. His power does not exceed that of the crown. Quote
Derek 2.0 Posted August 4, 2015 Report Posted August 4, 2015 Everybody from the senate is back on the payroll. Excellent question, I never thought about this fact. WWWTT Who do you think is in charge? I won't badger you for link, I just want hear who, in your opinion, is currently in charge. Quote
Smallc Posted August 4, 2015 Report Posted August 4, 2015 He could try that I suppose, if he was stupid. If the election is deemed fair, he has no choice. His power does not exceed that of the crown. The Governor General is bound by convention. It would be only an extraordinary circumstance that would allow him to exercise power outside of it. The PM is the PM as long as he commands the confidence of the house. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted August 4, 2015 Report Posted August 4, 2015 (edited) The Governor General is bound by convention. It would be only an extraordinary circumstance that would allow him to exercise power outside of it. The PM is the PM as long as he commands the confidence of the house. This is like democracy 101. If the PM loses the election, he is no longer the PM. That of course is because he has lost the confidence of the people. Losing the confidence of the house means there must be an election. Edited August 4, 2015 by On Guard for Thee Quote
Smallc Posted August 4, 2015 Report Posted August 4, 2015 This is like democracy 101. If the PM loses the election, he is no longer the PM. That of course is because he has lost the confidence of the people. Losing the confidence of the house means there must be an election. You know so little about our system of government. After an election, the sitting PM can attempt to govern and gain the confidence of the house. If that confidence is not available or is withdrawn, only then must he step down. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted August 4, 2015 Report Posted August 4, 2015 You know so little about our system of government. After an election, the sitting PM can attempt to govern and gain the confidence of the house. If that confidence is not available or is withdrawn, only then must he step down. Why do you seem to struggle over the obvious? Quote
Bryan Posted August 4, 2015 Report Posted August 4, 2015 If the PM loses the election, he is no longer the PM. It does seem logical that would be the case, but that is not how our system works. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted August 4, 2015 Report Posted August 4, 2015 It does seem logical that would be the case, but that is not how our system works. If the opposition wins more than half the seats in an election the GG must ask the leader of the oppositio to form a new government. Quote
Smallc Posted August 4, 2015 Report Posted August 4, 2015 If the opposition wins more than half the seats in an election the GG must ask the leader of the oppositio to form a new government. That is how things generally work, but if by some miracle, the sitting PM thought he could command their confidence, he would have the right to continue to govern. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted August 4, 2015 Report Posted August 4, 2015 That is how things generally work, but if by some miracle, the sitting PM thought he could command their confidence, he would have the right to continue to govern. He can lose his seat and still govern yes. He can't if he loses more than half of the seats. Quote
Bryan Posted August 4, 2015 Report Posted August 4, 2015 He can lose his seat and still govern yes. He can't if he loses more than half of the seats. And yet it has happened before. Quote
jacee Posted August 4, 2015 Report Posted August 4, 2015 (edited) You know so little about our system of government. After an election, the sitting PM can attempt to govern and gain the confidence of the house. If that confidence is not available or is withdrawn, only then must he step down.Is that Harper's plan?Call an election ... at great expense to us ... and then just ignore the results? Wouldn't surprise me a bit. Harper doesn't have a democratic bone in his body: Autocrat all the way. . Edited August 4, 2015 by jacee Quote
xul Posted August 4, 2015 Report Posted August 4, 2015 Who is in charge right now? Queen of England.....LOL.....King of Saudi Arabia I bet at least 50% of Canadian conservative dudes would make him their king if he shut down his oil pipe to rise the oil price to $100 per barrel once again before the end of this year, so the dudes could get their desirable Christmas gifts---a brand new version of Xbox with 4k war games and "minecraft" support I suppose---from their re-employed parents Quote
WWWTT Posted August 4, 2015 Report Posted August 4, 2015 Who do you think is in charge? I won't badger you for link, I just want hear who, in your opinion, is currently in charge. GG and the senate. But that can change with some evidence. A link is necessary here. WWWTT Quote Maple Leaf Web is now worth $720.00! Down over $1,500 in less than one year! Total fail of the moderation on this site! That reminds me, never ask Greg to be a business partner! NEVER!
Keepitsimple Posted August 4, 2015 Report Posted August 4, 2015 You need a link? What do you think, all of a sudden we are just into anarchy? This is not China. But Justin Trudeau would like it to be..... Sorry On Guard - I couldn't resist this time......that's the type of continuous drive-by smear that you've become infamous for! Quote Back to Basics
Topaz Posted August 4, 2015 Report Posted August 4, 2015 Usually in elections voters vote for their MP in the riding, but do you think this time many will be voting for the leader? Since there is a "get rid of Harper' movement out there, I can see were this may be happening across Canada. Quote
hitops Posted August 4, 2015 Report Posted August 4, 2015 (edited) Usually in elections voters vote for their MP in the riding, but do you think this time many will be voting for the leader? Since there is a "get rid of Harper' movement out there, I can see were this may be happening across Canada. Most people vote for the party leader, this has been true for decades. The candidate MP is just wearing the jersey. Edited August 4, 2015 by hitops Quote
Big Guy Posted August 4, 2015 Author Report Posted August 4, 2015 (edited) Thank you for he responses - but - I had been unable to find a definitive answer to my question and I still have not seen one. Until there is a verified link from some official organization then all else is personal speculation. I ask again - Who is now in charge (decision making) in Canada. Who in the government can send troops into action? I am surprised that this question has not come up in the past. We are going to be in this position for almost 3 months. In 1981, in the USA, when Nixon was in trouble, General Alexander Haig declared that "I am in charge". There is profit and opportunity in chaos. Edited August 4, 2015 by Big Guy Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
On Guard for Thee Posted August 4, 2015 Report Posted August 4, 2015 Thank you for he responses - but - I had been unable to find a definitive answer to my question and I still have not seen one. Until there is a verified link from some official organization then all else is personal speculation. I ask again - Who is now in charge (decision making) in Canada. Who in the government can send troops into action? I am surprised that this question has not come up in the past. We are going to be in this position for almost 3 months. In 1981, in the USA, when Nixon was in trouble, General Alexander Haig declared that "I am in charge". There is profit and opportunity in chaos. The governor in council (the cabinet) can order troops into action by an order in council. They don't need the parliament. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted August 4, 2015 Report Posted August 4, 2015 .....In 1981, in the USA, when Nixon was in trouble, General Alexander Haig declared that "I am in charge". There is profit and opportunity in chaos. Nixon was not the USA president in 1981. Gen. Haig declared that he was in control at the White House. None of this has anything to do with a federal election and transfer of power in Canada. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Big Guy Posted August 4, 2015 Author Report Posted August 4, 2015 "The governor in council (the cabinet) ..... parliament." Cite please Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
Big Guy Posted August 4, 2015 Author Report Posted August 4, 2015 I stand corrected. In 1981 it was Reagan who was shot and incapacitated when Haig stated his famous position. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
On Guard for Thee Posted August 4, 2015 Report Posted August 4, 2015 "The governor in council (the cabinet) ..... parliament." Cite please http://appointments-nominations.gc.ca/prsnt.asp?page=Process〈=eng Quote
Smallc Posted August 4, 2015 Report Posted August 4, 2015 Thank you for he responses - but - I had been unable to find a definitive answer to my question and I still have not seen one. Until there is a verified link from some official organization then all else is personal speculation. I ask again - Who is now in charge (decision making) in Canada. Who in the government can send troops into action? I am surprised that this question has not come up in the past. We are going to be in this position for almost 3 months. In 1981, in the USA, when Nixon was in trouble, General Alexander Haig declared that "I am in charge". There is profit and opportunity in chaos. Your question has been answered. The current government remains in charge until such a time as it's no longer in charge. Quote
cybercoma Posted August 4, 2015 Report Posted August 4, 2015 Usually in elections voters vote for their MP in the ridingThat's not actually true. Polls show that they vote for the party. The individual candidates in the vast majority of cases are irrelevant. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.