End the Harper Government: My views on Canada's democracy

[Smallc]

http://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/the-missing-3-1-billion-no-one-is-asking-about/

A painstaking six-month search by a team inside Treasury Board has followed the money and reconstructed the entire $12.9-billion in allocations the Auditor-General examined.

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/john-ivison-the-3-1-billion-conservative-boondoggle-that-never-was

[Argus]

A quote from another thread:

I agree pretty much, but I don't want a government that's perfect. I demand a government and political representatives that are at least somewhat honest

The Harper Conservatives ARE somewhat honest. At least they haven't stooped to stealing my money in truckloads like the last guy.

that will put their country above their own career aspirations, above their own re-election, above getting what they politically want at all costs. I demand a government that respects our democracy, and our constitution. I want MP's and a PM that would rather do the right thing and be willing to lose their jobs rather than keep their job if it means needing to do the dishonest/undemocratic thing.

I've often said the Conservatives' position on Israel costs them more votes than it gets them, especially since most Jews are fairly liberal. They could get a lot more votes from the large and growing Muslim population, who are now over three times the size of the Jewish population and are going to triple in numbers by 2020, if they just stopped supporting Israel. Muslims would be a natural constituency of theirs since they are opposed to abortion, gay rights, and a lot of other things which would make it distasteful for them to vote for the Liberals or NDP.

How is Stephen Harper not a traitor to our country and our democracy when he ie: muzzles government scientists just so he can get his own environmental policies enacted without scientific criticism, or muzzles members of his cabinet and party whenever it suits his agenda?

I doubt you impress anyone with silly hyperbole like that. On those subjects Harper is no different than Chretien was or Mulcair or Trudeau will be. I have a feeling you won't be calling them traitors, though.

Call me idealistic, but there's politicians in this country that will put their country before themselves,

Yeah? Name them.

[SpankyMcFarland]

I see Tony Abbott got dumped in Australia. Imagine the Cons doing that to Harper - utterly conceivable except after a crushing electoral defeat. Remember Chretien's long goodbye? We are way too deferential to our PMs in Canada. They work for us and should never be allowed to forget it.

[cybercoma]

The Harper Conservatives ARE somewhat honest.

If you ignore all of the charges and convictions for fraud. The party itself plead guilty. For the first time in a generation a sitting MP, who was parliamentary secretary to the prime minister, was convicted. They're one of the most secretive governments we've had, obstructing committees and denying information requests. They were the first sitting government in history to be in contempt of parliament for not disclosing costs.

Honest? You must have a different definition of the word.

[PIK]

CY that is a joke. Chretien and mulroney are real fraudsters. This government is clean compared to those 2. Every government will have issues, it is just how many and how bad. Harper has one of the cleanest to date. Look at who was convicted, was it not for spending to much of their OWN MONEY and not the taxpayers. Harper is in trouble for trying to get taxpayers money back and he is being vilified for that. Open your eyes man.

[ToadBrother]

CY that is a joke. Chretien and mulroney are real fraudsters. This government is clean compared to those 2. Every government will have issues, it is just how many and how bad. Harper has one of the cleanest to date. Look at who was convicted, was it not for spending to much of their OWN MONEY and not the taxpayers. Harper is in trouble for trying to get taxpayers money back and he is being vilified for that. Open your eyes man.

Harper is in trouble because he's been leader of the CPC for eleven years and PM for nine years. That alone would make winning again difficult. Everything else is just reasons for voters not to vote for him.

Hey, it sucks, but no party ever gets a permanent hold on power. That's why we call it democracy.

[ToadBrother]

I see Tony Abbott got dumped in Australia. Imagine the Cons doing that to Harper - utterly conceivable except after a crushing electoral defeat. Remember Chretien's long goodbye? We are way too deferential to our PMs in Canada. They work for us and should never be allowed to forget it.

Harper isn't going to stick around if he's defeated. If the Tories don't get a plurality on election night, he will resign. The only possible exception may be if the seat counts are so close, the Tories may choose to wait for any recounts.

It's quite possible it might be some time after October 19th before we find out who the government is. Looking at the polls right now, they all seem to be circling a mean of about 30%.

[cybercoma]

CY that is a joke. Chretien and mulroney are real fraudsters

You know they could ALL be fraudsters, right?

[cybercoma]

CY that is a joke. Chretien and mulroney are real fraudsters. This government is clean compared to those 2. Every government will have issues, it is just how many and how bad. Harper has one of the cleanest to date. Look at who was convicted, was it not for spending to much of their OWN MONEY and not the taxpayers. Harper is in trouble for trying to get taxpayers money back and he is being vilified for that. Open your eyes man.

It was for electoral fraud, which is arguably worse than anything else. Then when they were busted, they changed the laws to make it harder to investigate electoral fraud. Open your eyes indeed.

[Moonlight Graham]

The next government, no matter who wins of these 3 parties, it's just going to be the same crap all over again. Maybe a bit better, maybe a bit worse, but the same crap.

"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss":

[ToadBrother]

The next government, no matter who wins of these 3 parties, it's just going to be the same crap all over again. Maybe a bit better, maybe a bit worse, but the same crap.

"Meet the new boss, same as the old boss":

Ah yes, but a parting on the left will become a parting on the right!

[SpankyMcFarland]

Harper isn't going to stick around if he's defeated. If the Tories don't get a plurality on election night, he will resign. The only possible exception may be if the seat counts are so close, the Tories may choose to wait for any recounts.

It's quite possible it might be some time after October 19th before we find out who the government is. Looking at the polls right now, they all seem to be circling a mean of about 30%.

If the current trends hold, a clear majority of voters won't want any more Harper but that is what they may get.

[ToadBrother]

If the current trends hold, a clear majority of voters won't want any more Harper but that is what they may get.

Perhaps, but if it ends up being as slender a minority as the polls indicate, I doubt it will be a very long-lived regime. If the Tories only get a few seats more than their nearest competitor, Harper might even resign rather than face defeat when Parliament reconvenes.

[jacee]

Only by chicanery ... aka election fraud.

[BC_chick]

I've often said the Conservatives' position on Israel costs them more votes than it gets them, especially since most Jews are fairly liberal. They could get a lot more votes from the large and growing Muslim population, who are now over three times the size of the Jewish population and are going to triple in numbers by 2020, if they just stopped supporting Israel. Muslims would be a natural constituency of theirs since they are opposed to abortion, gay rights, and a lot of other things which would make it distasteful for them to vote for the Liberals or NDP.

It just goes to show how ingrained Harper's Alliance roots are on this topic.

You don't ever catch me on the Israel boards anymore because my opinions on the subject could be deemed hate-speech (according to the CPC) and thanks to C-24 I could get kicked out the country.

Think about that, I could get kicked out of a country I have been a citizen of for over 30 years, and I could be forced to go to a country I left as a small-child where I have no friends/family/knowledge of the society.

Just for criticizing Israel!

Forget Muslim-Canadians, I really don't know how any Canadian finds that acceptable.

Edited September 14, 2015 by BC_chick

[Argus]

I see Tony Abbott got dumped in Australia. Imagine the Cons doing that to Harper - utterly conceivable except after a crushing electoral defeat.

Australia's system allows PMs to be voted out by caucus members. That's why they've had, I think 8 PMs in 6 years (or is it 6 PMs in 8 years).

In Canada's system, the party leaders are voted on by a general assembly of the party, so the caucus members alone can't vote them out.

[Argus]

It just goes to show how ingrained Harper's Alliance roots are on this topic.

You don't ever catch me on the Israel boards anymore because my opinions on the subject could be deemed hate-speech (according to the CPC) and thanks to C-24 I could get kicked out the country.

Think about that, I could get kicked out of a country I have been a citizen of for over 30 years, and I could be forced to go to a country I left as a small-child where I have no friends/family/knowledge of the society.

Just for criticizing Israel!

Forget Muslim-Canadians, I really don't know how any Canadian finds that acceptable.

Paranoid, much?

The fear that you could be expelled from Canada for criticizing Israel is ludicrous, even if you were a visitor on a visa.

You actually think the government is going to strip your citizenship and expel you for being one of the miillions who say nasty things about Israel? Wow.

As for hate speech, that is something the Left put in place, and avidly supports. I don't know any right wingers who are too happy with it. But in any case, prosecutions of it are exceedingly rare, and confined to deliberate and ongoing attempts to stir up and incite hatred and actions against a particular group within Canada. I doubt Israelis would qualify. Jews, on the other hand, would.

Edited September 14, 2015 by Argus

[BC_chick]

The fact is, Harper put into place the means for a person like me to be considered a second-rate citizen and he also made it illegal to say certain things Israel, including peaceful boycotts.

Even if there is a one in a billion chance anything could come of it, the possibility is out there, and it's unacceptable in a democratic society.

[Argus]

The fact is, Harper put into place the means for a person like me to be considered a second-rate citizen and he also made it illegal to say certain things Israel, including peaceful boycotts.

Even if there is a one in a billion chance anything could come of it, the possibility is out there, and it's unacceptable in a democratic society.

There is ZERO chance someone would be stripped of his or her citizenship and shipped overseas after 30 years in Canada for taking part in one of those stupid boycotts of Israel.

Btw, are you boycotting China? Their human rights record is a lot worse than Israel's. No, didn't think so.

[ToadBrother]

Australia's system allows PMs to be voted out by caucus members. That's why they've had, I think 8 PMs in 6 years (or is it 6 PMs in 8 years).

In Canada's system, the party leaders are voted on by a general assembly of the party, so the caucus members alone can't vote them out.

There are ways to get rid of a leader that don't require a general vote from the party. The Socreds in BC did it in 1991. It's a bit tricky, and not all the details are still known, but essentially it went like this:

- The members of Cabinet went to the Lieutenant-Governor and informed him that the the Socred caucus was intending to vote "no confidence" in their own government, which would force Premier Vander Zalm's resignation.

- Further, the BC Cabinet made it clear that as soon as there was a vote of non-confidence, the Socreds, who still enjoyed a majority in the BC legislature, would put forward an interim leader; in this case Rita Johnston.

Underlying this is two twin concepts; first of all that it is parliament (or legislative assembly) that picks the Government (the Ministers of the Crown, including a Premier or Prime Minister), and second of all is that where there is a vote of non-confidence, if the current parliament can put forward another government, it has the right to try to govern. It also demonstrates another important principle of Westminster parliaments that is too often ignored in this day of the cult of leaders, that it is not simply the PM or Premier who enjoys the right to advise the Queen or her representatives, but the entire Cabinet, and that the Cabinet, or indeed the entire Privy Council, still enjoys some right to communicate with the Vice-regal representative.

Admittedly this method doesn't really help opposition parties, and I'm not sure I would recommend it as a way for a minority government to get rid of an unwanted Prime Minister, but it is a somewhat torturous way to accomplish that end.

As to Australia, I don't think the caucus picking leaders is the real problem here. Britain, and in particular the Tories in the UK, have run under a system of caucus choosing the leader since the Conservative Party was founded by Sir Robert Peel. The system works. The problem in Australia has been some really bad leaders being elected to the major parties.

[BC_chick]

There is ZERO chance someone would be stripped of his or her citizenship and shipped overseas after 30 years in Canada for taking part in one of those stupid boycotts of Israel.

Btw, are you boycotting China? Their human rights record is a lot worse than Israel's. No, didn't think so.

As a matter of fact, I do look for Made In China stickers, but thanks for asking.

As for the zero chance of me losing my citizenship, you're missing the point. The fact is, it *could* happen - thanks to law put in place as a result of Harper's Evangelical view of Israel.

[Argus]

As a matter of fact, I do look for Made In China stickers, but thanks for asking.

As for the zero chance of me losing my citizenship, you're missing the point. The fact is, it *could* happen - thanks to law put in place as a result of Harper's Evangelical view of Israel.

A sinkhole could open up under your house and drag you down into the Earth too. And the odds are a lot higher. Pretty poor reason not to live in a house, though.

[SpankyMcFarland]

As to Australia, I don't think the caucus picking leaders is the real problem here. Britain, and in particular the Tories in the UK, have run under a system of caucus choosing the leader since the Conservative Party was founded by Sir Robert Peel. The system works. The problem in Australia has been some really bad leaders being elected to the major parties.

Until 2014, the British Labour Party used an electoral college to choose the leader with one third of the votes allocated to the MPs and MEPs. In terms of stability/inertia, Canada seems to be at the other end of spectrum from Australia, with Ireland closer to Oz. In Ireland, the parliamentary party decides the leader. Attempts to remove the leader are called 'heaves'. A concern in the recent election of Jeremy Corbyn in the UK was the role of new members in the vote. He is not popular with MPs. Edited September 15, 2015 by SpankyMcFarland

[BC_chick]

A sinkhole could open up under your house and drag you down into the Earth too. And the odds are a lot higher. Pretty poor reason not to live in a house, though.

Unconstitutional laws are not random acts of nature. Sinkholes are.

Edited September 15, 2015 by BC_chick

[Bob Macadoo]

A sinkhole could open up under your house and drag you down into the Earth too. And the odds are a lot higher. Pretty poor reason not to live in a house, though.

The better analogy would be if the gov't enacted legislation that allowed horizontal drilling in your area and this increased the likelihood of causing a sinkhole under your house. You might not get swallowed whole but I'm pretty sure you'd fight it like you were or if your neighbour had a rickety house (ie. brown).