Newfie Canadian Posted June 6, 2005 Report Share Posted June 6, 2005 Liberal MP leaves Grits over same-sex bill Liberal MP Pat O'Brien, who opposes his party's position on gay marriage, says he's quitting the Grits to sit as an Independent.The move comes less than two months after he held a news conference in April to announce he was staying with the Liberals despite misgivings. Another independent MP. Interesting. I'm not shocked by this, I'm more shocked that he stayed after the last time he went public with his dissatisfaction over SSM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted June 6, 2005 Report Share Posted June 6, 2005 This was the member who said he'd stay on with the Liberals long enough to finish his work on defence committees, right? -k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted June 6, 2005 Report Share Posted June 6, 2005 June 6, 2005 - I guess my immediate reaction is that we should all carefully watch the Grit God Squad - you know, the Wappels, the McTeagues, the McKays. Make sure the batteries are fully charged in your tape recorders, fellas! It's pay day! I gather he's suggesting that Harper could be trying to make deals with Liberal MPs who aren't thrilled about the SSM issue. -kim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I Miss Trudeau Posted June 6, 2005 Report Share Posted June 6, 2005 Liberal MP Pat O'Brien, who opposes his party's position on gay marriage, says he's quitting the Grits to sit as an Independent. The move comes less than two months after he held a news conference in April to announce he was staying with the Liberals despite misgivings. Whore! Opportunist! Prostitute! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted June 6, 2005 Report Share Posted June 6, 2005 Whore! Opportunist! Prostitute! Yes... just another startling example of the Independent Party's use of Largesse to get their way in parliament... -k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Terrible Sweal Posted June 6, 2005 Report Share Posted June 6, 2005 Whose fault it is that this guy espouses beliefs no-one is interested in rewarding, and Belinda espouses beliefs that people do wish to reward? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted June 6, 2005 Report Share Posted June 6, 2005 Is it that nobody views O'Brien as being worth rewarding? Or is it that only one side here has anything with which to offer "rewards"? That we have only one party in this country which has a realistic chance of forming a government has implications. If you're in the civil service or the press or potentially other spheres as well, you *know* who is going to be in charge in this country for years to come... and that has to have implications for how you do your job. -k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I Miss Trudeau Posted June 6, 2005 Report Share Posted June 6, 2005 Is it that nobody views O'Brien as being worth rewarding? Or is it that only one side here has anything with which to offer "rewards"? True enough. Just look at Harper's attempted bribe to Cadman... "Vote with us and we won't force you to embarass another CPC candidate next election." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I Miss Trudeau Posted June 6, 2005 Report Share Posted June 6, 2005 Yes... just another startling example of the Independent Party's use of Largesse to get their way in parliament... He has sold out to the radical christian right in the hope of winning again next election. To fatten the purse, he's also recieved a personal guarantee from Focus on the Family that he won't burn in hell. The man clearly has no principles. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted June 6, 2005 Report Share Posted June 6, 2005 Yes... just another startling example of the Independent Party's use of Largesse to get their way in parliament... He has sold out to the radical christian right in the hope of winning again next election. To fatten the purse, he's also recieved a personal guarantee from Focus on the Family that he won't burn in hell. The man clearly has no principles. What'd he sell to the radical religious right? And what price did he receive? -k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted June 6, 2005 Report Share Posted June 6, 2005 Liberal MP Pat O'Brien, who opposes his party's position on gay marriage, says he's quitting the Grits to sit as an Independent. Good riddance, really. I don't think O'Brien sold out, however, but deserves credit for standing by his beliefs (no matter how mule-ignorant I think they are). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted June 6, 2005 Report Share Posted June 6, 2005 Good riddance, really. I don't think O'Brien sold out, however, but deserves credit for standing by his beliefs (no matter how mule-ignorant I think they are).In such a jaded parliament, I'm happy to see BD that you can imagine that maybe O'Brien is acting out of conscience.This is how the G&M reports his action: Mr. Valeri said it was his understanding that Mr. O'Brien was not interested in toppling the government, and could not see what he had to gain from the move.“(Mr. O'Brien's) certainly been very vocal on this issue, and so I don't see any difference in what he will be able to do as an independent on C-38, as what he had been able to as a member of caucus,” Mr. Valeri said Monday. G&M I too wonder what O'Brien gains by this. I thought it was a free vote for the Liberal caucus. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newfie Canadian Posted June 6, 2005 Author Report Share Posted June 6, 2005 Perhaps he gains nothing, August, except getting out of a government that he feels is missing the mark on SSM. A CBC article says: O'Brien had been hinting at leaving the party last April. But he said at the time he was convinced to stay on after being given assurances by Prime Minister Paul Martin that full and fair hearings would be held over same-sex marriage.... "I had assurances it would be meaningful and fair from the prime minister. That's not what's happening, in my judgment," he[O'Brien] said. He complained that the hearings have been given an artificial and unnecessary June 14 deadline. He said witnesses are only given 24 hours' notice to appear, are often berated and insulted by members of Parliament on both sides of the issue and that too many witnesses are being grouped together in one session. Ontario Liberal MP to sit as Independent (CBC Article) Could just simply be a matter of O'Brien feeling Martin had given him the shaft, much like Kilgour thought Martin's Darfur pledge wasn't enough to get his vote for the budget. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theloniusfleabag Posted June 6, 2005 Report Share Posted June 6, 2005 Dear Black Dog, Good riddance, really. I don't think O'Brien sold out, however, but deserves credit for standing by his beliefs (no matter how mule-ignorant I think they are).I echo August1991's sentiment.I'm happy to see BD that you can imagine that maybe O'Brien is acting out of conscience. I too wonder what O'Brien gains by this. I thought it was a free vote for the Liberal caucus.August1991, when the party 'cracks the whip' on someone, the vote is hardly 'free'. Perhaps O'Brien realizes some of what you consider 'flaws inherent in the system' and didn't want to play 'party politics' anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted June 6, 2005 Report Share Posted June 6, 2005 Does this mean that, if the Tories present a non-confidence motion, O'Brien would vote against the government and provoke a dissolution so that SSM legislation could not be passed by this parliament? Is that O'Brien's objective? Valeri is quoted above saying that is not the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fellowtraveller Posted June 6, 2005 Report Share Posted June 6, 2005 Unless the Bloc changes their wholesale minds and votes against SSM en masse, O'briens action will have zero effect on a confidence vote. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cartman Posted June 6, 2005 Report Share Posted June 6, 2005 Was it a big mystery to this fella that the Liberals were going to introduce SSM when he decided to run as a Liberal in the first place? He should have run as an independent to begin with. Too many people are shifting alliances. I am starting to think Hugo has a point about government being a form of organized crime. On the other hand, maybe they should just do it like hockey and the leaders could trade MP's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Dog Posted June 6, 2005 Report Share Posted June 6, 2005 I'm happy to see BD that you can imagine that maybe O'Brien is acting out of conscience. Wot NC said: Perhaps he gains nothing, August, except getting out of a government that he feels is missing the mark on SSM. If only Bev Dejarlais would follow suit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RightWinger Posted June 6, 2005 Report Share Posted June 6, 2005 I'm happy to see BD that you can imagine that maybe O'Brien is acting out of conscience. Wot NC said: Perhaps he gains nothing, August, except getting out of a government that he feels is missing the mark on SSM. If only Bev Dejarlais would follow suit. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Maybe this is a sign of things to come. Maybe the Liberals are falling apart over the same topic most of you say has little value. His constituents are probably quite happy as many other ridings would be if the MP's listened to their constituents and voted against gay marriage, but then again this is not a democracy. Good to see there are a few MP's left in the Liberal party with some morals. Hope to see more!! RW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted June 6, 2005 Report Share Posted June 6, 2005 I think O'Brien's purpose is to get PM PM to delay SSM legislation. He's saying, "I won't vote against you and bring down the government during if you don't rush this SSM legislation through." I gather as a caucus member, he couldn't play that game. Our parliament is turning into the US House of Representatives before our very eyes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted June 6, 2005 Report Share Posted June 6, 2005 Whose fault it is that this guy espouses beliefs no-one is interested in rewarding, and Belinda espouses beliefs that people do wish to reward? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Belinda has views? I mean, other than on fashion and shoes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted June 6, 2005 Report Share Posted June 6, 2005 Was it a big mystery to this fella that the Liberals were going to introduce SSM when he decided to run as a Liberal in the first place?I imagine it was since he's been an MP for some years, and the party was opposed to same sex marriage up until about two years ago. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donvonbra Posted June 6, 2005 Report Share Posted June 6, 2005 Liberal MP Pat O'Brien, who opposes his party's position on gay marriage, says he's quitting the Grits to sit as an Independent. Good riddance, really. I don't think O'Brien sold out, however, but deserves credit for standing by his beliefs (no matter how mule-ignorant I think they are). <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Why now? Martin has been pro-SSM ever since he became PM. O'Brien is not in the cabinet so he is free to vote on this issue any way he wants. He's vocal about it. I have never heard him criticized by the Lib Party elite becuse of his views. He has no hope of advancement of course in the Grit ranks. Does he expect to be welcomed into Tory ranks with the hope of getting into the Cabinet if the CPC wins the next election, as slim as that looks like right now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theloniusfleabag Posted June 6, 2005 Report Share Posted June 6, 2005 Dear Donvonbra, Does he expect to be welcomed into Tory ranks with the hope of getting into the Cabinet if the CPC wins the next election, as slim as that looks like right now?If that was the case he would have 'crossed the floor' and been immediately welcomed, with assumably sloghtly better chances of a cabinet post than he has now. O'Brien is not in the cabinet so he is free to vote on this issue any way he wants.Not exactly. Kilgour and Kindy were booted from the PC party for 'voting in accordance with the will of their constituents' against the GST. If O'Brien leaves (for taking a personal stance on the issue) before getting booted, both sides 'save face'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donvonbra Posted June 6, 2005 Report Share Posted June 6, 2005 If that was the case he would have 'crossed the floor' and been immediately welcomed, with assumably sloghtly better chances of a cabinet post than he has now. Who knows -- "independence" might be just a way-station en route to Torydom? Not exactly. Kilgour and Kindy were booted from the PC party for 'voting in accordance with the will of their constituents' against the GST. If O'Brien leaves (for taking a personal stance on the issue) before getting booted, both sides 'save face'. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Did not 30 or more Libs vote against C-38 at 2nd reading? In fact, Martin has said all long that they could vote as they wished on SSM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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.