How long will the Harper government last?

[YankAbroad]

I'm an NDP supporter?

*catches breath*

Oh my.

Sorry.

*catches breath again*

I'm just noting the reality. Obviously the NDP hold the balance of power along with the Bloc. The Bloc will do whatever is necessary to screw the feds, so you've got the NDP as the thing which will prevent an immediate election. And I cannot see them supporting Harper's agenda.

He'll have to call another election to ask for a mandate majority, and I see that happening within 9 months to a year.

Signed,

Your Friendly Neighbourhood Libertarian NDPer

[shoop]

The NDP actually doesn't hold the balance of power. See it takes 155 seats for a majority in the House of Commons. CPC (125) + NDP (29) = 154. Just one short...

The Bloc will do whatever is necessary to look out for the best interests of Quebec. That isn't *always* equivalent to screwing the Feds.

The Conservatives will be able to govern issue by issue, pushing the more contentious stuff earlier on.

People will not want an election within the next nine months to a year. Any party forcing an election that early will be punished by the electorate.

Once the Liberal leadership race gets started in earnest the CPC will have at least six months after the convention to govern. That makes fall of 2007 as the earliest date for the next election...

I'm just noting the reality. Obviously the NDP hold the balance of power along with the Bloc. The Bloc will do whatever is necessary to screw the feds, so you've got the NDP as the thing which will prevent an immediate election. And I cannot see them supporting Harper's agenda.

He'll have to call another election to ask for a mandate majority, and I see that happening within 9 months to a year.

Signed,

Your Friendly Neighbourhood Libertarian NDPer

[YankAbroad]

If Harper plans to relaunch the culture wars over gay marriage, he can kiss his government goodbye. That's why it would be prudent for him to focus on more pressing concerns, such as economic reform and free trade negotiations.

[shoop]

I take it your silence means a tacit acknowledgement that your nine months to a year claim was pretty weak AND you are backing down from it?

Culture wars? Don't really exist in Canada. Harper promised a free vote in Parliament on SSM and he will deliver. Abortion, probly won't even come up.

Look for the accountability act, day care plan and GST to all be introduced in the spring sitting of parliament. Emerson will deal with the softwood lumber file.

If Harper plans to relaunch the culture wars over gay marriage, he can kiss his government goodbye. That's why it would be prudent for him to focus on more pressing concerns, such as economic reform and free trade negotiations.

[Canuck E Stan]

If Harper plans to relaunch the culture wars over gay marriage, he can kiss his government goodbye. That's why it would be prudent for him to focus on more pressing concerns, such as economic reform and free trade negotiations.

You seem to make the assumption that the free vote will turn out against the gays,what if the free vote turns in their favour?

With many of the Liberals,NDP, and Bloc plus a fair number of Conservatives in favour, the free vote will most likely favour gay marriage.

The issue of gay marriage will then be finished for good.

[uOttawaMan]

I think people need to stop pulling partisan support out of their ass for a second, and realise noone holds a balance of power in parliament.

The Conservatives obviously form the government, and at the moment have no "natural allies" (if there could be called such a thing in politics) so they obviously need opposition MP's to side with them for bills to pass.

In the opposition benches, you have arguably a chance for 3 left wing parties to work together, however one is only interested in furthering the province of Quebec, which in certain cases allows them to support the Conservatives on issues of provincial inequality (such as the fiscal imbalance), the other is a left wing party with a rather small amount of seats (my party just so we're clear) , that's views tend to clash with the CPC, and has an overinflated opinion on how much influence it has in the house. That being said, those 29 seats can help a cause significantly if it was felt other opposition MP's might swing with the vote.

The last belongs to a centrist party, who if they took a long look at many of the Conservative initiatives , would find they hold common ground with the CPC. However, they are stuck in a confused mess of in-fighting at the moment, and with their apparent bitterness, lack of leadership, and more than likely hesitancy to bring down a government so quickly, what support will and will not come from the Liberal party is really unpredictable at best. (That's just my opinion)

That being said, none of this makes the slightest difference, since everyone on here is pretty much already set in their views, so im gonna eat a cookie. (I think this was my longest post ever here...mmm cookie)

[YankAbroad]

You seem to make the assumption that the free vote will turn out against the gays,what if the free vote turns in their favour?

There's a lot of assuming going on about what I'm saying, which is highly inaccurate.

I don't expect the SSM vote to go Harper's way -- but that's the problem. His social conservative base is going to expect him to "fight on, forever" if he loses the free vote. He's going to have to abandon them if he loses the vote -- whereas, if he drags on without one, he can string them along long enough to appeal to the centre and win a stronger government.

I take it your silence means a tacit acknowledgement that your nine months to a year claim was pretty weak AND you are backing down from it?

Actually, I answered your post and certainly am not backing down from my prediction.

Though I find your partisan, mindless commitment to your leader in the face of actual facts to be touching and quaintly myopic!

[Michael Hardner]

I don't expect the SSM vote to go Harper's way -- but that's the problem. His social conservative base is going to expect him to "fight on, forever" if he loses the free vote. He's going to have to abandon them if he loses the vote -- whereas, if he drags on without one, he can string them along long enough to appeal to the centre and win a stronger government.

Yank - as Canuck E Stan pointed out, he only promised a free vote. If that happens, and it fails then he can move on. There's no abandoning anybody.

Harper is much more interested in retooling Canada's economics, in my opinion.

[lost&outofcontrol]

Nice, first reply you start off with a whine.

So let me get this straight, you are actually trying to draw a comparison to King-Byng here? Hmmmm, the only people the NDP could form a coalition with that would actually create a majority government would be the Conservatives.

According to you the Liberals are so *disorganized* that if the government falls within the next ten months in the following election they won't even hold onto the Official Opposition.

If that were true, why would the Conservatives and Liberals allow the government to wall within the next ten months???? (You do realize that together they control over 2/3rds of the seats in the House of Commons.)

I think that proves your basic inability to grasp reality.

You don't need to have a possible majority to form a government. Heck you don't even need to be the party with the most seats in the house. Just ask Arthur Meighen, didn't work out so well for him though. If the conservatives truly mess up (institute mandatory pink shirts on Tuesdays ), which I think they won't, no matter who's got how many seats, the government is going down. The liberal can even try to form a government without the assistance of the NDP and this would be based on precedent, this is called a Constitutional convention. See, researching your position isn't that hard; try it sometime. I even ask a teacher( a leading constitutional lawyer) here at Ottawa U about this very subject. Told me the same thing, if Harper falls within the next few months, the GG will ask Billy if he wants a go at it.

And where did I ever say if the conservatives fall the liberals would not be the official opposition ?! If the conservatives fall in the next few months, the liberals form the next government !

Seriously buddy, why does every post look like an attack on the conservatives to you ? We're all civilized here, let's act like it.

[lost&outofcontrol]

That being said, none of this makes the slightest difference, since everyone on here is pretty much already set in their views, so im gonna eat a cookie. (I think this was my longest post ever here...mmm cookie)

Well said and I prefer white chocolate and macadamia nut cookies.

By the way, what are you taking at Ottawa U ?

[shoop]

Your *precedent* has never happened in Canada.

Sit and mentally masturbate with your *leading constitutional lawyer* buddy all you want. This would never happen in Canada.

Why would Harper fall in the next few months? I appreciate your use of the term IF, but it ain't gonna happen.

Why does it look like an attack? Hmmm, because no minority government in Canada has fallen in a couple months. Thus if the CPC did it would be a f*ckup of historical proporations. No can't see why your hypothesizing about a monumental screwup on the part of the Conservatives would be seen as an attack on the Conservatives.

You don't need to have a possible majority to form a government. Heck you don't even need to be the party with the most seats in the house. Just ask Arthur Meighen, didn't work out so well for him though. If the conservatives truly mess up (institute mandatory pink shirts on Tuesdays ), which I think they won't, no matter who's got how many seats, the government is going down. The liberal can even try to form a government without the assistance of the NDP and this would be based on precedent, this is called a Constitutional convention. See, researching your position isn't that hard; try it sometime. I even ask a teacher( a leading constitutional lawyer) here at Ottawa U about this very subject. Told me the same thing, if Harper falls within the next few months, the GG will ask Billy if he wants a go at it.

And where did I ever say if the conservatives fall the liberals would not be the official opposition ?! If the conservatives fall in the next few months, the liberals form the next government !

Seriously buddy, why does every post look like an attack on the conservatives to you ? We're all civilized here, let's act like it.

[geoffrey]

Nice, first reply you start off with a whine.

So let me get this straight, you are actually trying to draw a comparison to King-Byng here? Hmmmm, the only people the NDP could form a coalition with that would actually create a majority government would be the Conservatives.

According to you the Liberals are so *disorganized* that if the government falls within the next ten months in the following election they won't even hold onto the Official Opposition.

If that were true, why would the Conservatives and Liberals allow the government to wall within the next ten months???? (You do realize that together they control over 2/3rds of the seats in the House of Commons.)

I think that proves your basic inability to grasp reality.

You don't need to have a possible majority to form a government. Heck you don't even need to be the party with the most seats in the house. Just ask Arthur Meighen, didn't work out so well for him though. If the conservatives truly mess up (institute mandatory pink shirts on Tuesdays ), which I think they won't, no matter who's got how many seats, the government is going down. The liberal can even try to form a government without the assistance of the NDP and this would be based on precedent, this is called a Constitutional convention. See, researching your position isn't that hard; try it sometime. I even ask a teacher( a leading constitutional lawyer) here at Ottawa U about this very subject. Told me the same thing, if Harper falls within the next few months, the GG will ask Billy if he wants a go at it.

And where did I ever say if the conservatives fall the liberals would not be the official opposition ?! If the conservatives fall in the next few months, the liberals form the next government !

Seriously buddy, why does every post look like an attack on the conservatives to you ? We're all civilized here, let's act like it.

Ohhh but we didn't elect them to sit in government.

The hypocracy of this smells so good!

[lost&outofcontrol]

Your *precedent* has never happened in Canada.

Sit and mentally masturbate with your *leading constitutional lawyer* buddy all you want. This would never happen in Canada.

It has happened before !! William Lyon Mackenzie King asked the GG in 1926, Lord Byng, to dissolve Parliament. The GG refused since the government had been in power for less than 6 months. The GG asked Arthur Meighen to form the government which he did. I don't know what else to say. There's no "hypocrisy" in my last post or anything, I'm just posting the fact that it has happened before in Canada. Read a book, any book if you get a chance.

[geoffrey]

I still insist the Liberals can't run a campaign for at least 2 years so it won't happen. The CPC has a majority until the Liberals get some money and a leader.

About the GG giving Bill the power, it won't happen anymore. We now appoint useless idiots to that position that don't have any political spine, so Jean isn't likely to stand up for a consitutional challenge at this time.

Plus there would be a big call for removal of the GG and more division in Quebec.

[lost&outofcontrol]

I still insist the Liberals can't run a campaign for at least 2 years so it won't happen. The CPC has a majority until the Liberals get some money and a leader.

I completely agree with you on this point.

About the GG giving Bill the power, it won't happen anymore. We now appoint useless idiots to that position that don't have any political spine, so Jean isn't likely to stand up for a consitutional challenge at this time.

It is still true today.

If a minority government is in office and is defeated in the House of Commons or in the Legislative Assembly on a clear non-confidence motion, thus no longer commanding the confidence of the House, the Governor General or the Lieutenant Governor may dissolve the House or Assembly and call for a new election; or alternatively may call on someone else from the House or Assembly to be First Minister and to form a government, if he or she is of the opinion that this person would be able to command a majority of the members. (This second alternative was followed in Saskatchewan in 1929 and in Ontario in 1985.)

Taken from the government Relations website.

The Governor General may theoretically refuse a dissolution, but the circumstances under which such an action would be warranted are unclear.

Taken from wikipedia.

I mean, what other proof do I need. All it took was 2 mins of goggling to find this information. I'll go back to "mentally masturbate" now.

We would have alot less barking on these forums if people would just research before posting.

[shoop]

Wow, a similar circumstance to something that *might* happen now took place 80 years ago.

What I was saying all along, you agreed to in your last post. The government will not fall quickly because the Liberals aren't ready for it to happen.

Regardless of your intimate knowledge of your *leading constitutional expert* buddy - it ain't gonna happen.

Good attack on telling me to go read a book. Clearly obvious I have never read a book.

Regardless of historical precedent, the quickest way to get rid of the GG in 2006 would be to have her step in and play the role GG Byng did 80 years ago.

Yet another reason it won't happen. Michaell Jean's desire to save her job.

P.S. Just who could command a majority in the house in the event the Conservatives fell?

[tml12]

Wow, a similar circumstance to something that *might* happen now took place 80 years ago.

What I was saying all along, you agreed to in your last post. The government will not fall quickly because the Liberals aren't ready for it to happen.

Regardless of your intimate knowledge of your *leading constitutional expert* buddy - it ain't gonna happen.

Good attack on telling me to go read a book. Clearly obvious I have never read a book.

Regardless of historical precedent, the quickest way to get rid of the GG in 2006 would be to have her step in and play the role GG Byng did 80 years ago.

Yet another reason it won't happen. Michaell Jean's desire to save her job.

P.S. Just who could command a majority in the house in the event the Conservatives fell?

I have to agree with Shoop on this one...too many unknowns.

This government lasts at least 12 months...

[lost&outofcontrol]

Wow, a similar circumstance to something that *might* happen now took place 80 years ago.

What I was saying all along, you agreed to in your last post. The government will not fall quickly because the Liberals aren't ready for it to happen.

Regardless of your intimate knowledge of your *leading constitutional expert* buddy - it ain't gonna happen.

Good attack on telling me to go read a book. Clearly obvious I have never read a book.

Regardless of historical precedent, the quickest way to get rid of the GG in 2006 would be to have her step in and play the role GG Byng did 80 years ago.

Yet another reason it won't happen. Michaell Jean's desire to save her job.

I guess the .gov canada website is into spreading lies.

P.S. Just who could command a majority in the house in the event the Conservatives fell?

argh ! I've already answered this twice before.

**edit** I promise, this is my last post in this thread.

[shoop]

Thanks for that tml.

See I think the point that was being missed was while it could *theoretically* have happened the way L&OOC was saying, it never would in reality.

I don't quite think he was getting that point.

You are right, this government lasts at least 12 months, which would be just before the Liberal leadership - most likely in March.

I never understood how the Liberals could command a majority in the house.

I have to agree with Shoop on this one...too many unknowns.

This government lasts at least 12 months...

[geoffrey]

Thanks for that tml.

See I think the point that was being missed was while it could *theoretically* have happened the way L&OOC was saying, it never would in reality.

I don't quite think he was getting that point.

You are right, this government lasts at least 12 months, which would be just before the Liberal leadership - most likely in March.

I never understood how the Liberals could command a majority in the house.

I have to agree with Shoop on this one...too many unknowns.

This government lasts at least 12 months...

We can also look at the possibility of the CPC engineering a defeat sooner, before the leadership convention. Then the Liberals are running under either Martin, who will be the biggest lame duck ever, or Bill Graham, who has so much baggage even Toronto might not elect him. Is Bill strong in French?

If I was Harper, I'd pass my GST, pass my Childcare, pass my Accountability Act, pass my health care times, pass the crime bill, and pass armed border guards.

Then I pull the plug around say, October, of course making it look like the Liberals/Bloc were to blame (as these seats are the CPC targets). And presto, we have a majority government by the end of November.

[tml12]

Thanks for that tml.

See I think the point that was being missed was while it could *theoretically* have happened the way L&OOC was saying, it never would in reality.

I don't quite think he was getting that point.

You are right, this government lasts at least 12 months, which would be just before the Liberal leadership - most likely in March.

I never understood how the Liberals could command a majority in the house.

I have to agree with Shoop on this one...too many unknowns.

This government lasts at least 12 months...

We can also look at the possibility of the CPC engineering a defeat sooner, before the leadership convention. Then the Liberals are running under either Martin, who will be the biggest lame duck ever, or Bill Graham, who has so much baggage even Toronto might not elect him. Is Bill strong in French?

If I was Harper, I'd pass my GST, pass my Childcare, pass my Accountability Act, pass my health care times, pass the crime bill, and pass armed border guards.

Then I pull the plug around say, October, of course making it look like the Liberals/Bloc were to blame (as these seats are the CPC targets). And presto, we have a majority government by the end of November.

I don't disagree but how would you justify two elections in one year to the Canadian public? How would yuou pull the plug?

[shoop]

That's quite the agenda to pass in short order. Don't know if they could get all of that done so quickly.

Besides they would have to do someting on Defence before the next election.

We can also look at the possibility of the CPC engineering a defeat sooner, before the leadership convention. Then the Liberals are running under either Martin, who will be the biggest lame duck ever, or Bill Graham, who has so much baggage even Toronto might not elect him. Is Bill strong in French?

If I was Harper, I'd pass my GST, pass my Childcare, pass my Accountability Act, pass my health care times, pass the crime bill, and pass armed border guards.

Then I pull the plug around say, October, of course making it look like the Liberals/Bloc were to blame (as these seats are the CPC targets). And presto, we have a majority government by the end of November.

[wellandboy]

That's quite the agenda to pass in short order. Don't know if they could get all of that done so quickly.

Besides they would have to do someting on Defence before the next election.

We can also look at the possibility of the CPC engineering a defeat sooner, before the leadership convention. Then the Liberals are running under either Martin, who will be the biggest lame duck ever, or Bill Graham, who has so much baggage even Toronto might not elect him. Is Bill strong in French?

If I was Harper, I'd pass my GST, pass my Childcare, pass my Accountability Act, pass my health care times, pass the crime bill, and pass armed border guards.

Then I pull the plug around say, October, of course making it look like the Liberals/Bloc were to blame (as these seats are the CPC targets). And presto, we have a majority government by the end of November./quote]

Throw in the resolution of the softwood lumber dispute and a dose of further Liberal waste/scandal for good measure.

[Spike22]

They will go done in history as the only party to survive a full mandate with a minority. They will, maim, backstab, strongarm etc whatever it takes to hold onto power.

[Montgomery Burns]

Suddenly he's got power, and he's not very savvy with using it. He's managed to tick off a number of people who voted for his party in the hope they'd get a housecleaning with the ministerial situation the last few days. And, of course, the NDP are going to take a truncheon to most of his planned reforms.

9 months to a year tops? Sounds like another person brainwashed by the liberal media.

The fact is that the Liberals don't have a leader (and it appears that no one is exactly jumping for the chance at the job) and they are $30+ million in debt. The NDP is also in depth ($3 or $7 million--I forget the exact number). However the Conservative Party is about $10 million in the black.

An Ipsos-Reid poll released on Feb 23 said the Conservatives have actually gained popularity since the election, and the numbers show a possible majority if an election was held now. Conservative support rose to 39% with the Liberals dropping to 27%.

On Feb 25, an Ipsos-Reid/Canwest Global poll showed the approval rating of the Conservatives has reached 59%.

For all the screeching by the media about the anger of the Emerson situation, it appears that the public does not agree.

Harper is thinking long-term; building towards a majority status. I am confident he will do it.

After all, no one ever accused us "neocons" of being incapable.