Michael Chong Resigns

[scribblet]

According to other MP's he was consulted and briefed, "He and the PM discussed this over the course of the summer on at least two occasions if not more. And the PM did not make the decision about proceeding with this until he had the caucus discussion last Wednesday." Chong is now declinging an interview.

[MightyAC]

Chong claimed to oppose ethnic nationalism, citing the origin of his parents, but in fact he was merely justifying the ethnic nationalism of the American melting pot.

Canada cannot work that way - it's been tried. If Canada is to work, it must tolerate and respect the genuine differences between people. There is a reason Canada is a federal state.

These ideas of nationalism, ethnicity, multiculturalism, bilingualism are confused in Canada. Chong's vote is an example. That's sad because Canada has such experience with this.

I suspect Chong readily claims that he's Canadian, yet he'd deny being American.

Voting to lable Quebec a distinct society instead of a nation in no way promotes a melting pot.

We elect MPs to represent our wishes in parliament not to have ideas rammed down our throats by the PMO. I'm sick of big party politics, forced votes, distorted election results, lack of representation and wasted votes. I'm not sure what the ideal solution but something has to be done.

We have representative democracy, not direct democracy.

You don't tell a dentist exactly what to do. Rather, you choose a dentist and then follow her/his advice.

I am aware that we have representative not direct democracy. I am not pushing for more frequent referendums or even a referendum on this issue. However, I do suggest that MPs should represent the views of their constituents for the most part. In this case a motion that was opposed by 77% of Canadians outside Quebec was introduced and rushed through to a vote in less than a week with almost no debate. Other than Garth, Chong and a handful of Liberals, MPs did not even attempt to represent their constituents. This would be a contemptible move for any government but it comes off far worse for the CPC considering they ran on accountability, transparency, free votes, grass roots, etc.

I chose my dentist and I listen to his advice...but if he ever did a procedure I was opposed to (or even 77% opposed to) I would find a new dentist.

[August1991]

It would have looked better if Chong was consulted and if Chong simply told the public: "I resign because I disagree with the motion. Period." instead of being ignored. Even if we believe that the Ministers are just puppets, it certainly would have looked better.

That apparently is what happened.

Publicly, Chong said he disagreed profoundly with the resolution Harper brought forward because it embraced an "ethnic nationalism" he couldn't support. He said he reflected for five days upon his course of action after Harper sprang the resolution on his caucus in response to a Bloc Québécois motion that the Québécois "form a nation" plain and simple.

The 35-year-old MP, whose father emigrated from China and mother came from Holland, said publicly that an "undivided Canada" was for him a "fundamental principle" and "not something on which I can or will compromise."

And while he didn't cite it as a reason for quitting, Chong made clear he had not been consulted by Harper in the crafting of the "nation" resolution.

An insider called that complete nonsense. "He and the PM discussed this over the course of the summer on at least two occasions if not more. And the PM did not make the decision about proceeding with this until he had the caucus discussion last Wednesday."

Chong declined an interview.

Harper's circle feels Chong did not convey his deep-seated uneasiness to the Prime Minister and should have.

In fact, the insider says, Chong's concerns were "not unique in the party in that regard, but the idea that he might throw up a principled objection to the point of resigning? No, that was never in discussion."

On the other hand, Harper was facing a big political headache on the Quebec side of his caucus where, the insider confirmed, "there was a slew of folks who very much wanted to vote for the Bloc motion (to recognize Québécois form a nation).

"We persuaded them with the PM's response resolution that they had all sorts of room to vote for our resolution and to vote against theirs (the Bloc's), which is what happened in the end."

Interesting that this appears in the Toronto Star.

[Charles Anthony]

It would have looked better if Chong was consulted and if Chong simply told the public: "I resign because I disagree with the motion. Period." instead of being ignored. Even if we believe that the Ministers are just puppets, it certainly would have looked better.

That apparently is what happened.

I do not see it that way in the least.

This:

And while he didn't cite it as a reason for quitting, Chong made clear he had not been consulted by Harper in the crafting of the "nation" resolution.

should not have been aired out.

How does he come across saying he was not consulted??

An insider called that complete nonsense. "He and the PM discussed this over the course of the summer on at least two occasions if not more. And the PM did not make the decision about proceeding with this until he had the caucus discussion last Wednesday."

Someone is lying.

Even if Chong was not consulted, he should not have said he was not consulted -- unless of course he wanted his fifteen minute spotlight.

[bk59]

I think both possible scenarios you raise are optimistic. They are both good strategy.

I was looking at it more from what is in Canada's best interest rather than what is in the Conservatives' best interest. You're right, both strategies are good from the point of view of what is best for the CPC. But in terms of what is best for the country, I think optimistically that parties should try to cooperate more rather than just yelling and pointing fingers across the aisle. If all Harper is trying to do is cover his butt by consulting with Dion (in case the Liberals attack him for this motion) then that isn't really good for Canada. In my opinion.

Even if Chong was not consulted, he should not have said he was not consulted -- unless of course he wanted his fifteen minute spotlight.

That is probably the CPC view. However, I think it's fair game to let the public know that the PMO is running things without even consulting the ministers in the Cabinet. I mean, what is the point of having them there if you aren't going to use them effectively? Is Chong going for his 15 minutes? Maybe. But that doesn't change the fact that this seems to indicate that Cabinet ministers are being ignored and / or under-utilised.

[bk59]

And while he didn't cite it as a reason for quitting, Chong made clear he had not been consulted by Harper in the crafting of the "nation" resolution.

An insider called that complete nonsense. "He and the PM discussed this over the course of the summer on at least two occasions if not more. And the PM did not make the decision about proceeding with this until he had the caucus discussion last Wednesday."

The problem is none of what the insider says indicates that Chong was consulted on this motion. This issue really started heating up in the fall, October, and I doubt that the PM had this motion drafted and ready to go back in the summer. Chong may have talked in abstract terms with the PM about this months ago, but we're talking about an actual motion being put forward. I don't think you can consider two or three talks in the summer as being consulted on this particular motion.

And yes, there was a caucus discussion, but that actually proves the point that Chong was not consulted as the Minister for the unity file. If the first he heard about it was in caucus then that means the motion was pretty much ready to go at that point, without his input.

It would be like the head sales manager at Coca-Cola showing up to a company-wide meeting and only then hearing about the sales targets that have been set for the year, even though it is his/her responsibility to help set sales targets. To add salt to the wound, Coca-Cola would say that they consulted Pepsi's head sales manager when setting their targets (analogous to Harper consulting with Dion). If that happened in the business world it would be quite disrespectful to the sales manager (i.e. Chong).

[Charles Anthony]

If all Harper is trying to do is cover his butt by consulting with Dion (in case the Liberals attack him for this motion) then that isn't really good for Canada. In my opinion.

I can still look at it from the perspective of Canada's best interest and arrive at the same conclusion because if I believe in the motion, anything Harper needs to do to get it through is good.

However, I think it's fair game to let the public know that the PMO is running things without even consulting the ministers in the Cabinet.

From the public's perspective, sure.

However, from Chong's selfish perspective, he is biting the hand (his own party) that feeds him.

But that doesn't change the fact that this seems to indicate that Cabinet ministers are being ignored and / or under-utilised.

Call me cynical but that is what I expect. Are you expecting Harper to upset decades and decades of federal government political history and start giving a damn about what his ministers have to say??? Are you expecting Mr. Chong to provide any valuable insight on Intergovernmental Affairs or whatever??? Who is he and what credentials does he have???

Like all other MPs, his only purpose in the federal government is to hold a seat. Otherwise, he should run as an independent.

It would be like the head sales manager at Coca-Cola showing up to a company-wide meeting and only then hearing about the sales targets that have been set for the year, even though it is his/her responsibility to help set sales targets.

I disagree. I liken Mr. Chong more to a door-to-door salesman instead of a head sales manager.

He would be insisting that the NewCokeZero secret forumula should taste more like their competitor and getting upset when the entire company does not take his advice.

To be frank, if I was the Prime Minister of Canada, I would expect my ministers to not only play the role of my puppets but to be very happy that they are mooching from the tax-payer to do so. All they have to do is show up and smile -- much like the gals on ThePriceIsRight do. As soon as they stop smiling, they are out.

[jdobbin]

To be frank, if I was the Prime Minister of Canada, I would expect my ministers to not only play the role of my puppets but to be very happy that they are mooching from the tax-payer to do so. All they have to do is show up and smile -- much like the gals on ThePriceIsRight do. As soon as they stop smiling, they are out.

The smiling of cabinet ministers won't remain for long if they policy doesn't gain more support than it has so far.

You might like Harper's decision but it hasn't gained him any support in Quebec thus far and lost him support in western Canada.

[bk59]

But that doesn't change the fact that this seems to indicate that Cabinet ministers are being ignored and / or under-utilised.

Call me cynical but that is what I expect. Are you expecting Harper to upset decades and decades of federal government political history and start giving a damn about what his ministers have to say??? Are you expecting Mr. Chong to provide any valuable insight on Intergovernmental Affairs or whatever??? Who is he and what credentials does he have???

But didn't Harper run on promises to improve accountability? To give MPs more of a free voice in the House? So yes, I do expect him to use his ministers effectively. If Mr. Chong was not qualified to hold the unity file then he should not have been given that position. PM Harper appointed him to that position therefore at the time Harper must have thought he was the best (or at least one of the best) people in the CPC caucus to do that job. I can only assume that Harper checked his credentials and found them worthy. Federal government political history seems to indicate that Cabinet ministers are required to vote with the PM, but it also seems to indicate that at the very least those ministers were consulted and / or played a role in crafting legislation and motions. Not always of course, but the majority of the time.

To be frank, if I was the Prime Minister of Canada, I would expect my ministers to not only play the role of my puppets but to be very happy that they are mooching from the tax-payer to do so. All they have to do is show up and smile -- much like the gals on ThePriceIsRight do. As soon as they stop smiling, they are out.

That is a very poor way to run a business, let alone a government. The PM can't do everything by himself. That is the whole point of the Cabinet. To give qualified people responsibility over different areas of the government so that the PM does not have to micromanage. Besides, the people didn't vote for puppets. While some limits are expected when you are in government or in a party, most people expect to see at least a little bit of autonomy from their elected representatives.

[Charles Anthony]

But didn't Harper run on promises to improve accountability? To give MPs more of a free voice in the House? So yes, I do expect him to use his ministers effectively.

I understand. That makes sense. However, I still stand by my belief that it would have been more prudent and wise for Mr. Chong to be more diplomatic and bite his lip. His actions undermine his party and his leader. Do you really think he will go far in politics now after what he did???

If Mr. Chong was not qualified to hold the unity file then he should not have been given that position. PM Harper appointed him to that position therefore at the time Harper must have thought he was the best (or at least one of the best) people in the CPC caucus to do that job.

Sorry. I am stopping right there and I dismiss everything you just stated because I honestly believe that our federal government is a smoke-screen for cronyism. I do not believe our federal government serves the public much at all.

Again, call me cynical, but I believe that the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs could do even less than our Federal Prisoner Ombudsman and we would not know the difference. I honestly believe that we let ourselves be fooled.

That is a very poor way to run a business, let alone a government.

I agree and the record shows!

What I am saying is that if you give almighty power to statesmen, you should expect them to use it.

The PM can't do everything by himself.

Maybe not but I do not think he has much to do anyway.

That is the whole point of the Cabinet. To give qualified people responsibility over different areas of the government so that the PM does not have to micromanage.

Have you ever paid attention to what happens in the House of Commons? We see very insolent and childish behavior. Would YOU hire any of those lazy or arrogant baffoons to run YOUR business???

Besides, the people didn't vote for puppets.

Yes, they did.

You might like Harper's decision but it hasn't gained him any support in Quebec thus far and lost him support in western Canada.

I am not saying I like his decision. I am saying how I understand it.

Do not get me wrong: I am a separatist.

[jdobbin]

I am not saying I like his decision. I am saying how I understand it.

Do not get me wrong: I am a separatist.

So anything to discredit Canada is likely to make separatists in Alberta and Quebec happy?

[Charles Anthony]

So anything to discredit Canada is likely to make separatists in Alberta and Quebec happy?

What do you mean by "discredit Canada" exactly?

I can be a proud Earthling [yeah, yeah, I can hear you all now: "No, YOU can not! Earthlings have to be born here!" very funny] but I am not a subject of some Federal Government of The Earth, am I??

Who would discredit The Earth to be happy?

[jdobbin]

What do you mean by "discredit Canada" exactly?

I can be a proud Earthling [yeah, yeah, I can hear you all now: "No, YOU can not! Earthlings have to be born here!" very funny] but I am not a subject of some Federal Government of The Earth, am I??

Who would discredit The Earth to be happy?

I wasn't referring to you specifically but Quebec separatists and some Albertans who actively work to break up the country. They support legislation that promote separateness and try to set up roadblocks or dismantle areas of federalism.

The problem is that once the separation door has been opened, what's to say that a municipality or city can't separate? Why not native reserves in Quebec and Alberta? It always surprises me that provincial separatists seems to think all of their land is inviolate but not Canadian land.

[Charles Anthony]

They support legislation that promote separateness and try to set up roadblocks or dismantle areas of federalism.

Sounds like a smart strategy to me. Get them from the inside.

The problem is that once the separation door has been opened, what's to say that a municipality or city can't separate? Why not native reserves in Quebec and Alberta?

I do not see that as a problem at all. I understand that "separation door" and I see it as a fast way to reduce big government in Canada.

It always surprises me that provincial separatists seems to think all of their land is inviolate but not Canadian land.

Me too.

After Quebec separates I will have to label myself as a "de-amalgamationist" or something like that.

[jdobbin]

Sounds like a smart strategy to me. Get them from the inside.

I do not see that as a problem at all. I understand that "separation door" and I see it as a fast way to reduce big government in Canada.

Me too.

After Quebec separates I will have to label myself as a "de-amalgamationist" or something like that.

I realize that your separation goes right down to the individual person. That is, if someone wants to opt out of everything, they should be allowed to.

Government of one.

[Murray B.]

As an Albertan born and raised it pains me to face the truth on this matter.

Mr. Chong does not seem to know much about the actual history of this country. If he did then he would realize that there is not much of a probmem here. Mr. Harper is merely confirming the special status that the French speaking people in Quebec have always had.

I'm no expert but I know that many years ago the Crown agreed that Quebecers would be allowed to have their own language, religion, culture, etc. and that their laws would be based on French common law and not English like the rest of the country.

The real issue is whether the government should honour past agreements and not about whether or not Quebec has special status. That boat sailed many years ago.

[mcqueen625]

A Conservative cabinet minister appears set to resign his post over Prime Minister Stephen Harper's stand on Quebec.

Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Michael Chong (he also holds the sports portfolio) will reportedly announce his resignation at a news conference later today.

During question period, Interim Liberal Leader Bill Graham "got up on his feet and asked (Harper) point blank whether Mr. Chong was indeed resigning. The prime minister did not respond," reported CTV's Robert Fife.

CTV

Who is Michael Chong and does it matter whether he resigns from the Cabinet? The caucus?

Pierre Trudeau used to say that he got involved in politics to make sure Quebec didn't leave Canada and to make sure English Canada didn't kick it out.

If you're a federalist, the only sensible position is Harper's. If you're a separatist, then you can side with Kinsella because there'll be almost no one in Quebec except those astute political analysts Serge Joyal and Trudeau Jnr to support you.

The flaw in that thinking is that only opens up the country to other groups demanding to be considered as nations. I know, people are saying that this is just symbolic and that's all it means, but they would be wrong. Already we have the Acadian Society demanding that they also are a nation and should be recognized as such.

New Brunswick jumped right on Trudeau's bandwagon and declared that NB is "Officially Bilingual," and ever since the Acadian Society has used the courts to push forward with theri own agenda of making New Brunswick into a French speaking province even though after more than 40 years less that 1/4 of the population of New Brunswick speaks French, but still they persisted. Many jobs in NB were and are declared to be requiring fluency in French, or do not apply. This has simply become a make-work project for Acadians, and now that they have those jobs, they are now demanding that they be able to work exclusively in French even though the majority of the people they interact with are unilingual English, and these Acadians were hired because they supposedly speak both languages. Having dealth with many of them, they certainly did not have to have any competency in English in order to get their jobs.

Just as soon as Harper made that declaration about the Quebecois being a nation, the Acadian's demanded of an MP at a apublic function that they are should have nationhood declared for them as well. Maybe the rest of us should also join lobby groups and demand nation status as well. After all if Canada is to be fair to one, it has to extend the same honor to the other segments of Canadaian society. This declaration has done nothing to promote harmony, instead it has further divided us along linguistic lines, and is fragmenting the country.

[abcon99]

When you are voting on anything but what the party policy paper says is an issue of conscience, then you either vote yes, abstain, or get out of the party, thats how it works. Chong had to vote yes as a member of cabinet, but could abstain as member of caucus. He made that choice, and it is his right to do so. Prime Minister Harper made his choice, as leader and Prime Minister, and that is the way it goes as well. I agree with Harper, respect Chong, and tell liberals that the difference is no liberal ever gave up a cabinet position on a small item of principle. That is because liberals have no priciples.