PDA

View Full Version : Canadian coup? Or just parliamentory democracy at work?


Saint Fool
12-02-2008, 11:45 PM
Well this (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/World/Rest_of_World/Political_coup_in_Canada_Dion_to_replace_Harper_as _new_PM/articleshow/3782681.cms) is just fascinating.


TORONTO: In a political coup, Canada's three opposition parties have joined hands to oust the just elected minority government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

In a deal signed by the Liberal Party and the New Democratic Party (NDP) and backed by the separatist Bloc Quebecois in Ottawa on Monday, the first two parties will form a new government, with the third supporting them from outside.

Under the deal, Liberal Party leader Stephane Dion will become the new prime minister till May when his party chooses a new leader to replace him.

Dion has sent a letter to Governor-General Michaelle Jean - who is away in Europe - about the decision of the combined opposition to defeat the current government in the House and form a coalition government.

Harper meanwhile says that he'll fight the coalition with every legal means. (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aSMYXmtJbdE8&refer=home) And, from various articles I've read, Harper and the conservatives are the ones who are using the word "coup." (Because words have power, don't you know?)

I'm familiar with votes of no confidence and PMs calling new elections, but (hoping we have some parliamentary experts here) if the ruling party is still a minority in terms of seats held, what's to stop this from happening if a coalition can be formed?

KTC
12-02-2008, 11:56 PM
In this bad economic climate, I believe they are making a grave error. We shall see what happens. I dislike Harper, but to do this is to send a message to the rest of the world that Canada is in a state of disarray and uncertainty.

Sheryl Nantus
12-03-2008, 12:01 AM
even more so considering the Bloc's entire reason for existence is to get Quebec out of Canada.

and Dion is about to be turfed as leader of his own party.

good to know idiots abound both north and south of the border, eh?

:D

Tirjasdyn
12-03-2008, 12:04 AM
Huh we were just talking about that the other day....

actually we were having a conversation about how crazy Canada's duel citizenship rules are and how they change every couple years. (I'm a former Canadian Citizen because I didn't pay the C Gov 1000 dollars when I was 28. but my brother and sister have Never had canadian citizenship. We were all born in the US and our mother is Canadian. However my daughter can claim Canadian citizenship if she wants...my nephew can't.)


Any way this came up. We don't know what to think about it.

KTC
12-03-2008, 12:06 AM
even more so considering the Bloc's entire reason for existence is to get Quebec out of Canada.

and Dion is about to be turfed as leader of his own party.

good to know idiots abound both north and south of the border, eh?





Exactly...they were going to throw him out the door and suddenly he is poised to take over the country. The guy is a first class moron.

Curiously, the man (Dion) who will be Canada's new prime minister had led his Liberal Party to its worst-ever defeat in decades, reducing its tally from 95 to 77 in parliament.

William Haskins
12-03-2008, 12:47 AM
frum has an interesting analysis:


Imagine Canada 6 months on. There’s a Liberal prime minister. He will head an unstable coalition of Liberals and socialists aligned with separatists. To appease the socialists, he will have to raise taxes. To appease the separatists, he will have to direct disproportionate money and attention to the province of Quebec.

He will have zero democratic legitimacy. He will never be able to use the words, “That’s the job the Canadian people elected me to do.” His government will contain almost no representatives from the west. Everyone will understand that the only issue uniting this government was its members’ eagerness for public money for their own party funds.

This weak new prime minister will somehow have to deal with what is already shaping up as a savage recession.

And not just the recession. The new coalition government will face an equally savage constitutional crisis. The only way the Liberals can prevail is if the current Governor-General disregards constitutional precedent and democratic practice to transfer power without an intervening election. Lord Byng could not get away with that in 1926 -- and Byng was a governor-general who owed his office to the neutral British Crown. Michaëlle Jean, by contrast, was a patronage hire by one Liberal prime minister who now (under this scenario) will have repaid the favour by delivering up power to another. It will look like the most squalid political deal in Canadian history.

Battered by scandal and recession, the unpopular new government will have to worry constantly about treachery in the ranks. Perhaps the coalition can strike a deal now to divide up the offices and choose a prime minister, without either a leadership convention or an election. But six months from now, with the government polling at 20% or 25%, will that deal hold up? If Michael Ignatieff eventually ends up with the top job, won’t many old Rae partisans imagine that things would be better if only their guy had won? And vice versa? Even worse: If Stéphane Dion somehow succeeds in retracting his resignation and imposing himself upon his two would-be successors, his life will be about as secure and comfortable as a wounded tuna’s in a sea of sharks.

Sooner or later, this government will collapse. Probably sooner. When it does, and faces the people, it will have to bear responsibility for unemployment and budget deficits. It will look desperate and selfish and cynical verging on crooked. It’s hard to imagine any result other than a crushing once-in-a-generation defeat: another 1958 or 1984.


http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2008/12/01/david-frum-only-the-losers-will-survive-ottawa-s-game-of-competitive-suicide.aspx

blacbird
12-03-2008, 12:59 AM
Welcome to the joys of multiple-party parliamentary democracy. For all the chest-beating we heard here during the recent U.S. electoral campaign about how much better such a system would be, who here is going to defend it? Step forward and be counted.

caw

Plot Device
12-03-2008, 01:13 AM
It's simple: when the Democratic process doesn't work to your liking, just find a way around it.

blacbird
12-03-2008, 01:57 AM
It's simple: when the Democratic process doesn't work to your liking, just find a way around it.

But, Plot, this is the democratic process in Canada, working exactly like any parliamentary democracy is designed to work. The public does not elect the Prime Minister; their elected representatives do. And they can change PMs at any time, by simple parliamentary vote. It's not unheard of, by any means.

caw

Tirjasdyn
12-03-2008, 02:33 AM
Welcome to the joys of multiple-party parliamentary democracy. For all the chest-beating we heard here during the recent U.S. electoral campaign about how much better such a system would be, who here is going to defend it? Step forward and be counted.

caw


Um different system. Multiparty republic would still be better in imho...course we don't have coup written in the constitution.

KTC
12-03-2008, 02:56 AM
Welcome to the joys of multiple-party parliamentary democracy. For all the chest-beating we heard here during the recent U.S. electoral campaign about how much better such a system would be, who here is going to defend it? Step forward and be counted.

caw

I certainly wasn't beating my chest...although maybe in frustration. I was pissed when Harper went against his own election date law and set an election--just to prove that he could get the votes, is my guess--I was pissed when he was voted back in and now I'm pissed that they are eliminating him. This is just horrible for our unity.

KTC
12-03-2008, 02:57 AM
But, Plot, this is the democratic process in Canada, working exactly like any parliamentary democracy is designed to work. The public does not elect the Prime Minister; their elected representatives do. And they can change PMs at any time, by simple parliamentary vote. It's not unheard of, by any means.

caw

True, yes. Party leaders come and go. The idiot they are going to put into power was just about to get a boot firmly to the ass...and now they are making him Prime Minister.

willietheshakes
12-03-2008, 03:29 AM
frum has an interesting analysis:



http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2008/12/01/david-frum-only-the-losers-will-survive-ottawa-s-game-of-competitive-suicide.aspx

Everytime David Frum opens his mouth, one of Canada's great, great women rolls over in her grave...

illiterwrite
12-03-2008, 06:54 AM
Poor Michaëlle Jean (our Governor General). Between the "coup" (not) and the poetry literary award scandal, she has a busy week ahead of her.

William Haskins
12-03-2008, 07:09 AM
Everytime David Frum opens his mouth, one of Canada's great, great women rolls over in her grave...

he's a backdoor man?

robeiae
12-03-2008, 07:13 AM
he's a backdoor man?
I don't understand what you mean.

KTC
12-03-2008, 08:15 AM
Poor Michaëlle Jean (our Governor General). Between the "coup" (not) and the poetry literary award scandal, she has a busy week ahead of her.


GG has to rush home from abroad. Can you say intervention? At any rate, I think she puts Clarkson to shame. We should have GG trading cards.

blacbird
12-03-2008, 12:22 PM
I don't understand what you mean.

As sometimes happens, we're in agreement here, Robs. Let's us poor benighted slobs petition William for elucidation.

caw

Albedo
12-03-2008, 05:35 PM
But, Plot, this is the democratic process in Canada, working exactly like any parliamentary democracy is designed to work. The public does not elect the Prime Minister; their elected representatives do. And they can change PMs at any time, by simple parliamentary vote. It's not unheard of, by any means.

caw

Well technically no-one elects the PM in the Westminster system, he's appointed by the Governor-General. In practice the appointee must always have the confidence of the house, hence the GG must act on a vote of no confidence by removing Harper. Looks like they were able to assemble a majority in this instance and hence bypass the conservative minority. You could say the new government will be more legitimate because it's actually a majority.