Monday, April 19, 2010

Ignatieff Flexing

I'm not even a fan of the gun registry, don't think these "reforms" the Liberals are proposing will get them ANY mileage with rural voters, and normally I want to see more free votes in Parliament, but Ignatieff is right to crack the whip here:
Michael Ignatieff plans to whip his caucus to vote against a controversial Conservative bill to abolish the long-gun registry. MPs who do not vote with him will be punished.

Usually, MPs are allowed to vote their conscience on private member’s bills but this one is different – it has caused much consternation and embarrassment for the Liberals.

“Let me be perfectly clear: the Liberal Party opposes the Conservatives’ effort to scrap the gun registry altogether and we will vote against the Hoeppner bill a third reading in the House of Commons,” the Liberal Leader told the Canadian Police Association today at their annual general meeting in Ottawa.

It's a sad state, when individual MP's vote with their constituents in mind, and yet that expression reflects poorly on the leader, but that's the reality at the moment. I've argued for more free votes, and defended recent dissent, but there is a cumultative effect taking hold here that risks hurting the Liberals chances, and more succinctly, weakening the leader. You like to look at things on a case by case basis in politics, and in this case, strong resolve from Ignatieff is required to blunt a worrying trendline. One almost every recent vote, whether overtly or the "whispers", Ignatieff seems to have a perceived problem keeping his caucus together. This is being perceived as dissatisfaction or lack of compelling leadership, and because of this perception, he best nip it straight off.

The Liberal policy is to support the gun registry, and Ignatieff has offered some mostly toothless amendments to appease detractors. If these MP's vote against, then the gun registry dies and Ignatieff will face another round of questionings. The last polling I saw, showed solid overall support for abolishing, and support wasn't exactly strong, even with Liberal supporters. However, at this date and time, the arguments are irrelevant, if the braintrust upholds this policy, people have to fall in line, on the "greater good" front.

I hate the whip, but given the obvious backlash that will come, I say giver a good crack this one time Michael.

22 comments:

Tof KW said...

How is that any different than the Reformatories voting en mass to kill the registry under a supposed free vote, including all 10 Quebec MP's where support for the registry is the strongest? Just goes to show that old Reform Party talk about MP's voting with their constituent's wishes was all just bullshit. Pity really, the Reformers take over the PC's, then jettison all the best parts of their old party.

Steve V said...

It's not different, but the press seems to confuse democratic expression with weakness. Sheep are in, haven't you heard?

bubba said...

Why did he allow M.P.s to support it at the first two readings?

Tof KW said...

I'll answer your question bubba, when you answer mine.

Again, how is Ignatieff's upcoming wiped vote different than Harper's?

Was the Reform Party's policy on MP's voting with their constituent's wishes all just bullshit?

Sir Gallahad said...

Bubba,

Is it true the only reason you vote CPC, is because your MP who is a conservative bought you lunch?

That is what I read an another site.

Would you like to confirm that?

I never got an answer on BCL.

Steve V said...

"Why did he allow M.P.s to support it at the first two readings?"

Why doesn't Mr Reform ever let his MP's vote their conscience? You guys live in a one sided world. Baaa, baaa.

Marpman said...

Did anyone ever do a post-mortem to figure out why it went so far over-budget? Curious as to why..seems like a simple premise.
Personally, I would like a strengthened bill. I cannot fathom why any gun-user would have an issue registring the firearms they use. We do this with cars as well as many other things, what is such a big deal?
From what I have read, it has reduced the rates of gun-use in crime and has had an impact..so lets make it stronger.
Heck, the police-chiefs are in favour...why is the 'get tough on crime' party so against it.
Oh...I loved Toews comments about the parole issue...that it was all the result of the Liberals. Might consider the CPC the borg, collective concious...they think as one.

Gene Rayburn said...

Sir Gallahad,

Bubba was bragging about his lunch exploits over at Canadian Cynic's. Who knew he was such a cheap vote.

Jim said...

It's very simple really.

I will support a universal firearms registry the day after personal property rights are enshrined in the constitution.

Why is it so many of you Libs have a problem with personal property rights?

Oh, I forgot, it can't work with you socialist agenda.

Police State
Rule 1. Universal firearms registration

Socialist State
Rule 1. No personal property rights

Marpman said...

huh?

Since when is carrying a weapon something that would be considered 'personal rights.' What a crock of bull. In fact, the personal protection argument is not the one used against the gun registry...it is the rural argument that guns are necessary. Ok, I can buy that.

Is you car registered? Do you have a driver's license? Do you pay taxes? Ok...now why would simply licensing your weapon be an issue.

I suggest Texas might be your home.

Jerry Prager said...

And then can we ban the "let me perfectly clear" "let me be clear" "let's be clear."
TofKW, every policy Reform had has gone out the window except destroy the liberals. Everything else was a fraud.
Marpman: the reason people have a problem (allegedly) is because the only way to establish a national registry in the first place was to use the criminal code,otherwise its a provincial matter; thus anyone who doesn't register gets a criminal record, which makes gun owners unhappy.
Van Loan lied about how much the police use the registry, hid the RCMP report until the day after the 2nd vote. That's why it passed.

Jerry Prager said...

Jim: I'm not a liberal but the reason I have problem with property rights in the charter is that it will be used by corporations to rob us blind. The commons will be enclosed, the crown land will be sold off, and the whore of Babylon will set up shop with Big Business. The gun registry is here to stay, we don't need your vote or your support to keep it. It's what Canadians want.

Sir Gallahad said...

GR,

Thanks, I read that somehere.
I just had a hard time believing it.

You would vote CPC, because your MP bought you lunch. Bubba is a cheap date...

I guess that little bit of cheap vote buying, bought Bubba's loyalty forever.

Jim said...

To Marpman...I did not suggest that I want to carry a gun, nor did I suggest that it was a personal right...I suggest you reread my post.

And to JerryP...I agree that any ammendment would have to be carefully written to only include Canadian citizens and exclude multinationals or megacorps.

And no, I don't think the registry is here to stay, and if anyone should be worried about support, it would be your side of the spectrum.

CK said...

Oh wow! McCarthyism is alive and well in the world according to Jim:

It must be hard walking through life paranoid 24/7.

Police State because we must register our firearms?

What's the big deal with registering these firearms, anyway? Because it may take up a small blip in a year? Really!

If you have nothing to hide, then registration shouldn't be a problem.

With all your energy used to rant and rave on these boards, could have been long used to register your firearms.

And what is wrong with registering firearms? I for one, would be concerned if I had a neighbour who had guns in their home.

Jim said...

All of my firearms are registered.

Tell me CK, why would you be concerned if a neighbour owned guns?

Do you think all of your neighbours are disarmed?

Feel free to project away.

Steve V said...

Jim

Just a pointer, you might sound more persuasive without the moonbat socialist speak.

Jim said...

Thanks for the advice, Steve.

Although I do believe that socialism, as we seem to have defined it in Canada, could well be the death of this fine country.

I have personally seen our social safety nets being abused. When a hand up becomes a lifestyle, there is a problem. A lax system has spawned abuse.

What ever happened to being a net contributor? I employ people and we build and repair things.

I certainly don't think this country owes me anything. I don't lust after a cushy gov't job. I pay my taxes and then some.

Yet I am bad because I am a firearms owner. Laughable.

If socialists really want hate me, I will admit to owning a house, business, boat, RV and I am thinking of investing in a depressed real estate market in Phoenix.

Gotta love personal merit and a free market!

Gayle said...

"Why did he allow M.P.s to support it at the first two readings?"

He is proposing it be amendments now. It is really not that hard.

Jim - which political party in Canada supports state control of all industry? If your answer is none, and it should be, I suggest you retract the socialism nonsense.

Gayle said...

"I have personally seen our social safety nets being abused."

Lots of things are abused. How many people do you think cheated on their taxes last year?

If you are worried about people abusing the public purse, may I suggest you write Harper a letter and politely point out that he spent tens of millions of tax dollars on CPC advertising, in the guise of the Canadian Action Plan ads. How much did Flaherty spend on his little private jet flight for a photo op?

People who receive public assistance receive paltry sums of money. There is no way they could possibly defraud the government in the league of private jets and tax fraud. Hell, I am willing to bet Harper spends more public money on his personal stylist than most people on assistance receive in any given year.

CK said...

Jim,
I live in the big city in a neighbourhood composed of mainly Orthodox Jews, I seriously doubt they have guns in their homes.

If your weapons are all registered, then what's your problem? If the Twiggy wannabe with the mullet's bill doesn't pass, how would this change for you? You would still register your firearms, right?

CK said...

Oh and Jim,

You may want to look up the true definition of soshalism...Canada doesn't have anything remotely close to that.