tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20358187.post2640912268406338231..comments2023-10-22T09:18:16.885-04:00Comments on Far and Wide: Outflanked AgainSteve Vhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04871113039374739208noreply@blogger.comBlogger32125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20358187.post-59308564645820034542010-01-21T15:44:02.943-05:002010-01-21T15:44:02.943-05:00I think Jeff's right in his own post. This is...I think Jeff's right in his own post. This is a "fix" that likely wouldn't even work if the PM had a minority, and it's utterly useless if the Prime Minister has even a one seat majority.<br /><br />In other words, it's crafted entirely for this session of parliament. It's flair over substance, and I'm glad it didn't come from the Liberal party.<br /><br />The Liberal party has problems, but emulating the NDP isn't going to solve them. For years, the Liberals coasted because they faced a divided right wing and managed to convince a significant number of people that the evil Reform/Conservatives had a "hidden agenda". The right wing isn't divided anymore and fewer people think that there's some evil Reform conspiracy afoot.<br /><br />But this doesn't mean the Liberal party is finished. There are plenty of centrist voters who could vote Conservative or Liberal and the Liberals should play the long game and craft policies to appeal to those centrist voters.<br /><br />Emulating the NDP just cedes the centre to one party. Bad idea.<br /><br />They also need to stop this absolute obsession with "stopping Harper". It's NOT about Steven Harper. The goal should be to develop a platform that Canadians will vote for, not to come up with the "quick fix" to get rid of Harper.<br /><br />Stick with Ignatieff, do the difficult work and run on policies!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20358187.post-10233720169789110042010-01-21T13:47:36.056-05:002010-01-21T13:47:36.056-05:00Yes, because Canadians care and/or know who runs t...Yes, because Canadians care and/or know who runs the OLO.<br /><br />Pretty superficial, and mostly meaningless rebuttal. Thanks for the insights ;)Steve Vhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04871113039374739208noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20358187.post-75977505318817334552010-01-21T13:47:06.517-05:002010-01-21T13:47:06.517-05:00Yes. Oui. Can.Yes. Oui. Can.Omarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12058734544373976550noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20358187.post-64401222172705941592010-01-21T13:45:21.932-05:002010-01-21T13:45:21.932-05:00"Why is Ignatieff saddled with the Liberal le..."<i>Why is Ignatieff saddled with the Liberal legacy?</i>"<br /><br />Not to be rude, BUT:<br /><br />Do the words "Liberal leader" mean anything to you?<br /><br />"<i>If we were smart, we would position him as a break from the past, embrace his time abroad and his lack of 'career politican' status.</i>"<br /><br />You can't position Ignatieff as a break from the past while yesterday's man's guy runs the OLO.<br /><br />"<i>Why does Ignatieff have to assume the lineage like he owns it?</i>"<br /><br />Let's face it: the Liberal Party of Canada has been surviving off the salad days of Pierre Trudeau for a good long time now.<br /><br />You can't take an institution that is as beholden to the past, and beholden to political mythology, as the Liberal Party and walk away from that without walking away from the party's entire brand identity.Patrick Rosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04592482865332628189noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20358187.post-74855800160613106202010-01-21T12:27:35.434-05:002010-01-21T12:27:35.434-05:00Thanks for reinforcing the notion that conservativ...Thanks for reinforcing the notion that conservativism and comedic timing are diametrically opposed.Steve Vhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04871113039374739208noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20358187.post-54225665091615824502010-01-21T11:51:50.395-05:002010-01-21T11:51:50.395-05:00Why does the NDP want to limit prorogues? I think ...Why does the NDP want to limit prorogues? I think they are delicious, especially with onions and bacon.albertanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11409712148375695105noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20358187.post-20717722461303963442010-01-21T10:18:45.558-05:002010-01-21T10:18:45.558-05:00There is no constitutional issue with the proposed...There is no constitutional issue with the proposed reform. What the NDP have proposed does not restrict the Governor General / the Crown, merely what advice the Prime Minister may offer.<br /><br /><br />In other words, the Prime Minister is not empowered to advice the Governor General to prorogue Parliament unless Parliament has agreed.<br /><br /><br />That still leaves open the possibility of prorogation under two circumstances.<br /><br /><br />1. Parliament has legitimately conccluded the business set out for it in the throne speech and is ready for a new legislative package.<br /><br />2. The Governor General in extremis chooses to exercise the reserved powers of the Crown without the advice of the Prime Minister. (Though it strikes me that in any extreme circumstance that would justify exercising the reserved powers, dissolution is likely to be a better tool than prorogation.)Malcolm+https://www.blogger.com/profile/08469936715413110334noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20358187.post-88347051333694657982010-01-21T09:18:36.052-05:002010-01-21T09:18:36.052-05:00I must say, I find the Spector citation anusing. ...I must say, I find the Spector citation anusing. Really?Steve Vhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04871113039374739208noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20358187.post-27150658356632847582010-01-21T09:16:58.958-05:002010-01-21T09:16:58.958-05:00Any proposal would be subject to HOC debate and tw...Any proposal would be subject to HOC debate and tweaks. I blogged a few days ago that the Grits should float a proposal to outlaw prorogation altogether. Like the NDP idea, such a proposal would be debated and a compromise would likely be reached.<br /><br />If you want votes, you've got to at least try to give the voters what they want. An end to prorogation is what they want and Steve's 100% correct that the NDP is eating the LPC's lunch.<br /><br />Chrystal's quite right, too, that there has been ample time for all parties to come up with an anti-prorogue proposal.<br /><br />Patrick's argument makes zero sense. It's like saying a reformed drunk cannot try to reform other drunks. Ever met a reformed drunk?<br /><br />JBJimBobbyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04603665575714484326noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20358187.post-11634170781252926412010-01-21T09:09:59.494-05:002010-01-21T09:09:59.494-05:00You're wrong and as much as it pains me to say...You're wrong and as much as it pains me to say it, Norman Spector is right. Take a read:<br /><br />http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/spector-vision/two-cheers-for-mr-ignatieff/article1438628/Heatherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14127821210106611188noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20358187.post-14620772558374666282010-01-21T08:37:25.382-05:002010-01-21T08:37:25.382-05:00Bob Rae being receptive to the proposal, well, wha...Bob Rae being receptive to the proposal, well, what's he going to say - no we don't want reform? That would be a huge gaffe. Rae's too smart for that.<br /><br />Rae open to proposal probably not necessarily exactly as NDP have put it.RuralSandihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09552973218865121867noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20358187.post-48471380761125666162010-01-21T08:32:58.587-05:002010-01-21T08:32:58.587-05:00arbitrary is conspeak for straws to be graspedarbitrary is conspeak for straws to be graspedGene Rayburnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12438068218145410142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20358187.post-47223462202457223252010-01-20T23:05:33.316-05:002010-01-20T23:05:33.316-05:00Arbitrary?
He prorogued parliament in order to av...Arbitrary?<br /><br />He prorogued parliament in order to avoid being accountable to our elected representatives. I think it is pretty darn clear by now that is simply wrong.<br /><br />If nothing else, I am pretty darn sure we can get all the opposition parties, and probably quite a few government MP's, to agree with that.Gaylehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08112657859825911939noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20358187.post-83853903953199093412010-01-20T21:52:26.980-05:002010-01-20T21:52:26.980-05:00We need some kind of ground rules to be establishe...We need some kind of ground rules to be established regarding prorogation that don't infringe upon the constitution.<br /><br />Otherwise it's just an arbitrary interpretation as to what is right or wrong.Joanne (True Blue)https://www.blogger.com/profile/17445664997050698154noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20358187.post-9795682137564344742010-01-20T20:25:58.409-05:002010-01-20T20:25:58.409-05:00Isn't there a constitutional question here too...<i>Isn't there a constitutional question here too? Prorogation is a power vested in the Governor General who, by convention, accepts the advice of her Prime Minister on the matter, largely w/o question.</i><br /><br />Prorogation is an excellent example of one of the GG's customary powers. There is, in short, no constitutional question from the standpoint of statutes that would require amending because no such laws exist specifically governing the powers of the GG. Moreover, since the PM exercises executive power on a purely <i>de facto</i> customary basis, any Act of Parliament defining certain powers as being beyond his purview (or solely within the discretion of Parliament) would supersede the PMO. <br /><br />In short, there is no constitutional question here since, like the UK, ours is both written and unwritten. Parliament is absolutely empowered to "fill in the gaps" as concerns its own functioning. For something even more definitive, Section 44 of the <i>Constitution Act, 1982</i> provides that: <br /><br />44. Subject to sections 41 and 42, Parliament may <b>exclusively</b> make laws amending the Constitution of Canada in relation to executive government of Canada or the Senate and House of Commons. (emphasis mine)<br /><br />In conclusion, an Act of Parliament which might be seen to be "constitutional" in nature constitutes an amendment by virtue of being passed by Parliament. It is only fitting that powers such as prorogation be stripped from the GG. I'd say the same about elections too, as there is no reason why an unelected vice-regal who is little more than a toady for the PM should be able to defy or usurp the will of Parliament.JGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00273619697804064873noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20358187.post-8545288956197523902010-01-20T18:47:57.523-05:002010-01-20T18:47:57.523-05:00Just to add, for the optically challenged. Take a...Just to add, for the optically challenged. Take a look at some of the headlines, not just for the big publications. NDP wants to reform prorogation powers. Given that 70 odd % of us disagree with Harper's decision, I'd say that is a "pretty good day" as Wells title suggests. All I'm saying, that could have been our day. Maybe tomorrow ;)Steve Vhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04871113039374739208noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20358187.post-32036944668340265902010-01-20T18:44:13.291-05:002010-01-20T18:44:13.291-05:00Actually, they have "seized" the agenda,...Actually, they have "seized" the agenda, for the time being at least. The definition applies, because we are already seeing questions put to Libs "what do you think of the NDP proposal?".<br /><br />Again, I don't see this as anything massive, or maybe not even doable in the end. What I'm commenting on, is that the NDP is pretty agile when it comes to strategy. In this instance, they throw this little item in the window, while we do some outreach to the FB group, armed with nothing. Imagine if Ignatieff could do that Q and A tomorrow with something to offer? It's just optics, the NDP proposal is a baby step, but politically, it was a shrewd stroke.Steve Vhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04871113039374739208noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20358187.post-17904748999647608912010-01-20T18:36:48.856-05:002010-01-20T18:36:48.856-05:00Steve, to be fair, the NDP have hardly "seize...Steve, to be fair, the NDP have hardly "seized" the agenda. Both they and the Libs have had an inordinate amount of time to come with something. After all, Harper prorogued Parliament 22 days ago. That it took ANYONE this long is, well, disheartening. (That's as polite as I can be about it.)Chrystal Oceanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00171002438761303983noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20358187.post-25934660893903580282010-01-20T18:13:02.382-05:002010-01-20T18:13:02.382-05:00Isn't there a constitutional question here too...Isn't there a constitutional question here too? Prorogation is a power vested in the Governor General who, by convention, accepts the advice of her Prime Minister on the matter, largely w/o question.<br /><br />I'm no constitutional or legal scholar, but it seems there's two angles you could address it from: stop the PM from asking her for prorogation, or stop her from taking his advice on it.<br /><br />I don't see how you can legally bar the PM from stopping by Rideau Hall or, horror of horrors, phoning over and asking for whatever.<br /><br />As for restricting the GG's latitude for accepting his advice, can that be done by simple law alone, or is that a change to her powers as described in the constitution? <br /><br />If it's the latter, then a bill such as that proposed by the NDP would seem largely symbolic and unenforcable. A GG could feel morally obligated to heed the advice, but the current GG didn't feel morally bound to listen to the petition from the opposition parties when she prorogued last year, and that petition and this bill could be equally binding.<br /><br />I trust though that the NDP has considered all the legal and constitutional questions, and crafted legislation that is intended to be legally binding and effective, and not mere symbolism.<br /><br />I look forward to hearing what the legal eagles have to say.Jeffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14971310821484459106noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20358187.post-53018782279606201102010-01-20T18:10:36.855-05:002010-01-20T18:10:36.855-05:00Would it be as simple as a motion and a vote in th...Would it be as simple as a motion and a vote in the House?<br /><br />Has Layton checked the Constitution, etc.?<br /><br />Or is he just playing politics.<br /><br />What if the sitting government has concluded it's agenda for that period?<br /><br />Harper has not concluded his agenda - he just recycles it over and over again.RuralSandihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09552973218865121867noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20358187.post-30511473262176673112010-01-20T17:59:23.799-05:002010-01-20T17:59:23.799-05:00Bob Rae just on CBC. Seemed receptive to NDP prop...Bob Rae just on CBC. Seemed receptive to NDP proposal, for what that's worth.Steve Vhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04871113039374739208noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20358187.post-89671630580477033042010-01-20T17:41:03.588-05:002010-01-20T17:41:03.588-05:00Maybe the LPC hasn't done it because it's ...Maybe the LPC hasn't done it because it's a legislative & constitutional non-starter? Prorogation is a necessary tool of Parliament that allows governments to introduce a new legislative agenda. Legislating that prorogation can only happen at the discretion of the majority of the legislature would replace one form of abuse with another. The issue isn't prorogation, the issue is, as Jeff said, this government's tranparent abuse of prorogation to avoid public debate and their unparallelled contempt for Parliament. The problem is that the precedent set when the Governor General agreed to prorogue Parliament in 2008 is fundamentally unsound. The redress may be changing from an appointed to an elected executive to put teeth back into the Governor General's historic perogatives. But an endless hung parliament would be no more democratic than one that is never in session.LifeonQueenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07625566368008296328noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20358187.post-22349758891477217952010-01-20T17:33:51.330-05:002010-01-20T17:33:51.330-05:00Patrick
Why is Ignatieff saddled with the Liberal...Patrick<br /><br />Why is Ignatieff saddled with the Liberal legacy? If we were smart, we would position him as a break from the past, embrace his time abroad and his lack of "career politican" status. Why does Ignatieff have to assume the lineage like he owns it?Steve Vhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04871113039374739208noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20358187.post-76236673572744926342010-01-20T17:31:18.132-05:002010-01-20T17:31:18.132-05:00If you want to engage the pool of voters that are ...If you want to engage the pool of voters that are angry about this prorogation, then you need to address the "symptom" in a way that says the Libs will approach it differently. Agreed on the wider point, but people are right when they say the Libs squander the true opportunity if they don't differentiate themselves. <br /><br />What the NDP proposed isn't much, but the optics are good strategy. Throwing out a few "reforms" is a no brainer as far as I'm concerned.Steve Vhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04871113039374739208noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20358187.post-57622999255464022032010-01-20T17:31:02.047-05:002010-01-20T17:31:02.047-05:00How would the Liberal Party have a shred of credib...How would the Liberal Party have a shred of credibility to reform the proroguement process?<br /><br />Jean Chretien prorogued Parliament to hinder Paul Martin's internal wranglings within the Liberal Party.<br /><br />In other words, Chretien decided to keep the rest of the country waiting on its own internal political struggles.<br /><br />Not to mention proroguing Parliament to delay facing questions in the house about the Auditor General's report on the Sponsorship Scandal.<br /><br />The NDP is the only legitimate party in Canada that has a shred of credibility as it regards reforming the proroguement process.Patrick Rosshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04592482865332628189noreply@blogger.com