Give us the election, Stephen!

[jbailey]

In A recent CBC article, Stephen Harper is quoted as saying that his plan for the national child care program is simply a part of the budget. Failure to pass a budget is seen as a failure of confidence, and triggers an election.

This puts the opposition parties in a tight place. Specifically, the Liberals aren't ready to head to the polls yet. Paul Martin hasn't been officially replaced, with a successor not expected to be chosen until October or so. An election in May would go very poorly for them.

Since getting elected, Prime Minister Harper has managed to trigger an ethics inquiry into his government, and is already taking a hard line that risks bringing it down or screwing the opposition party. He told us that he would bring new things to our government, and certainly he has. This type of maneuvering can only be described as "incredible" for what, the second week of parliament?

Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out, Stevey-baby.

Comments

too bad he won't leave

[(Anonymous)]

Harper surprised me. I figured it would be a whole six months before he proved that he was an ass. So much for accountable government. That lasted all of two days. No party can defeat this budget. On one hand no one wants another election. Especially the Liberals. And on the other the media will rip apart any one who opposes "money for children."

The Liberals were not a good government, but Harper won't be any better. The PC-Alliance merger was the worst thing to happen Canada in a decade.

Keeping Promises

[(Anonymous)]

If the NDP campaigned on four fundamental promises (e.g., nationalising the banks, leaving NATO, doubling the tax on gasoline, and banning American television programmes), and they became government, I would expect them to propose all those measures in Parliament. If one of the fundamental promises failed to pass, then that would indicate that the NDP and their agenda lacked the confidence of the House. In that case, the constitutional procedure would be resignation of the cabinet, followed by either a new election or a chance for another party to form a cabinet.

Harper may or may not be willing to compromise on some of the details of his child care plan; but if Parliament rejects the plan in general, whether or not it's part of the budget, then the Conservative government ought to resign. Such "manoeuvring" is "incredible" only in comparison to governments that consider holding on to power more important than keeping fundamental campaign promises. Not that we've ever had governments like that in Canada...

I might also add that, under the current rules, the Ethics Commissioner must launch an investigation whenever a formal complaint is made by an MP. Thus investigations mean little; only the conclusions of the Ethics Commissioner matter.

--Marc

Re: Keeping Promises

[auzure-skies.livejournal.com]

But sometimes "holding on to power" means compromising, and keeping people (read: taxpayers) happy. Sticking with your campaign promises, when those promises only earned you a slim lead, is foolhardy. It means that Canadians were NOT all in the same boat, and elected three other parties to balance out the Conservative vision of Canada. In this case, he's gotta compromise on some things. People wanted the Ethics amendments he's made - and good job on it, too. But the majority of Canadians also want national childcare, so he should go with it. We've got the biggest surplus in over 20 years; let's put it into our kids.

Re: Keeping Promises

[(Anonymous)]

A "national daycare program" on the money allotted was a soundbyte for election campaigns, not a fact. The money was given to the provinces with no strings attached. No different than a few billion dollars (also no strings attached) was enough to 'fix healthcare for a generation'.

How much do people advocating a national program know about Quebec's, anyway? Nothing stopping other provinces from doing it themselves except the will. And if one objects that Quebec's provincial system has flaws, how on earth does one propose to avoid the exact same problems writ large in a national system?

[wonderbadger]

This totally unrelated to politics:

Hey! Mark was just here on the weekend, and he told me you had a blog, and here you are! And azure_skies, too, I notice. How very cool. I'm friending you both. :)