Since the HarperCon$ have been running about trying to claim that a Liberal/NDP/Bloc coalition is somehow "undemocratic", it's worth spending a few minutes to debunk those talking points.
(1) In the October election, Canadians returned a minority government. The Con$ervatives won 143 seats, with the remaining 165 seats split between the Liberals, NDP and BQ.
(2) Based on voter turnout, and popular vote percentages, the Conservatives aren't exactly in a place to assert that they got more than a plurality of seats - sort of.
Conservative Popular Vote: 37.7%
Voter Turnout: 59.1%
So...37.7% of 59.1% is 22.3% of Canada's eligible voters actually voted for the Conservatives.
Comparatively speaking, 54.4% of those who voted marked their ballots for one of the Liberals, Bloc or NDP. Which means that 32.2% of Canada's eligible voters voted for the parties now threatening to form a coalition.
Let's be clear about this - Canadians did not grant the Con$ervatives a majority of the seats in the house, nor would anyone be able to claim that this is a ringing endorsement of Stephen Harper as a leader, either.
(3) We don't elect our Prime Minister. He is just the leader of the party that is able to control the most seats in the house.
(4) In a minority parliament, the governing party is always obliged to get at least some of its support from among the opposition members, especially anything that is a confidence vote. (money votes are always confidence votes)
(5) So, the difference between Harper's minority and a Liberal/Bloc/NDP coalition is merely that there is an agreement between party leaders to collaborate. Harper has made it clear that he's quite unwilling to collaborate with anyone - including his own party.
Is a coalition "undemocratic"? Not really. It's actually the first sign in a long time of the parties in the House of Commons actually trying to make it work at all. Canadians need to remember that we sent back a rather 'checkered' parliament this last election, and we told them to find a way to make it work. That doesn't mean it has to work with Harper sitting in the PMO.
Tuesday, December 02, 2008
How Stupid Is Liepert?
I don't even know where to begin with this bunch of drivel from Alberta health minister Ron Liepert:
Uh huh. Got it. So if I get sick, it's clearly my fault because of something in my lifestyle. Using Liepert's logic, the poor should be the healthiest people on the planet.
... and then there's reality: (as opposed to ideology)
Of course, Liepert also uses this to signal to Albertans that he is setting things up to dismantle public health care in Alberta:
Coming soon - pay for it yourself healthcare in Alberta:
Anyone for moving to Saskatchewan or B.C.?
A squeeze on disposable income as the economy nosedives could lead to healthier lifestyle choices, the province's health minister suggests, including fewer addictions and less obesity
...
"Somehow we've got to get Albertans to accept more personal responsibility for their behaviour," he said.
"I guess I'm hopeful that if people don't have the money to spend on Jolt and booze and everything else, maybe they won't become quite as addicted."
Uh huh. Got it. So if I get sick, it's clearly my fault because of something in my lifestyle. Using Liepert's logic, the poor should be the healthiest people on the planet.
... and then there's reality: (as opposed to ideology)
"That's a blame-the-victim approach that has been consistent in the Conservative ideology," Swann said. "They fail to see the social conditions that are creating the conditions in which people are making poor choices."
Calgary dietitian Sarah Remmer also isn't certain less disposable income will lead to healthier food choices. "A lot of people eat fast food because it's inexpensive," said Remmer, adding studies have shown people living in lower-income communities are more overweight or obese.
Of course, Liepert also uses this to signal to Albertans that he is setting things up to dismantle public health care in Alberta:
Less prosperity may also lower Albertans' expectations of what services should be covered under the public health-care system, added Liepert, who's leading the Alberta government's major over-haul of the medical regime.
"We're going to have some tough decisions to make in the budget coming next year and I think people are going to start to say, 'OK, maybe government shouldn't be covering everything,' " the health minister said after his speech.
Coming soon - pay for it yourself healthcare in Alberta:
On Monday, the province is unveiling a new plan broadly outlining the government's medical reforms. The plan will focus on sustainability of the medical system, whose costs have ballooned to $13.4 billion from$4.6 billion in 1998. However, the thorny issue of delisting services will not be addressed then, Liepert said.
Several other health announcements are planned, as the province's Dec. 15 deadline for this year's reforms looms.
Anyone for moving to Saskatchewan or B.C.?
Monday, December 01, 2008
So Eddie, How Much Did Harper Pay You?
I can only imagine what the conversations between the PMO and Stelmach's office this past week must have been.
How blatantly partisan can you possibly be Stelmach? Did Harper pay you to come up with that drivel, or did you think it up all by yourself? But then again, Stelmach lives in Alberta where a bale of hay can be elected as long as it is nominated on the conservative ticket.
Does it strike anyone else as only mildly ironic that Stelmach's ire is directed at the opposition, not a Prime Minister who directed his government to play the most vicious of partisan games at a time when Canada's government needs to be focused on the economy?
Mr. Harper decided to play politics - he picked an exceedingly volatile moment to engage in a game of political chicken...and his bluff got called. Yes, he's backed down on some of the most volatile propositions, but at this point, can anybody trust him to actually do his job? Or does he believe that all he is responsible is political points - as if running Canada were some massive videogame where high score is all that matters.
[Update]
Just maybe, the rank and file of the CPoC will remove Harper as leader if they get bounced to the Opposition benches. It's time this bunch learned that politics really is all about compromise.
[/Update]
"Put Canada first and stop the nonsense,” the provincial Progressive Conservative leader told reporters in Edmonton Monday. “This is a time where we need sane, prudent leadership dealing with the bigger elephant in the room which is the global economic crisis. It's a real concern to all Albertans.”
He said he expects that “cooler heads will prevail” and that coalition talks will die by next week.
“I think it's just imperative that we move ahead with good, strong economic policies. Give us some predictability and some certainty in policies so that we can attract the investment that's necessary.”
However, he said his right-wing government already has a strategy in place to deal with a possible Liberal-NDP coalition in Ottawa. “But I'm not going to play the cards until such time and until we know who are dealing with and what the issues are.”
How blatantly partisan can you possibly be Stelmach? Did Harper pay you to come up with that drivel, or did you think it up all by yourself? But then again, Stelmach lives in Alberta where a bale of hay can be elected as long as it is nominated on the conservative ticket.
Does it strike anyone else as only mildly ironic that Stelmach's ire is directed at the opposition, not a Prime Minister who directed his government to play the most vicious of partisan games at a time when Canada's government needs to be focused on the economy?
Mr. Harper decided to play politics - he picked an exceedingly volatile moment to engage in a game of political chicken...and his bluff got called. Yes, he's backed down on some of the most volatile propositions, but at this point, can anybody trust him to actually do his job? Or does he believe that all he is responsible is political points - as if running Canada were some massive videogame where high score is all that matters.
[Update]
Just maybe, the rank and file of the CPoC will remove Harper as leader if they get bounced to the Opposition benches. It's time this bunch learned that politics really is all about compromise.
[/Update]
Sunday, November 30, 2008
Let's Talk About "Democratic" Government, Shall We?
So, now in an effort to save his skin, rumors are flying that Harper may prorogue parliament. (Garth Turner has picked up on the same rumour)
All this to avoid facing a confidence vote that Harper is apt as not to lose.
So desperate to hang on to power, Harper is prepared to suspend the business of Canada's government at a time when our economy is in crisis, even the Harper himself has had to admit that the fundamentals are not as sound as he so proudly proclaimed during this fall's election campaign.
Even in Alberta, where the word conservative is assumed to be synonymous with "infallible", proroguing parliament is apt to be seen as worse than falling to a confidence motion.
However, Mr. Harper may find this little tactic limited indeed, because Her Excellency, the Governor General may refuse to prorogue parliament at this time - on the basis that the session has just begun, and it would be difficult indeed for Harper to argue that the business of the government has been completed.
For a man who prattles on about democracy, Harper continues to prove to Canadians that he is about the least democratic leader this country has ever seen.
[Update]
One additional thought - for the first time I can remember, the leader of a minority parliament is unwilling to face a confidence motion over his government's actions. Where, pray tell, are the vaunted "principles" that Mr. Harper and his ideological allies have talked so much about in the past?
[/Update]
All this to avoid facing a confidence vote that Harper is apt as not to lose.
So desperate to hang on to power, Harper is prepared to suspend the business of Canada's government at a time when our economy is in crisis, even the Harper himself has had to admit that the fundamentals are not as sound as he so proudly proclaimed during this fall's election campaign.
Even in Alberta, where the word conservative is assumed to be synonymous with "infallible", proroguing parliament is apt to be seen as worse than falling to a confidence motion.
However, Mr. Harper may find this little tactic limited indeed, because Her Excellency, the Governor General may refuse to prorogue parliament at this time - on the basis that the session has just begun, and it would be difficult indeed for Harper to argue that the business of the government has been completed.
For a man who prattles on about democracy, Harper continues to prove to Canadians that he is about the least democratic leader this country has ever seen.
[Update]
One additional thought - for the first time I can remember, the leader of a minority parliament is unwilling to face a confidence motion over his government's actions. Where, pray tell, are the vaunted "principles" that Mr. Harper and his ideological allies have talked so much about in the past?
[/Update]
Harper's Hand - Firmly on the Trigger
Harper has his people talking about 'staying the course' and a 'firm hand on the tiller'. Even though the Con$ have blinked in their most recent game of political chicken, Canadians should be wary.
Harper has shown us that he is much more intent on playing for partisan advantage than he is in governing Canada for the benefit of Canadians. The fact that he slipped in several ideological turds into Flaherty's "Fiscal Update"(most ironically, a term that abbreviates to 'F.U.'...) last week tells us that he simply doesn't get it. If he wants to play the 'steady hand on the tiller' card, the first thing he needs to do is start governing rather than acting as though it was all a game of "scoring political points'.
Today, based on what I have seen, Harper's hand is not on the tiller, but on the trigger - and it is aimed at Canada and Canadian democracy. Make no mistake, Harper is an autocrat in the extreme. His fiscal policy is not fiscally responsible, it ideological. He seeks to impose a style of government that is extreme indeed - hard-fisted towards all who dare transgress or defy his ideology.
Harper has shown us that he is much more intent on playing for partisan advantage than he is in governing Canada for the benefit of Canadians. The fact that he slipped in several ideological turds into Flaherty's "Fiscal Update"(most ironically, a term that abbreviates to 'F.U.'...) last week tells us that he simply doesn't get it. If he wants to play the 'steady hand on the tiller' card, the first thing he needs to do is start governing rather than acting as though it was all a game of "scoring political points'.
Today, based on what I have seen, Harper's hand is not on the tiller, but on the trigger - and it is aimed at Canada and Canadian democracy. Make no mistake, Harper is an autocrat in the extreme. His fiscal policy is not fiscally responsible, it ideological. He seeks to impose a style of government that is extreme indeed - hard-fisted towards all who dare transgress or defy his ideology.
Saturday, November 29, 2008
The Arrogance of this PM
Regular readers of this blog already know that I am no fan of Stephen Harper. However, his antics in the last week have taken my opinion of the man to new lows.
Consider his marching orders to the troops:
Uh huh. Since that little piece of odiousness is off the table (or it was as of yesterday - perhaps the HarperCon$ have put it back on - hard to know), one has to imagine that there's just a little more to the picture than that. Of course, what this really reflects is the HarperCon$ playing more from the Karl Rove book of political dirty tricks than from any coherent sense of doing the right thing for Canada as a nation.
Harper is playing politics while our economy sinks, a Canadian Nero so self absorbed that the only thing that matters to him is his ego.
Consider his marching orders to the troops:
Mr. Giorno's e-mail stated that MPs must show that the current dispute with opposition parties is merely about the Liberals, NDP and Bloc trying to protect their share of the $27-million in public subsidies and steal power that they failed to win legitimately in the last federal election.
The Tories plan to scrutinize the public reaction to their message over the weekend. If they don't feel they've persuaded Canadians that a change would be disastrous, sources said, they may consider describing in more detail what kind of spending they would be prepared to offer and under what conditions they would pump stimulus into the economy.
Uh huh. Since that little piece of odiousness is off the table (or it was as of yesterday - perhaps the HarperCon$ have put it back on - hard to know), one has to imagine that there's just a little more to the picture than that. Of course, what this really reflects is the HarperCon$ playing more from the Karl Rove book of political dirty tricks than from any coherent sense of doing the right thing for Canada as a nation.
Harper is playing politics while our economy sinks, a Canadian Nero so self absorbed that the only thing that matters to him is his ego.
Harper Needs A Lesson On Canadian Civics
Since I'm hearing this bit of drivel fall from our Prime Minister's lips:
Perhaps it is time to remind Mr. Harper that in fact the Governor General has the right to consider the Leader of the Opposition forming a coalition government if the minority government falls. Such governments have been exceedingly rare in Canada, but that doesn't mean they cannot occur.
Second, to claim that it is 'undemocratic' is completely ridiculous. The last election for the Parliament was only a few short months ago. Canadians sent politicians a message that none of the parties deserves to govern in a majority setting. Therefore, we clearly asked the politicians to find a way to make a minority situation work. Since the leadership of the 'first party' has made it clear that he is unwilling to compromise with other parties, then the other parties have the opportunity to form a coalition - if, of course, they can persuade her Excellency, The Governor General, that such a coalition would have the confidence of the house.
It is, in fact, Mr. Harper who has shown himself to be anything but an advocate for democracy in the last couple of years.
In terms of the political crisis that Harper has just spawned, Jeffrey Simpson has an excellent assessment of the situation, and Harper's behaviour.
Rick Bell over at the Calgary Sun has the grand prize winner for headline: The PM plays politics when the economy is tanking and people are afraid. So how do you spell 'disgraceful?' S-T-E-P-H-E-N-H-A-R-P-E-R.
The opposition is entitled to defeat the government as it sees fit, Harper said Friday, but Dion himself does not have the right to take power without an election.
Perhaps it is time to remind Mr. Harper that in fact the Governor General has the right to consider the Leader of the Opposition forming a coalition government if the minority government falls. Such governments have been exceedingly rare in Canada, but that doesn't mean they cannot occur.
Second, to claim that it is 'undemocratic' is completely ridiculous. The last election for the Parliament was only a few short months ago. Canadians sent politicians a message that none of the parties deserves to govern in a majority setting. Therefore, we clearly asked the politicians to find a way to make a minority situation work. Since the leadership of the 'first party' has made it clear that he is unwilling to compromise with other parties, then the other parties have the opportunity to form a coalition - if, of course, they can persuade her Excellency, The Governor General, that such a coalition would have the confidence of the house.
It is, in fact, Mr. Harper who has shown himself to be anything but an advocate for democracy in the last couple of years.
In terms of the political crisis that Harper has just spawned, Jeffrey Simpson has an excellent assessment of the situation, and Harper's behaviour.
Rick Bell over at the Calgary Sun has the grand prize winner for headline: The PM plays politics when the economy is tanking and people are afraid. So how do you spell 'disgraceful?' S-T-E-P-H-E-N-H-A-R-P-E-R.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)