Harper to call a snap election??
G&M: "The Tories still say that if the Liberal-dominated Senate doesn't pass the crime bill by the end of the month, Prime Minister Stephen Harper is prepared to ask the Governor General to dissolve Parliament and call an election."
Not only is the above executively dictatorial (all bicameral debate must pass the PM smell test), it completely contradicts their [Tories] utopian fixed election
8 Comments:
Interesting. I guess their word and legislation is worth nothing.....or at least Pete Van Loan seems to indicate that:
But Mr. Van Loan has said the law does not prevent the prime minister from asking the Governor General to pull the plug.
"There is nothing in the law that takes away the Crown's traditional and usual prerogatives on this matter," he told reporters last week.
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/story.html?id=301407
Annon... Don't get it. I understand that quote to mean there is no law that prevents a Government from asking for dissolution... not that the CPC was ignoring a law?
Small peanuts even so compared to the theft of Millions from the public purse to line the party coffers....
and how come the Liberals are now broke? Why is it that they are only in the red when they are in power?
I'm far from a liberal apologist, but it does appear that the guy occupying 24 Sussex Drive is stearing clear of his commitment, or as u say pledge, to have a fixed election in '09 or have the opposition trigger one.
Now, it seems as if he is suggesting that he would be just as comfortable using his executive powers to call an unwanted "snap" election like the Liberals did many time I the past.
Now I know the constitution still allows such a move, but I don't remember that promise anywhere in the conservative party platform or from personal commitments.
Harper saying that he would ask the GG to pull the plug because of interferance in the funtioning of government by the unaccountable unelected senate is no different than Cromwell saying to the rump paliament
“you have been sat to long here for any good you have been doing. Depart, i say, and let us have done with you. In the name of god, go!.”
And it's about bloody time. Can 'em all
anon: I agree. Although many conservative partisans (which I am not) are reverting to the line "they are worse (meaning the liberals)" or "they did it in the past" or "it's still a constitutional option to trigger an election"...which goes to show you that after just two years in government, they have been tainted with the inside the beltway thinking, even when discussing ways to start the election process in motion.
kit: your last two paragraphs strengthen my above comment even more. Instead of throwing petty blame over to the other guys, why not take ownership for such policy flip-flops (like the fix election pledge).
bill: agreed.
zip: well, if he thinks it's a constitutional crisis in the senate, then come out strongly and say it. Other than that, either play by the rules given (which he has thankfully not) or role out a senate reform package that Canadians can finally vote on.
You comments are understandable, but perhaps short sighted. With a view to the big picture, this is the second time these anti-crime measures have passed the House for the most part.
They are now before the Senate for the second time (since Nov. 07 this time) and the Liberals are trying to forestall a Conservative achievement against crime.
It is not the will of the Conservatives that has been thwarted, it is the will of Parliament and apparently only for partisan purposes.
You can't criticize the PM for not delivering on promises, and at the same time tie his hands by allowing good legislation to be held up in the Senate where the Liberals have a huge majority. How can the Government continue to govern if it cannot advance the clear agenda by which it gained a mandate?
Like him or not, Stephen Harper has been clear about what he would like to do for Canadians. The anti-crime measures were a cornerstone of their agenda and CTV reports 76% of Canadians support it.
If progress that Parliament wants and the people want is being unreasonably held up by an unelected, unaccountable body (Senate), then the PM is not unreasonable in asking the people "Do you really want this legislation or not?"
zip: well, if he thinks it's a constitutional crisis in the senate, then come out strongly and say it. Other than that, either play by the rules given (which he has thankfully not) or role out a senate reform package that Canadians can finally vote on.
He has said it again and again. It's part of the Conservative mantra that the Senate needs to either change or be demolished.
He has also introduced a senate reform package which (unfortunately) had to be watered down to make it through the HoC.
He has instituted fixed elections but that does not preclude the government from falling or indeed in a case of constitutional crisis the government from asking the GG for disolution.
I agree with both of you. However, the senate is more of a problem [at the moment] because it is tilted in favour of the Liberals, who are using their power and numbers in the upper chamber to thwart legislation. This has happened in elected senates such as Autralia and the US as well.
But in our case, since the upper chamber has been traditionally a chamber of sober second thought and the lower house a much more powerful entity, the balance of power always gets thrown out of wack when the Liberals are out of power. So I guess their are only two options, change the constitution (and have an elected senate) or start winning numerous election (and appoint them). In the end, it will really be up to the ppl to decide the former.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home