Canada's Governor General agrees to suspend Parliament
- Thread starter Main Street
- Start date
Y_I_Otter
Dangerous Terroirist
It's not even a real grin, though.
I'm betting, once the cameras got put away, he bit the head off that poor kitten.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
frogwoman
Let them eat newts
It's not even a real grin, though.
that is actually a really really scary photo.
Y_I_Otter
Dangerous Terroirist
What I've been hearing on talk radio.
That isn't always the bellwether for the mood of the electorate in Canada it is in the US.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
That isn't always the bellwether for the mood of the electorate in Canada it is in the US.
I hope you're right. A Harper majority?
Brainaddict
slight system overdrive
No, no, still not getting why the GG acquiesced to the request to suspend parliament. What is the given logic? It can't just be because the PM asked her to - can it? That's the sort of thing that happens in tinpot dictatorships like Thailand. Is it claimed that it's necessary to maintain the integrity of the democratic system or something?
Y_I_Otter
Dangerous Terroirist
I'd imagine Harper presented Ms. Jean an argument based on the logic that the Conservatives needed the time to come up with a more comprehensive recovery budget and that being "forced" into calling a federal election barely two months after the previous one-- which attracted fewer voters by percentage of the electorate than any in our history-- would be counter-productive. It doesn't suit his purposes to call an election right now; he wants one in the spring, closer to the time of the Liberal leadership convention.
spring-peeper
Well-Known Member
A power grab or a desire to wrench power away from the conservatives?
I spent most of my time watching CBC newsworld. They did one of their quick little interviews with Justin Trudeau. They asked him if he thought his father was turning in his grave over the alliance with the the "separatists". His answer was that his father negotiated with them on more than occasion. I always thought that parties sounded each other out in hope of forming alliances or coalitions all the time.
I wonder why it's so hard to believe that the Bloq was actually acting in the best interests of all Canadians? Maybe, just maybe, they didn't want to go back to the polls again?
Can you blame him?
Oh come on - if he ever wanted to prove that Ottawa was a mess, now is the time.
I'm not too sure about a coalition with the NDP, though. I don't trust them. They are bad, bad for Canada!!!
Main Street
New Member
thanks for responding peeps
Y_I_Otter
Dangerous Terroirist
Anyone who doesn't know the leaders of the opposition parties under a minority government have each other on speed-dial knows nothing of Canadian politics.
Of course they didn't want to have another election. Dislike of the federal Tories in Quebec is has always been an on-again/off-again thing.
Yeah, New Democrats hold to the quaint belief that some things are too important to working people to be left to the profit-driven private sector-- things like essential utilities and health care. We're all bomb-tossing bolsheviks, every last one of us.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
Probably because the other options were to agree to the coalition request to let them form a government, or to call another election, to be held over christmas, once the non confidence motion passed on monday.
The mood of the canadian public was not very receptive to the first, given that it in essence means that Jean, an unelected official who is supposed to be a representative of the British Monarchy, is the one person in the country who gets to pick a govt. It would have hastened the end of the Monarchy in this country. Imo, it will be punted after the Queen kicks it, but this would have moved the date up.
Nobody wanted an election campaign over Christmas, least of all the politicians.
Y_I_Otter
Dangerous Terroirist
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
You say that like it's a bad thing.
I'm just saying it's a fact.
Tbh, I don't really care one way or the other. We've had the connection for a long time. I don't see how it's hurt us so far.
Otoh, having Charles as our king? I can do without it.
Y_I_Otter
Dangerous Terroirist
Not so much recently, but for the first three-quarters of our existence as a country we pretty much said, "ready, aye, ready" and rushed in to sacrifice successive generations of our best and brightest every time The Empire needed its arse pulled out of a jam. The monarchy and with it, the eleven governors-general and lieutenant-governors, their stately residences and bloated budgets are anachronisms we can well do without. It may be a pro-forma thing in most instances, but requiring "Royal Assent" for legislation passed by our Parliament sticks in my nationalist craw.
Otoh, having Charles as our king? I can do without it.
Ach, mummy will probably bury the bugger. Those Windsor women have longevity genes out the wahzoo! "
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
I am reminded of Gough Whitlam and the Australian constitutional crisis in 1975.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Australian_constitutional_crisis
Not quite the same thing but it bolstered the argument for a republic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Australian_constitutional_crisis
Not quite the same thing but it bolstered the argument for a republic.
nino_savatte
No pasaran!
Then there's King-Byng....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King-Byng_Affair
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King-Byng_Affair
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
That's true, but without the backing of the Empire, I think there was a good chance that the American implementation of its Manifest Destiny policy would have been directed north as well as west and south.
Just prior to Confederation, the US tested the British a number of times in Canada. One such time was the San Juan Islands Pig War.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pig_War
There were also tensions during the Gold Rush, when american prospectors arrived in large numbers from California, and on their way up the Fraser, determined to kill off all the indigenous native indians.
Similar threads
