Iggy would lead Liberal/NDP coalition

[J.O.]

Was it just me, or did both of them look uncomfortable in their own skin tonight?

[Mitch Cronin]

If what Harper is doing is asking the GG for a Proregation(??).... "to give the Canadian people time to be heard" ...

We should all be demanding they each pick new leaders and have another damned election!

The one's they've all got have either simply failed to win us, or have proven themselves unworthy!

Isn't it clear the answer to what the majority of Canadians want is NONE of the above?

Just heard on the CBC: "Each one of these fine leaders is depriving some villiage somewhere of an idiot."

[Guest rattler]

If what Harper is doing is asking the GG for a Proregation(??).... "to give the Canadian people time to be heard"  ...

We should all be demanding they each pick new leaders and have another damned election!

The one's they've all got have either simply failed to win us, or have proven themselves unworthy!

Isn't it clear the answer to what the majority of Canadians want is NONE of the above?

Mitch, you continue to think that the parties give a damn about the wishes of the voters. Sadly none of them appear to do so.

Dion just wants to have PM in front of his name (even for a few months)

Layton dreams of doing the same

May wants to draw that senate pay

Harper, screwed the pooch big time and wants to make it all better.

The only honest man is Mssr Duceppe who will deliver to the voters in Quebec who support the BLOC almost exactly what they want.

Final results from the Globe & Mail Poll

Do you support the Liberal-NDP coalition's bid for power?

Yes

48%

22987 votes

  No

52%

24537 votes

[BoomerPete]

I think that was my point. You are a west coast bleeding liberal. Western Canada is done with the likes of you. Stand by for further.

What is it with some of you guys that the only thing you can do when faced with disagreement is descend to personal insults? You think you're going to run me out of my home or something? Forget it buddy. I'm here to stay and no idiot spouting off that "Western Canada is done with the likes of you" is going to get me to move or surrender my vote. Crap answers like this makes it pretty damn easy to dislike both you, and more importantly the positions you advocate. If you want to persuade, why not stick to logic instead of threats and epithets?

While we're at it, I'd point out that though this "west coast bleeding liberal" may have a differing opinion from you on some social issues, I'm quite possibly to the right of you on many economic issues. And, as you may not have noticed, I have never advocated for the Liberals (or NDP). My track record is consistent: I oppose parties and individuals that preach intolerance, demonstrate a lack of compassion for those who are disadvantaged, or use lies and intimidation as their means of governance.

I've had serious misgivings about Harper from Day 1, but this latest fiasco has truly proven what sort of politician he is. After this, I want nothing to do with him and will oppose him at every turn.

Now, if the Conservatives are smart, and realize that he's too polarizing a leader to continue with ... then I'm listening. It's not like I figure that the coalition is a terribly appealing prospect. It's just that I, unlike most of you Conservative supporters it seems, understand that a coalition would be a constitutionally legal and in fact inevitable result of the present government being defeated in the House. So, instead of yelling, screaming and sowing a generation's worth of regional discord how 'bout you guys get busy and fix what's screwed up in your party so it can survive and serve its mandate out?

Pete

[YYC I/C]

In the history of our parliamentary democracy, can you think of a leader who projects more of a lack of confidence than Stephane Dion?? His "prepared and taped" speach was absolutely atrocious.......nearly unbelievable. He may be academically intelligent but he sure presents himself as a bumbling idiot.

Each one of these fine leaders is depriving some villiage somewhere of an idiot

Great quote!

[BoomerPete]

Is that Hedy's neighborhood or Sven's old one?

Big deal.

Would it matter? Are you planning on trying cut every riding that didn't vote Conservative adrift from the rest of the country?

For some reason the right winger's here seem to think that they can gain control over the nation if they just demonize those who disagree with them long enough and hard enough to make them go away. When will it dawn on you folks that all that approach does is make for more deeply commited opponents?

If Harper hadn't been intent on kneecapping the opposition and Flaherty had come up with a decent economic response to the financial crisis right now we'd be talking about the Conservative's being smart and flexible in tough times. Instead they've compounded things with a fake constituional crisis which it seems they're now intent on morphing into something very real by fanning regional animosities.

If you think that the Conservatives should be forming the government then take a deep breath and start figuring out what needs to be done to make that happen without destroying the country in the process.

Pete

[FA@AC]

Now, if the Conservatives are smart, and realize that he's too polarizing a leader to continue with ... then I'm listening. It's not like I figure that the coalition is terribly appealing prospect. It's just that I, unlike most of you Conservative supporters it seems, understand that a coalition would be a constitutionally legal and in fact inevitable result of the present government being defeated in the House.

Pete

Well said. Were the shoe on the other foot and if Dion was about to have Parliament prologued in a pathetic attempt to cling to power by running away from a mess that he himself had brought on, you Conservatives would all be calling him a fool. And in fact Dion has been a fool since the day he won the Liberal leadership, but for all we know he might well use his powers as PM a lot more sensibly than Harper has. It wouldn't exactly be difficult.

It's hard to want to show Harper any mercy because we all know that he'd show none if the tables were turned.

The Dear Leader has got to go, and he should take his clueless Finance Minister--dreams of a $1B surplus and all--with him.

[BoomerPete]

No one is capable of governing in the "entire nation's interest" when there are such different interests.

On the contrary, great leaders most often govern with the greater good of the nation placed ahead of regional or party interests. Stephen Harper is most clearly not a great leader.

then don't forget to mention how this pre-planned opposition coalition takeover from a government that has really not even put forward a budget or anything else since re-elected a mere 6 weeks ago is the same.

Pre-planned? Really? You figure that the Liberals were running around two weeks ago trying to figure out how to get Stephane Dion into 24 Sussex? You have got to be kidding! Sure, the NDP and the Bloc were probably discussing how each could best leverage their positions in the next parliament, but that's no better or worse than what every other party (specifically including the Conservatives and Alliance) has done in the past. That's how politics works. For the Liberals, frankly this whole thing was a crisis that I doubt they saw it coming. The only reason they are in it is because the alternative was to allow Harper to undercut the means by which they could credibly campaign as an alternative in the next election. He gave them a knife expecting them to commit suicide ... they decided to return the knife pointy end first.

Were I a Liberal leader, given the party's current situation I'd love nothing better than to let the Conservative's take the heat and let them govern during the coming hard times and then be ready to step in as a fresh alternative when the public gets angry at what didn't work for them while battling this recession. This coalition bears little risk for the NDP or the Bloc, but it is a huge risk for the Liberals and specifically for their leadership candidates. To take it on they had to have been convinced that there was no alternative available so long as Harper is Prime Minister.

As long as Harper's in you're out. It's as simple as that. ". This is strictly opinion only likely based on personal hopes and backed up by no factual evidence.

Sure it's an opinion, as is almost everything that you post in all your self vainglorious certainty. It is, however, an opinion that I think is widely held by the significant percentage of the population which didn't vote for the Conservatives. It's also an opinion held by many political analysts, even some who trend Conservative in their opinions. Harper has made the bone-head move of all time for the Conservatives. The sooner that they figure that out and fix the problem the better off the entire nation will be.

Pete

[BoomerPete]

The idea of western separation has been around for a long time, the problem is that it would never work as well for the west, as it has for Quebec, tradionally the west has been conservative, and the east liberal, with Quebec holding the balance of power, they know it and have used it well to obtain all they could (very smart politics)

This whole fiasco has been very well orchestrated, what Government hasn't suggested extremely controversial legistration, only to ammend it before it is put before the house? the current bill is no different, in fact, I find it quite humerous that the current buzz word to describe the conservatives is "partisanship" because they, regardless of the motives were saving tax payer dollars, and this coming from a group who squandered a billion or so in a sponsership deal

As for what's about to happen it is legal, and quite frankly I'm suprized it hasn't happened in the past, what I fear it that this will now be the norm for any minority government, and it could be years before we see any political stability in this country.

My thoughts on the coalition are just this, we tend to vote along party lines regardless of who the candidate is but in reality we vote for the person and they are free to change sides at their discretion, and that is where I have a problem with this type of coalition, if the tables were reversed and the tories were forming a pact with the NDP and the Bloc I would like it no better.

The preceding were strictly my thoughts and are in no way to be construed as fact and as always are subject to change when further information becomes available    

AME,

I think you are right that what we have been observing over the past decade has been a gradual drift in our national politics from broad based parties to more regional ones that have first produced 3 minorities in a row and next may result in governing coalitions becoming likely solutions. No minority has a mandate to govern without sufficent support from others in the House, and that seems where we are headed.

Regarding the use of the word "partisan", it's appropriate because the two most offending parts of the update, the withdrawl of federal funding for political parties and the suspension of the right to strike for the civil service served no practical purpose in dealing with the current economic situation. As they do nothing substantive it's clear that their reason for inclusion was for partisan purposes, those being:

i) to handicap the opponents ability to fight a future election and;

ii) as retribution to a civil service seen as not being sufficiently supportive of the Conservatives.

As for being a judicious saving of taxpayers money, first consider:

i) that the amount to be saved is pretty minor versus the scale of the challenge;

ii) that none of the potentially more productive efforts at saving money that might have been proposed was included because;

iii) the problem to be faced is about stimulating consumption not contracting spending, and;

iv) that, as it stands, the Conservatives have expanded spending over the last 2 years in many other areas where trimming could have occurred first if it was required.

Pete

[YYC I/C]

You figure that the Liberals were running around two weeks ago trying to figure out how to get Stephane Dion into 24 Sussex?

On the topic of 24 Sussex, who lives there in a coalition government?? Do you have to build a new wing to accomodate 2 new bedrooms for Layton and Duceppe??

[dagger]

Diane Francis pretty much sums up my feelings rather well.

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/f...-in-stupid.aspx

He should leave office and the sooner the better. But he won't. Instead he will meet with the Governor-General to try and convince her to dissolve parliament until the New Year.

Here’s my question:

All the blah-blah aside, the essence of this nonsenseis why would Harper ever dream that the other three parties would vote in favor of his triple-suicide bill designed to kill off publicly-funded campaign allocations? Were the Tories inhaling in caucus? Or was Harper just in touch with his Grinch? Or is he an Anglo-Saxon Machiavelli?

Harper and his government have been unforgiveably reckless. At a time, when consensus and leadership are needed the most, they have deteriorated into schoolyard bullies. Worst of all, they have handed on a platter an opportunity for three leaders, who have all been judged as even less adequate than Harper, to form a coalition to govern Canada. God help us.

Clearly, Tories must stage a palace revolt. Petitions being circulated should be about unseating Harper and his accomplices, not about defeating the coalition.

[Don Hudson]

Mitch;

re, "Proregation(??)"

First, think of "rogue", then think of why: Pro-rogue...

[Moon The Loon]

To me it sounded like he was saying that this is the way they do it when they're afraid to try it "live".

I can "Hear It Now": Harper saying "Pick up" after uttering the word "separatist" in French.

Here's a bone nobody has dared pick up. The GG is going to be put in a position unseen since 1926, that of exercising her Royal Authority. Whether she likes it or not. Whatever she decides, she will put herself in a position of "Dammed if you do, dammed if you don't."

I agree with those constitutionalists who agree that our system is in fact working as it should during this period of perceived uncertainty, like it or not.

But...

What would happen if the focus of national attention turned around on Thursday morning's meeting with Harpo and, instead of listening to what he was asking for, offered to him her resignation or, in other words, a refusal to make such decision as he is going to ask of her?

Would we be creating a back-door invitation to The Queen to attend our national dilemma? (Spelling checked and double checked!)

[YYC I/C]

I don't know what the GG will decide tomorrow but it would be un-precedented to over-rule a sitting Prime Minister unless he requests anything but an election. If Harper requests prorogation, I can't see the GG saying no.

[Canus Chinookus]

It occurred to me that you sleep in the bed that you make. Let this situation be a lesson to all you apathetic jackasses who didn't vote in the last election. I suspect there'll be a far higher turnout next time around... oh, in a month or so?

[internet]

For those who want the story behind the Liberal TV address.....

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/stor...?hub=TopStories

The Liberals have apologized for Liberal Leader Stephane Dion's taped televised address, after it was delivered to Canadian networks almost an hour past deadline and in near-cellphone quality.

"I apologize for what happened tonight. I apologize for the poor quality and the lateness. I am livid and am doing an investigation as to how this happened," Johanne Senecal, Dion's Chief of Staff, said to CTV News tonight.

Dion was supposed to deliver the networks a pre-taped statement to the nation Wednesday between 6: 15 p.m. and 6:30 ET. It was to air after Prime Minister Stephen Harper addressed the country at 7 p.m. ET about the political crisis on Parliament Hill.

CTV, along with other major Canadian networks, pre-empted regularly scheduled programming to deliver the addresses. Harper went to air shortly after 7 p.m. but networks were left scrambling to fill airspace when Dion's tape was nowhere to be found.

Alphée Moreau, a senior Liberal communication staffer, explained how the series of technical mistakes on their part resulted in an embarrassing snafu.

The timeline (all times ET):

6:15-6:30 - The Liberals miss their promised deadline to deliver Dion's statement to the television networks.

6:40 - Liberals arrive with a single tape at the press gallery in Ottawa. They were supposed to deliver two tapes: one in French, one in English. They arrived with a single tape in DVD-minicam format, which is not broadcast quality.

Shortly after 6:40 - The Liberals decide to run back to their offices -- a block away -- because the French portion of the tape needs another edit.

7:05 - Liberal staffers are still in their offices as the networks go to air with the Harper address.

7:07 - Harper's statement finishes and network anchors are forced to kill time as they wait for Dion's address.

7:10 to 7:15 - Liberal staffers arrive back at the press gallery on Wellington Street with a DVD-minicam player that they had taken from their own offices, along with the associated cables. There is still only one tape, not two. A press gallery official tells the Liberals that the gallery is not the feed point and an argument ensues. The Liberals ask why they weren't told that earlier. The feed point is next door at the CBC building, which is the long-established feed play point for all network pools. The Liberals are informed that they need to be walked into the building by authorized staff.

7:20 - English network anchors are still live on television, wondering where the tape is. CTV has still had no communications from the Liberals about Dion's address.

Approximately 7:15 - CBC receives the tape and begins dubbing into French and English versions. This takes about 10 minutes.

7:28 - CTV decides to go off-air and back to regular scheduled programming at 7:30. CTV has still not seen a feed of the tape.

7:28 - CBC incorrectly punches out the finished feed only to their network.

7:30 - CTV signs off broadcast at scheduled time.

"We missed our deadline," Moreau said. "The shot was not all that professional. It was soft-focused."

CTV received angry emails within minutes of signing off. Some viewers thought CTV was ignoring the Liberal leader, while others thought Dion was purposely snubbing the network.

Dion's coalition partners were both angry and embarrassed by the Liberal address.The NDP said Wednesday's fiasco undermined the credibility of the coalition, CTV's Robert Fife reported.

"I'm told that (Bloc Quebecois Leader) Gilles Duceppe ran into Mr. Dion in the elevator and asked 'What the hell happened?' and Mr. Dion said, 'We're not used to being in opposition," Fife said.

Jean Lapierre, broadcast journalist and former Liberal MP, mocked the party's video address.

"This was the cheapest video. I don't know if the Liberal party has financial problems, but they didn't have to go to a high school kid to get their video made," he said on CTV's Mike Duffy Live. "You ask people to forget about their normal TV show tonight. We did that on TVA. We had a million people waiting for a show call 'Le Poulet' -- 'The Chicken.' We didn't even get the egg!"

The blogsphere was quick to pounce on Dion's bumbling performance.

"Stephane Dion was late for the show, looked kind of red faced, and seemed to be getting a couple of bucks for the bankrupt Liberal Party for the product placement of a book entitled, and I kid you not, "Hot Air," wrote the Alberta Ardvark blog Wednesday.

[Fido]

Yup, they are ready to govern.

[BoomerPete]

Not sure how far west you are but I'm a long way west as well. In my neighbourhood Harper would probably get scolded for being stupid but the real jeering would be saved for dumb, dumber and their separatist cousin Le-only-smart-une.

Harper created this yes, but Canada is absolutely in the best economic shape of any country and they have the gall to say it's to save the country from ruin?

Maverick,

I guess we live in different neighbourhoods, but we do work out of the same airport, so we're not that far apart.

As for Canada being in "absolutely the best economic shape ...", a couple of points:

i) That economic shape is simply relative to other countries who are in worse trouble. Having your cabin on the Lido deck instead of steerage doesn't guarantee a seat in the lifeboat when you've booked passage on the Titanic. We're all headed into troubled waters that will demand very creative economic responses if we are to avoid a deep recession or worse.

ii) To the extent that our nation's finances are in good shape, most of the credit belongs to the Liberals, not the Conservatives. When the Liberals assumed government from the PCs our nation was a financial basket case. When they ceded power a decade or so later the books were in their best shape in generations. Agree with them or not about the coalition but they have proven capable of managing the nation's finances.

iii) Though we are in better shape than our friends to the south the Conservatives in their 2 years in power have overseen a significant increase in government spending coupled with a decline in government revenues. Consequently, prior to the recent meltdown the surplus had all ready been whittled down a great deal. The GST cut now looks like particularly poor planning considering the ways that the revenue that was foregone might be used to help mitigate the current problems.

90210 is correct, the west won't stand for this.

Which West are you talking about? In the province that you and I live in the Conservatives got only 44% of the vote. 200,000 more people voted against them than for them. Even considering Alberta which voted overwhelmingingly for the Conservatives the total percentage of votes for the Conservative party in all 4 of the western provinces still came to only 52.4%. It's hardly a group that's likely to be united in their condemnation. The problem with some western Conservatives is that they tend to forget that not everyone out here agrees with them.

Pete

[BoomerPete]

Mitch, you continue to think that the parties give a damn about the wishes of the voters.  Sadly none of them appear to do so.

Dion just wants to have PM in front of his name (even for a few months)

Layton dreams of doing the same

May wants to draw that senate pay

Harper, screwed the pooch big time and wants to make it all better.

The only honest man is Mssr Duceppe who will deliver to the voters in Quebec who support the BLOC almost exactly what they want.

rattler,

That's a pretty accurate summary I'd say.

Of them, though, only one is the Prime Minister, and he's the one that set the whole ball in motion (and apparently against the expressed advice of some of his senior advisors). For that, for the lies about the constitutionality of a coalition that he's mouthed since and for the intense regional polarization that's sure to come if this continues he deserves the boot.

Pete

PS - Can anyone really believe that Ignatieff, Ray or Leblanc wanted this? Their long term prospects of being PM have diminshed considerably given the nightmare of governance that the nation's headed for.

Final results from the Globe & Mail Poll

Do you support the Liberal-NDP coalition's bid for power?

Yes 48% 22987 votes

No 52% 24537 votes

Hardly what one would call a vote of confidence for either party's position is it? Wouldn't it suggest that the best solution is likely to involve neither the coalition in power nor the Conservatives continuing under its present leadership?

[Fido]

Hardly what one would call a vote of confidence for either party's position is it?

Compare the number 48; the number of the people that do not support the coalition. with the ballyhooed number of 63% (or Dagger's 75%) that did not vote conservative a few weeks ago.

[BoomerPete]

Compare the number 48; the number of the people that do not support the coalition. with the ballyhooed number of 63% (or Dagger's 75%) that did not vote conservative a few weeks ago.

48% vs. 52% sure doesn't make the case that there is a substantial majority supporting either position. That's hardly a nation unified in outrage of the Liberals/NDP & Bloc as some here have suggested.

What it does show is that the Prime Minister has created an issue that's neatly divided the nation down the middle at the very moment that we need a leader capable of bringing us together to defeat a common enemy. Just brilliant leadership.

Pete

[Guest rattler]

48% vs. 52% sure doesn't make the case that there is a substantial majority supporting either position. That's hardly a nation unified in outrage of the Liberals/NDP & Bloc as some here have suggested.

What it does show is that the Prime Minister has created an issue that's neatly divided the nation down the middle at the very moment that we need a leader capable of bringing us together to defeat a common enemy. Just brilliant leadership.

Pete

At least 47,000 people took the time to answer the question and that is encouraging.

I think the results, which clearly show that the public is of two minds and illustrate the need for another election in which the people could be counted. I would rather see us spending 300 million or so on another election rather than billions on a rescue scheme that up to now is lacking any detail, time line or total cost.

As far as Harper creating the problem, there is no doubt he build the field but then the others came. So as far as I'm concerned all share the blame for where we are today. Harper 50%, Dion and Layton the other 50%. Can not assign any blame to the BLOC for taking their free ride (they have noting to lose and everything to gain).

Regarding the GG, I bet she will allow Harper to prorogue Parliament until Jan but with restrictions similar to those placed on a Government during an election period.

[Don Hudson]

"Just brilliant leadership."

Pete, no matter who supports who, no matter how this turns out, no matter what the rhetoric spouting from Ottawa from all, but especially the bobbing-and-weaving Prime Minister, (mind the body language, not the speech), and no matter who voted for who, that is the key to this entire disaster in governance - the most out-of-touch piece of stupid and reckless calculation by a political leader in recent memory.

Stephen Harper deserves to lose his job and disappear from Canadian politics, Flaherty needs to grow some balls, (an opportunity he will however, shortly lose), Dion and his team of incompetents need to sit in the corner with the dunce hats on, Layton needs to get rid of the stars in his eyes and Duceppe needs to stop feigning a collegial honesty.

By his speech yesterday, Harper has demonstrated he doesn't get what happened and what he did - divided the country as no other PM has. He has threatened democracy in Canada as no other leader has.

Funding for the parties has nothing to do with who they are or what persuasions they represent. The political parties are legitimately constituted and elected into Parliament. Removing funding is effectively removing a fundamental principle of a democracy. This is a principle which the Conservatives still don't get.

GG may prorogue this parliament but that would be a terrible decision that rewards the irresponsibility of this leader, even though she doesn't have the Constitutional authority to do so. Harper has lost the confidence of Parliament - ergo, things must continue. To prorogue, he gets away with this.

GG's earning her salary for the first time.

We'll spend the next month kicking tin, looking for the primary cause but we need look no further than the Prime Minister himself. The rest are details of partisan politics. We are now in uncharted democratic territory in the worst financial crisis since 1929. The Conservative Party has a great deal to answer for.

rattler;

"there is no doubt he build the field but then the others came. "

Of course they did. The Prime Minister had lost the confidence of the House and there was a vacuum of leadership - something had to be done. They did what was Constitutionally proper. Spin came later.

[AME]

Here's a bone nobody has dared pick up. The GG is going to be put in a position unseen since 1926, that of exercising her Royal Authority. Whether she likes it or not. Whatever she decides, she will put herself in a position of "Dammed if you do, dammed if you don't."

If she hands the Government over to the coalition, anything they promised to the Bloc will become a major issue for her, given her husband's former association with the FLQ

[BoomerPete]

At least 47,000 people took the time to answer the question and that is encouraging.

I think the results, which clearly show that the public is of two minds and illustrate the need for another election in which the people could be counted.  I would rather see us spending 300 million or so on another election rather than billions on a rescue scheme that up to now is lacking any detail, time line or total cost.

As far as Harper creating the problem, there is no doubt he build the field but then the others came.  So as far as I'm concerned all share the blame for where we are today.  Harper 50%, Dion and Layton the other 50%. Can not assign any blame to the BLOC for taking their free ride (they have noting to lose and everything to gain).

Regarding the GG, I bet she will allow Harper to prorogue Parliament until Jan but with restrictions similar to those placed on a Government during an election period.

rattler,

I see the meaning of those poll results differently, though I agree the number of respondents (I wasn't one actually) is impressive. With the nation split down the middle on this issue what a first past the post electoral system is likely to do is to substantially disenfranchise one of the two groups. How? Well, take a look at the last election. The Conservatives received only 37.6% of the popular vote and yet they received 46.4% of the seats in the House, a bump of almost 10%. A good part of this is due to vote splitting between the opposition parties in ridings where more voters opted for the Liberals or NDP (and in some cases the Greens) than for the Conservatives, but the Conservatives gained the seat. So, if we are to have an election framed around this issue it would only be valid if there were only two options, the acceptance or rejection of the coalition option on the table. Elections don't work that way, Stephen Harper knows it, and that's why he's so keen to have another election 3 months after the last.

A more appropriate democractic method would be to hold a referendum on the issue, but that is a process that measures public sentiment, it doesn't in itself change the law. And the law as it stands permits coalitions to govern. That an election is not warranted is clearly supported by a body of constitutional precedent and opinion, both in Canada and in England. It has been made clear that there is a body in existence within the House that has the support of a majority of the duly elected members from the recent election. To deny that body the right to form a government is to overturn the rules of our constitutional democracy at the moment when absolute adherence to the the law is most necessary for our governance to be seen as fair. What Harper is attempting to do is to rewrite constitutional law in mid stride in order to save his own skin. It is abhorent to watch.

On the matter of prorogation, Ed Schreyer's comments, as one of the most respected of past GG's are quite instructive. Yes he was an NDP'er and yes I'm sure he supports the coalition position, but that does not mean that his observations as one with clear insight into the issue are not sound. He sums up what's about to happen quite neatly:

“I'll put it this way and I will make this a plain-spoken sentence. Nothing should be done to aid and abet the evasion of submitting to the will of Parliament. I think one can stop there. It's about as basic as that.”

Just last week when this update was delivered the Prime Minister specifically stated in the House that a vote of confidence on the matter would take place in 8 days. The only thing that has changed since is that it now appears that it's a vote that the government will lose. With a new Parliament having just been convened, the only circumstances to justify prorogation would be a genuine national emergency, but as Mr. Schreyer says: “The only emergency seems to be a desire [of the Harper government] to avoid facing Parliament. That is not an emergency.”

What this prorogation is about is the evasion of the will of Parliament, nothing more. Granting it sets the stage for a month to two of attempted governance without representation while the public is bombarded with advertising intended to inflame regional prejudices in order to pressure the GG to change the rules of government and force the opposition to withdraw it's coalition.

Frankly, doing that, withdrawing the right of the people's representatives to meet in Parliament for months on purely partisan grounds is the real treasonous act here, not the attempt to form a government with the support of duly elected members, some of whom are from the Bloc. If we believe in this country, whatever our political stripes, we should be demanding that our constitutional laws be upheld without favour. I think it's time to understand that in his attempts to save himself some of the basic institutions of our constitutional democracy are being attacked by our own Prime Minister.

Pete

The Globe & Mail: One governor-general to another: Don't aid in evading Parliament's will

One governor-general to another: Don't aid in evading Parliament's will

Globe and Mail

Lawrence Martin

December 4, 2008 at 12:09 AM EST

The heat is on Governor-General Michaëlle Jean – and it's coming from a former governor-general.

Ed Schreyer said in an interview yesterday that granting a wish for the prorogation of Parliament at this point would constitute an evasion of the process of Parliament and should not be done.

“I'll put it this way and I will make this a plain-spoken sentence. Nothing should be done to aid and abet the evasion of submitting to the will of Parliament. I think one can stop there. It's about as basic as that.”

With a new Parliament having just opened, the only circumstances to justify prorogation, Mr. Schreyer said, would be a genuine emergency. “The only emergency seems to be a desire [of the Harper government] to avoid facing Parliament. That is not an emergency.”

Ms. Jean is under no obligation to listen to Mr. Schreyer, but his observations go to the heart of a problem she faces. No governor-general should be seen to be in the business of closing down Parliament for the crassly political reason of saving a government from almost certain defeat on a confidence motion.

The driving imperative of the Harper government's adjournment request is survival. Ms. Jean knows that last Friday the Prime Minister stood in the House of Commons foyer and announced that the opposition would be allowed a confidence vote on Dec. 8. She knows that his reason for wanting to renege on that vow is that he is likely to lose that vote. To grant prorogation could make her look complicit in the Prime Minister's political power play.

That's the type of thing, Mr. Schreyer said, that has to be avoided. Speaking of political neutrality, he said: “I regard that as the sine qua non of the office. … What the Governor-General must not do is start canvassing because that too quickly comes to destroy respectful neutrality, political neutrality.”

She must also consider the danger of setting an unacceptable precedent. Granting prorogation in dire circumstances for a government is tantamount to saying it should be granted at any time – that the governor-general should be a rubber stamp in the process. That means any time a minority Parliament is in trouble, facing a confidence vote, the prime minister could simply prorogue to head off the crisis.

Paul Martin could have done so in the fall of 2005 and avoided losing an election campaign that extended over Christmas. John Diefenbaker could have tried it in the early 1960s. Joe Clark could have tried it in 1979, though Mr. Schreyer said he's not sure he would have granted it.

Those leaders may have had second thoughts, realizing that the governor-general of the day might have turned them down. But with the precedent of a go-ahead for Mr. Harper, why would any future PM hesitate?

Mr. Schreyer, who served as NDP premier of Manitoba, was appointed governor-general by Pierre Trudeau in 1979. He later campaigned for the NDP in the 1999 Manitoba election. While his political bias is clear, he said he was speaking from the point of view of his experience at Rideau Hall. He said he didn't want to get into giving advice to Ms. Jean, but his strong views will certainly be interpreted as such.

In an earlier interview with the CBC, Mr. Schreyer, who favours the Liberal-NDP coalition being allowed to form a government, would not give his view on prorogation, saying he hadn't yet thought it through. But that has become the critical issue. Many are talking as though the die is cast, that the Governor-General is very likely to accept the Prime Minister's request to adjourn Parliament. The prevailing sentiment appears to be that Ms. Jean will, indeed, grant prorogation, that a timeout is needed, that cooler heads should prevail – until late January.

This could well be the solution for the Harper Conservatives. By then, with the Prime Minister outfoxing the opposition at every turn, they might be able to put this crisis to bed. The Conservatives have gained ground over the past two days with an impressive blitzkrieg of demagoguery, painting the opposition deal as a separatist coalition. Mr. Harper, whose Conservatives have had many close ties to the Bloc Québécois, went so far yesterday as to label the opposition pact “a plan to destroy Canada.”

The Liberals, meantime, have been woefully inadequate in Question Period, steamrollered by the Tory onslaught. They've missed a golden opportunity to paint Mr. Harper as a coward running away from his promise of a confidence vote.

Given a few weeks time, the Conservatives will be able to flesh out an economic plan while bombarding the airwaves with their propaganda machine. The coalition will see its support fritter away. Their only chance is to strike now. They had better hope Michaëlle Jean listens to Ed Schreyer.