[*Dominique*]

So, as expected, PM Harper has asked GG Jean to prorogue Parliament, and she's agreed, effectively suspending our government until Jan. 26.

It was expected. She works for him and will go with what he says. I personally think it was a mistake because we all know the reason she did is to let Harper avoid that confidence vote and not the well being of the Canada/Population. I think Harper is an hungry power man that cannot face it when someone says something against him. He basically acted like a big baby. Just because the key is on the door until January doesn't mean that people will trust him more. I didn't vote for him so I was hoping he would go down.

The anti-separatists sentiment that comes from the Harper and a lot of the West will have horrible effect on the next federal election.

[Mio]

If there is an election come January, there will be another minority government. We're already have three minority governments and we will have a forth.

I personally think Harper is an idiot, but I voted Conservative for a number of reasons. One, was because even though I have voted Liberal in all federal elections I refused to vote this year for Dion.

[Mio]

Oops, double posted and didn't know it!

[sunnykerr]

Bleh. This reminds me of when Kings (and Queens) of England would suspend parliament because the barons wouldn't do as told.

Oh, well.

I'm sure it'll be yet another minority government myself, but if Ignatieff wins the Liberal leadership, I have to hope that the Liberal could/would give the Conservatives an actual run for their money.

I'm NDP myself, so I'm not saying that out of deep abiding love for the Liberal party. I just feel like, right now, people are either voting for the Conservatives or against the Conservatives, with the four other parties splitting that vote.

And I'd just wish that we'd have a real confrontation.

[dayne]

It's hilarious that Harper labels the coalition as "undemocratic". Last time I checked, Canada had a parliamentary-based structure of government. There is always the possibility of a majority, minority, or coalition based government. If the ruling government loses the confidence of the majority of our elected representatives, they no longer have the mandate to govern.

Now, just when I thought that he couldn't sink low enough (i.e. with his proposed budget), he has parliament suspended. He has stomped on a truly democratic proccess and the rights of our elected representatives just to keep his hold on power like some autocratic dictator. Not only that, it delays the infusion of much needed funds to infuse our economy. Shame on Jean Michelle for letting Harper get away with this.

The sad thing is that now the conservatives will use their vast financial resources to blitz the public with their manipulative propaganda until parliament resumes at the end of January. My guess is that public opinion by then will be firmly against any sort of coalition government. The cash-strapped Grits, NDP's, and even the Bloc need to find a find a way of conveying their message.

[stumps101]

I find it all a bit of a joke honestly. I think agreeing to postpone the session was a very bad move too. So now we have a PM who's basically running away.

[Laurababora]

I agree, Harper was wrong when he called it "undemocratic" because it technically isn't. However in terms of the confidence of the majority, I heard that there are some Liberal MPs who are not comfortable with the idea of this coalition government and that they may cross the floor to the Conservative Party. If they do I believe from the number I heard that would give the Conservative party a majority? I'm still not really sure about how that works out but I had heard something like that on the news the other night.

Technically what Harper did in proroguing Parliament is perfectly legal and democratic. May have pissed off a bunch of people but he has a right to do it and most people were expecting him to do it anyway. I don't really get how that makes him a dictator because I'm sure if the Liberals or the NDP were in the same position they would do it too.

Yes, it delays the infusion of funds and I agree that we need those funds but I'd rather have a delay and (hopefully) have a Conservative government come out of this mess than have a Liberal-NDP-Bloc coalition government come in and spend tons of money trying to save the economy and pull us into a deficit. That's my fear about this coalition government, especially since its been said that this coalition is mostly the idea of the NDP and the Liberals are just tagging along. If the economy is going to be as bad as everyone is saying it will be, I don't think spending lots of money is going to help and I can see this coalition government doing that.

I think I could have supported a Liberal-NDP-Bloc coalition if 1)Dion wasn't the leader and the Liberal party got their stuff figured out before agreeing to the coalition and 2)if it didn't seem that this coalition was being lead by Jack Layton and the NDP instead of what is supposed to be a Liberal lead party. I like Jack, don't get me wrong and I like his ideas but I just don't see how it would be possible to not go into massive debt with everything he wants to implement.

I'm also kind of pissed off with how Harper has gone about dealing with this coalition and how he's constantly refering to the Bloc as "separatists" and how the Liberals and NDP are in bed with them. I get that its a good strategy to get English Canadians to back his party but anyone in their right mind would realize its just going to bring up the issue of sovereignty which hasn't been a real issue in years. Now, the Conservatives will have to deal with this mess if they can get out of the mess with the coalition government first.

[*Dominique*]

Technically what Harper did in proroguing Parliament is perfectly legal and democratic.

Yes but it was still for selfish reasons. We all know he did not want to face the confidence vote and he wants more time to make his own very horrible propaganda. He does not want to face the fact that he is not wanted anymore. It was a very bad move to agree to his demand. Michelle Jean has showed the population that she is a very weak general governor. I would love for her to explain herself and tell me a good reason why she agreed.

[*Ledi*]

It's hard for me to describe just how angry I feel about the GG's decision to support Harper.

[Laurababora]

Originally Posted by *Dominique* (View Post) Yes but it was still for selfish reasons. We all know he did not want to face the confidence vote and he wants more time to make his own very horrible propaganda. He does not want to face the fact that he is not wanted anymore. It was a very bad move to agree to his demand. Michelle Jean has showed the population that she is a very weak general governor. I would love for her to explain herself and tell me a good reason why she agreed.

She has to agree with the Prime Minister. She acts on the advice of the Prime Minister. She could refuse. I believe it was done once before but that ended up making things worse. So she really wasn't in a position to refuse.

And I believe that the Coalition government was done for selfish reasons. Mainly on the part of the NDP party. Jack Layton was constantly saying how he was going to be PM during the election, so it wouldn't surprise me if he was behind the coalition thing, which most commentators on the news are saying.

I'm pretty sure that there are quite alot of people who still want Harper in, me included. Lets not forget the people who voted him back in. Why should those people have their vote taken away just because Jack Layton wants a chance to play PM? And aside from that, I'm curious how people who voted Liberal or NDP or Bloc can be happy that two other leaders will be gaining power too that they didn't vote for?

[*Ledi*]

Originally Posted by Laurababora (View Post) She has to agree with the Prime Minister. She acts on the advice of the Prime Minister. She could refuse. I believe it was done once before but that ended up making things worse. So she really wasn't in a position to refuse. And I believe that the Coalition government was done for selfish reasons. Mainly on the part of the NDP party. Jack Layton was constantly saying how he was going to be PM during the election, so it wouldn't surprise me if he was behind the coalition thing, which most commentators on the news are saying. I'm pretty sure that there are quite alot of people who still want Harper in, me included. Lets not forget the people who voted him back in. Why should those people have their vote taken away just because Jack Layton wants a chance to play PM? And aside from that, I'm curious how people who voted Liberal or NDP or Bloc can be happy that two other leaders will be gaining power too that they didn't vote for?

If people feel as though their votes are being taken away, then maybe they should protest and be against our actual system instead of the coalition?

We are happy about it because we want a government that will 1) get things done and 2) won't be so partisan. We also really want Stephen Harper to disappear because he's unfit to lead our country for so, so many reasons.

We voted for our representatives because we trust them to make the right decisions regarding our country. So if they feel as though this is the right decision to make, then why would we be unhappy about it? I mean, after all, we did give them the power to do be able to do this. That is, 62% of us compared to 38% of those who gave their support to the Conservatives.

[sm_love_dc]

There are alot of lessons here for sure. I am not a fan of the situation that we are in. I am not sure if nothoing beening done is better than something being done. The solutions are not easy ones. I run a store in Alberta where, hmmm, Steven Harper is next to god. There is so much talk about the fact that Alberta has the lowest jobless rate but that is not entirely true.

We are running the buisness -14% down to last year. So yes I have not had to let people go, but last year these same people were recieving 40 hours a week and now they are at 27. So they may have a job but they are not able to make ends meat.

Someone came into the store today and I was alone and this person said, 'oh your not bussy hey, its because of that coalition, when will they ever learn?' I have to say to that woman, 'No, we have not been busy since this summer.' Ever since Canadians saw what was happening in the US.

Now, it may not be Harpers fault that the economic downturn occurred, but I think his inabilty to understand that when times get hard every vote counts. So if a MP has been ellected in a riding as a NDP, Liberal, or Bloc then their concerns should matter as much as if it had been a Torie riding. Each of these members represent a different economic challenge across Canada.

The Conservatives were unwilling to make this happen, what was the other side going to do. Put aside anyones feeling about Dion, there are alot of smart Liberal and NDP members that are willing to work towards a solution. But this cannot be done with the Harper government. There has been no time in this PM time in office where he has been expected to communitcate what his government plans to do. He needs to change his tune right now or else he will not be remembered kindly.

I worry that in the interm of this 'cooling off period' there will be more lay-offs and right before Christmas. There will be no confidence in the Canadian market. That is not good for the industries or internal retail organizations. Retail is the first to go in a situations like this.

I wish that the election that had just occured had more intrest in economic matters, this election should have been about the here and now. What is your solution, not I can shoot a puck while being photographed. That may have been Canadians fault though, we were not ready to fully accept the the economic facts around us. I wonder of those voters that had lost their jobs due to the ecomic downturn, who voted for whom? They were in the middle of a large personal crisis, whom did they think had the answers to economic situations?

We say that we wanted canidates that where more like the American model, but really I would settle for ones with real solutions that knew how to get their idesa out there. Not just some political spin that looks good on the 5 o'clock news.

All I remember about the Harper campaign was that Dion was like the Devil. That is not a solution. Sorry I cannnot vote for people who do not have at least some solution to the problem.

And by the way does Harper not have economics major?

As for Dion, well he knows that this is do or die time for him. He is not stupid about about the countries feelings for him. So why do this? Beacuse he has too. It is as simple as that. He has been elected the leader of a party in a democtraic society, and has exersied a democratic right as a member of parilment, same goes for Layton.

As for Harper? If he foes not come up with a solution by January I am sorry, but that is not the defintion of a leader. Come on, even G. Bush's government has come up with some, might not be entirely right, solutions. If Harper does not come up with the right plan it may mark the end of the Canadian middle class. He better get the best minds in Canadian economic polices toghter, I don't care if they have ever voted or live and breath Conservative teachings or live on a boat in the middle of the ocean, and come up with some thing.

[*Dominique*]

When the GG decided to let Harper run free and not face the music like any real adult would have to, she took my vote away. I didn't want Harper when I voted in October and I do not want him more right now. The Parliament could have changed things around and maybe not bring perfect leaders but better leaders than the big baby that is Harper. The GG played it safe for her job and Harper's job but not for the population. I will never ever support Harper and even more so now with what he did and also what he said about the Quebecois. He has divided the country even more and I hope people show him how they feel when we have to elect our new PM. By this time, Dion will probably be gone so Harper will have an harder time getting in I believe. In a minority government, there is no real leader. You cannot lead like you are the only one in control. Harper has shown that he is selfish and he will hide when things don't go his way.

The coalition might have come up for selfish reasons (like Dion wanting to show off and maybe secure his place among the Liberals) but the real reason was not selfish. Harper has shown that he doesn't want to deal with a minority government and he will do anything to push the non conservatives aside. We voted for a minority government and there is a reason for that and it is not to let Harper push our representatives away so he can do whatever he wants. When he heard about the coalition, Harper should have asked them to sit down and talk and come up with something. Is that what he did? No... He went on a propaganda and how he will do anything to protect his government. He is a dangerous leader IMO.

[Laurababora]

Originally Posted by *Ledi* (View Post) If people feel as though their votes are being taken away, then maybe they should protest and be against our actual system instead of the coalition? We are happy about it because we want a government that will 1) get things done and 2) won't be so partisan. We also really want Stephen Harper to disappear because he's unfit to lead our country for so, so many reasons. We voted for our representatives because we trust them to make the right decisions regarding our country. So if they feel as though this is the right decision to make, then why would we be unhappy about it? I mean, after all, we did give them the power to do be able to do this. That is, 62% of us compared to 38% of those who gave their support to the Conservatives.

Whoa, ok. I may be against the coalition but I'm in no way against our system. And I think its unfair to say that.

I also want a government that will get things done and yes, I agree that Harper hasn't completely lived up to that but I am highly doubtful that a Liberal party, that needs desperately to just get together and work through the problems that they've had ever since Martin was brought down, along with an NDP party who appears to just want power can acheive this. I believe that they will just make things worse. As much as it might seem to come off in what I write but I do not think that Stephan Harper is god, I just think he's the most competent to run this country. That's JMO.

As for trust in representatives, the Liberal party doesn't even have trust in Dion. He was third choice in selecting a leader at the last Liberal convention and they never once backed him up when his image was being ripped to shreds during the campaign. I have a hard time placing trust in someone who is seen this way by his own party. I think its really time that the Liberal party put Iggy in as Leader. He was the obvious choice during the convention and is the obvious choice now. I'm just curious but does anyone know why they are choosing to pick a new leader in May instead of sooner? Why the long wait?

And I don't think the GG played it safe. She just did her job. Like I said before, a GG has only really refused the advise of the PM like once or twice in our long history as a country. I don't think there was much she could do.

I agree, instead of Harper spewing all this talk about separatists and stuff like that, he really should have sat down to talk with the leaders. And I think if Iggy was leader of the Liberal party and had more control over the coalition something could have been worked out. I would have still liked to see him do the same thing with Dion, Layton and Duceppe but I think at this point there is so much hate between Dion, Layton and Harper that I don't think much would have gotten accomplished. I really wish politics in Canada were more like in the US in the way that it doesn't get so personal there after the election. I mean, and I could be wrong about this, but didn't McCain offer to help Obama if he needed during his term?

sm_love_dc- I believe Harper does have a degree in Economics.

[Raonaild]

Originally Posted by Laurababora (View Post) Technically what Harper did in proroguing Parliament is perfectly legal and democratic.

Legal perhaps, but democratic? When the leader of a minority government gets an unelected official to suspend Parliament so a majority of elected officials can't vote against said minority government? Doesn't seem particularly democratic to me.

Then again, I sympathize with the GG. I think all of her options were bad, and proroguing Parliament for 6 weeks was the least objectionable of the options. If she'd denied the request, if she as an unelected representative of the Queen had denied the request of the elected Prime Minister, that wouldn't be particularly democratic either. I think that, giving in to the Conservatives on this will give her more credibility later on if she turns around and allows the coalition to form the government rather than calling an election. It looks like she's not picking favourites, that she's trying to be fair to all sides.

Originally Posted by *Dominique* (View Post) The anti-separatists sentiment that comes from the Harper and a lot of the West will have horrible effect on the next federal election.

Not directed particularly at you, but I find it odd in this debate how people talk about "The West" like it's one thing. I think most of the time people are talking about Alberta, because here in the West of the West (Vancouver), attitudes are quite a bit different, particularly in the urban areas. Around here, there were several ridings where the Conservatives won seats without winning the majority of the votes, because the left was split between NDP/Liberal/Green, and the NDP received more of the popular vote than the Liberals did. Most of the folks I know around here who know about politics think the coalition should be given a chance.

As far as the anti-separatist sentiment from Harper, I remember one political pundit this week saying something like Harper took an economic crisis and instigated a new national unity crisis (attacking the BQ) and a new constitutional crisis (telling the GG to prorogue Parliament to avoid a confidence vote) within the space of a week. I don't even want to think about what other trouble he may cause before Jan. 26.

Another smart thing I heard a pundit say this week is that we're going to be having minority governments for the foreseeable future, so our MPs are going to have to find a way to make them work one way or another. There's a truism in Canadian politics that you can't form a majority government without Quebec, and it seems from the rhetoric over the last few weeks that Harper has given up on trying to win seats in that province.