Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bossnass
As much as a minority should comprise, they are still the largest single power. I think the problem lies with the smallest parties (in many cases, the NDP) who represent a relativity small proportion of Canadians, having more than proportional influence. A minority government should not be held hostage and impotent.
|
The NDP represents far more of Canada than you give them credit for. Based on the popular vote, they actually have a less than proportional influence. In the 2006 election the NDP received 29 seats with 17.5% of the popular vote. The bloc got 51 on 10.5% of the popular vote, while the Conservatives got 124 on 36.3% of the popular vote. This is a byproduct of our electoral system, not of the support Canadians have.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bossnass
Non-conservatives have called every potential confidence vote as a ploy for an election for the last two years. I'll reiterate the simple idea that this wouldn't be an issue if it was believed that they would lose the next election.
|
Sorry for the grammar Nazi, but it's a pet peeve. In any case, until recently Canadians wouldn't have tolerated another election. There were no significant issues that should have pushed us to an election, until now. Quite frankly no, I don't think the Liberals will win, but I don't think the Conservatives will get a majority either. The elections will be a huge waste of time and money when nothing will get accomplished and we will be back where we were before, with time wasted on an election that could have been used to work towards an egalitarian solution.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Bossnass
I agree that there should be more clarity and transparency. In no small part, there isn't enough due to the tenuous nature of a having a minority. That said, anti-harper leftist rants detract from a reasonable discussion. Tangents on the criminal system included.
|
Note I edited out my tangent because I realized it was pointless to the current discussion. The transparency issue is key when we're still licking our wounds from the sponsorship scandal that showed what happens behind closed doors when you don't know what's going on in your government.
On the transparency issue, I'll leave it to Rick Mercer to sum it up better than I ever could:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rick Mercer
In fact in the two years since they've formed the government, the words "Harper government" and "communicate" have never appeared in the same sentence without the word "won't" in the middle. Now granted, first goin' off, this was a bit of breath of fresh air coming off the Liberals where you couldn't turn on the TV without seeing some cabinet minister on there blathering on about whatever their department was up to.
But with Harper, the pendulum has swung the other way. He doesn't have cabinet ministers so much as he has chalk outlines on the sidewalk. And to be successful in Harper's Cabinet you have to abide by the three D's: don't see, don't hear, don't say. If Helen Keller were alive today, she could have any job she wanted. They promised accountability, they've delivered invisibility.
You could take a hundred bucks, you could stand on a any street corner in Canada, offer people five bucks if they can name three cabinet ministers off the top of their head – double their money if they can name the minister of health. At the end of the day you'd still have enough money for dinner and a movie. Which is exactly the way Stephen Harper likes it. As far as he's concerned, good government is out of sight and out of mind. And fine, that might make his life easier, but he's gotta remember, the conservatives were hired to run this country, not to hide from it. And these things, they come in threes: out of sight, out of mind, could mean out of office.
|