Wednesday, November 17, 2010

Wow, the Blogging Tories on the Unelected Senate

It's deafening. I didn't expect this much fall out.


The Conservative Party of Canada: We expect the other parties to deliver on accountability.

18 comments:

CanadianSense said...

Why did 15 Liberal Senators fail to show up for work and pass the Bill?

Jim (Progressive Right) said...

Really? That's your argument? That's the best you got?

Jim (Progressive Right) said...

“We don’t believe an unelected body should in anyway be blocking an elected body,” [Stephen Harper] told a news conference in Calgary … “We are looking for the opportunity to elect senators, but if at some point it becomes clear some senators are not going to be elected, the government will name senators to ensure that the elected will of the House of Commons and the people of Canada is reflected in the Senate.”

I, for one, am glad the elected will of the House is being reflected by the single biggest hypocrite elected Prime Minister this country has ever seen.

CanadianSense said...

How is pointing out the Globe is providing cover for Liberals who don't show up for work?

If you don't show up for work do you expect to get paid?

I would encourage you contact the Liberal leadership and demand they show up for work and vote for legislation that they support.

That is how our system works. Do you think Liberals can mail in their votes?

Dylan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Dylan said...

CanadianSense, is it an abuse of power for unelected Conservatives to call a snap vote on a bill that has the support of the House of Commons when they know their Liberal colleagues are absent? Or is that just part of "the game?"

As I suspected, CPC supporters justify this flagrant hypocrisy as being a "spoonful of medicine" for Liberals. And to think, all they needed to do was sell out their principles!

sassy said...

unaware of what the phrase "snap vote" means

CanadianSense said...

It is an "abuse of power" for Senators who show up for work that vote against the fringe parties policies of the NDP and Bloc?

Perhaps if Liberals in Parliament and Senate did not skip so many key votes or keep the confidence of the Conservative government: Canadians would have an opportunity to test your theory.

46% of Canadians felt the palace coup attempt by three stooges was undemocratic in December 2008.

Apparently the Senate that is no longer controlled by Liberals is now "unelected".

This is very easy to resolve. Contact the coalition parties and have them remove confidence on this government.

Best of luck!

Karma or payback may leave a bitter taste.

Democratic Reform is an option the left had ignored for years. Now it has come home to roost.

BTW: I would support abolishing the Senate to save money and adding the MPs to Ontario, AB and BC.

Dylan said...

"It is an "abuse of power" for Senators who show up for work that vote against the fringe parties policies of the NDP and Bloc?"

How quickly do CPC supporters forget their party is made up of two former fringe parties whose combined national support constitutes roughly 1/3rd of Canadians. That's no ringing endorsement either.

Last time I checked, two wrongs do not make a right. Your comments only adds fuel to the suspicions that Harper will act vengefully against progressives if given the chance of a majority government.

Lastly, I don't buy your "abolish the Senate" bit for one second. If you were a Senate abolitionist, today's scandal would be another feather in your cap against the kind of partisan bullshit that keeps the House from enacting the will of the people. Instead, you relish in a hollow victory which has set back legislation supported by 62% of Canadians. Last time I checked that's a real majority.

CanadianSense said...

Dylan can you show me the ballot in 2008 where you voted for a coalition party platform?

Nice try adding up all the parties. Why did MI throw Dion under the bus in December and reject in January 2009?

He called it a three legged stool in May (book signing tour) he was in France for the holidays.

Jack and Dion denied it and attacked each other platform.

You bring up the old parties and hidden agenda to scare us. Really?

Check with Kevin Page on those scary big ticket items.

Liberals gutted them and this government is restoring those deep cuts.

I am curious if you truly cared about Education, Social Services and Health you would be voting for the Conservative. (Their budgets reflect it the priorities)

You can quibble about glow sticks or a reflective pool that cost $ 57k.

The PBO and AG back up where the money is going and as a result Canada is moving forward better than any other developed country in the G7.

It is a shame in your quest to play small politics you attack our military, our diplomats, our public servants that are doing the work.

What do you have against these people?

Dylan said...

"Dylan can you show me the ballot in 2008 where you voted for a coalition party platform?"

That's cute. I remember my first talking points...

"It is a shame in your quest to play small politics you attack our military, our diplomats, our public servants that are doing the work.

What do you have against these people?"

These people? You mean people like Richard Colvin, Munir Sheikh, and Pat Stogran?

CanadianSense said...

You cited three people and ignored hundreds if not thousands doing the hard work in the field.

Where are those damning reports from the PBO or AG?

Are all those in the field "puppets" vs. the 3 - 10 you can cite the champions of truth?

Looks like your champions are in a very small "protest" group.

I do applaud the obsession with logic of hanging in with less than 10 people as the only gospel truth. The left are fanatical when facts don't match their belief system.

It is a shame you choose to ignore the good work of so many people to play small politics.

Ignatieff and Rae stepped up on Afghanistan finally. Looks like those in need won't be abandoned by the herbivores in the cheap seats.

Dylan said...

"It is a shame you choose to ignore the good work of so many people to play small politics."

This is fantastic! Strawmen and decoys, exactly what I would expect from a blogging con.

Small politics, CanadianSense, is being selective with your memory and principles on Senate Reform and then diverting the conversation to a "you don't support our men and women on the ground" argument. Where did the conversation go?

But I'll play, just to see how you can spin all this.

No, there are no "puppets" behind Colvin, Sheikh, and Stogran. And these mere mortals are, or should I say, were, civilians whose expertise and hard work elevanted them to the highest levels of our government, with superior knowledge of the inner-workings of their department and elite access to information. The shakedowns they went though and subsequent resignations are telling not of their own personal beliefs, but the actions of this government towards their departments and the experts who remain in said departments on the field.

This isn't simply MY opinion, but also the shared testimony of others who were once part of the Canadian civil service and have publicly come out to condemn the attitudes of Harper and his caucus. Lastly, I have profound respect for the people in the field who can swallow their gut instincts and follow through with whatever Jason Kenney or Lisa Raitt says should be done. I didn't drag the civil service in to the debate and use them as a shield against my weak position, you did. Shame on you.

wilson said...

Dylan asks:
'is it an abuse of power for unelected Conservatives to call a snap vote on a bill that has the support of the House of Commons when they know their Liberal colleagues are absent? ..

Maybe you know by now Dylan, from watching Power and Politics with Solomon,
that the vote was not called by the Cons Senators,
it was called by LIBERAL Senators in error.

new question:
When the Liberal Senate mistakenly calls a bill to vote,
with 15 of their Liberal Senators absent,
do you play nice or do you kill the bill?

You kill the bill.

Perhaps more Liberal Senators should show up for work,
so when someone makes this big a booboo, there are enough Liberals at work to fix it.

CanadianSense said...

Wilson dont be too hard on Dylan. He has a difficult time with the big picture. He sounds like a young idealist who just spilled his hot chocolate.

He may have thought politics was a squishy feel good activity with hugs for everyone.

Those Liberal Senators and Liberal MPs are too busy to vote or show up for work and the Conservatives should be more forgiving for their weakness and poor planning.

Dylan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Dylan said...

Bullseye Wilson. You did it. When I also watched Power and Politics I seemed to have my ears and eyes shut.

Or, wait...wait one minute... there's a audio transcript which indicates no one calling a vote and all I saw on Evan Solomon's program was a couple of Senators who disagree in the interpretation of someone merely standing up. Marjory LeBretton says they "jumped up, demanding a vote" while Mitchell himself said he called for the bill to go to committee to be debated. If Mitchell shifted in his seat, if he was picking a wedgie, if he had to go use the washroom - would any of those signs have been adequate to call a vote? Maybe. And that's what's being investigated by the Senate Speaker - the procedural loophole that got the Senators into this mess in the first place.

And while we can debate the merits of parliamentary procedure there are two questions which Solomon stated so eloquently:

1.) Is the senate obliged to debate something that has the support of the majority of the House of Commons?

And 2.) Does it give an undemocratic precedent, I guess that is the question. You may have the right to do that but does it set an undemocratic precedent top do that without debating the merits of the bill.

To answer both, I would argue, as the Senate is the chamber of sober second thought, that yes - they do have an obligation. And when you have the opportunity to act on the spoken words of an individual, which would send the bill to committee; or interpret their physical actions, which would allow the CPC majority to kill the bill - which road do you take? Thinking about the role in which the Senate is supposed to play in our system of governance, I think we would all agree that due process (debate within the committee, a third vote in the House and then a final vote in the Senate) is the proper course. Or at least, it ought to be the proper course for EVERY piece of legislation.

And yes, it does set an undemocratic president since every patriot would be in agreement that legislation should be passed or defeated in the House of Commons by our elected representatives and our Senators should act as the "sober second thought" and recommend changes, revisions and/or additions to legislation which ultimately needs the support of a majority of the elected representatives in the HoC. And all this is to say, or reiterate, a very small-c CONSERVATIVE position on the role of the Senate. How quickly do your memories fade?

I'm not losing any sleep on this issue. The bigger picture is already being painted as we speak. With the government colouring the political landscape with brushstrokes from embarrassing missteps on the international stage, the closed UAE base, an inflated sole-sourced F35 contract, and a ballooning deficit.

Have a good one gentlemen, your clock is ticking.

Anonymous said...

"The bigger picture is already being painted as we speak. With the government colouring the political landscape with brushstrokes from embarrassing missteps on the international stage, the closed UAE base, an inflated sole-sourced F35 contract, and a ballooning deficit."

The Liberal track record on these issues would be much worse.