Constitutional Crisis In Canada - Above Politics SE01

An Above Politics Special Edition that digs deeper in the recent political crisis in Canada with ATS member GAOTU789 and hear why the Prime Minister of Canada asked the Governor General to shut down parliament and the constitutional questions this all raises.




length: 14:09
file: atsmix_3180.mp3
size: 4976k
feed: atsmix

International Reporters wanted for The Above Politics Show thread

The Above Politics Show Web Site


[edit on 12/26/2008 by Dave Rabbit]

Something worth downloading to my Ipod. Excellent job Guys.

Makes you think if Canada will survive as in current form, and just how long before parts of Canada actively plan to break away. I have seen threads on ATS with the idea that Western Canada should break away.

And of course, there have been calls for Quebec to break away.

I for one can not see the logic of those who want to break Canada up. What would this achieve and could for example, Quebec finance its self?

I really like the "Insider" angle from GAOTU789...

When are we getting the Update?

reply to post by darkangel831


i to come from Canada and our government has done nothing for the people of this land for the last 30 years other that screw all of us. as to the government being shut down by the governor general who is the queens representative as the queen is only the figure head of Canada-don`t bet on it as she gets more respect from the people up here than we give our government.
now that the queens rep has spoken the only logical thing to do is call in the queen and our elected officials and all other parties are done , we the people need to be heard once again as the Canadian government has never listened to any one.
their childish game of king of the hill has come to an end ,i quit playing it when i was 10 to 12 it seems these children never grew up. as it stands we have 4 or 5 parties elected to office whether with or without a majority this is also known as a [COALITION ] or don't the children on the hill know it -sorry they all want the throne as the king of the hill .
to the queens rep. call in the QUEEN as this is the only option now open to you as the government has COLLAPSED and it can`t be fixed-your majesty we need your help!
signed
WE THE PEOPLE

This was a terrible interview lol...

I live in Canada, and in Calgary; Which is Stephen Harpers riding.
You cannot join a coalition with a Separatist party lol.

Harper won, let Steve do what he must..
No one will do a better job, at this time.

Originally posted by xbranscombex
This was a terrible interview lol...

I live in Canada, and in Calgary; Which is Stephen Harpers riding.
You cannot join a coalition with a Separatist party lol.

Harper won, let Steve do what he must..
No one will do a better job, at this time.

I voted for harper and he was my guy. Then, he blackmailed the others into forming a coalition, which put them in the bad "light". He is no longer my guy, as that's the kind of shady stuff I hate. Not "look me in the eyes" stuff at all. Also tho, the liberals made a horrible mistake in stephane dion. I'd never let that geeky little weasel face rep me. Imagine him bargaining with hardasses from overseas??? he just seemed like spoiled little brat.
I'm in edmonton, and we wont separate while the price of gas is so low....

The so-called coalition was the saddest joke in Canadian politics in almost 100 years.

Dion was soundly rejected by his own party, as well as voters and he almost became PM with the backing of the traitors in the Bloc.
(The NDP don't count because they are actually lost Liberals)

They never stood a chance because our GG had the strength and brains to stop this little coup detat in it's tracks. Perhaps she was able to draw a parallel to other countries history and decided Canadians were being used by a bunch better suited to cleaning the latrines on Parliament hill rather than using them.

That's for another day.

There was never a risk to our system of government, those that would say there was a chance in hell of it happening, simply have no clue of what they speak.

The opinion that a coalition of leftist Liberals and New democrats would almost make sense if the fiscal priorities of the parties were even remotely similar. As a matter of fact, the Liberals under Dion were very vocal about this during the election. They are just too far apart on all the important issues. Add to the fray the Block Quebecois (a separatist party) that has as a goal the breakup of Canada, and you have a coalition that would not only tear apart the country, but would put the federal government and all of the provinces in the pour house.

It could just never work to the advantage of "We the People".

Alright being a Canadian who lives on the side of the country people don't know exist *cough* (New Brunswick) i can say with all certainty, that our government is most likely the most unresponsive government in the world.

I mean come on, they say were laid back, your damn right we are.....40% of the population doesn't vote, we have a Prime Minister (Harper) who would rather George run the country for him, and an economic crisis they're watching as if it was a made for tv movie.

Stephen Harper has done nothing but place us at the American Breast suckling ALLLL THE WAY BABY!
Then again Dion can't talk his way out of a paper bag either. I dunno most Canadians just don't care, the ones that do, the older generation, fear change, so nothing gets done.

It's time for a new wave of politics in Canada, run by the youth, not the old, nostalgic, un-motivated government we have now.

And as far as the Coalition is concerned, thats not a good idea either, because if it does take place, it'll be a free for all for the parties, just battling back and forth the issues at hand. Quebec will most likely have another referendum, and if it doesn't get any better they'll win and seperate. They want to keep the currency, but that would be a whole other thing in itself.

The only reason Harper put everything on hold is so he could steal ideas from other parties and form a *Cushion* plan so he doesn't loose the confidence vote, kinda smart, but kinda dumb at the same time.

Is this just happening in Canada? I for one am a Canadian, and up here we find that it's crawling up from the United States, and we're being hit with the economic crisis and downfall. And not only is there people wanting us to break off, but there are people really truly believing that America will break off. I was on YouTube the other day, and there are a few videos about people's theories of America breaking off also.

So what will happen, do you think?

It would require some crazy type of situation for any of the states or provinces to separate from they're countries.

I figure the new administration will do their part in trying to fix the economic crisis, it may help, but it probably won't. Meantime in Canada, if Stephen Harper loses his confidence vote and the Coalition is formed, it'll help quell some of the smaller issues facing the individual provinces, but i won't fix the overall problems that we bear day in and day out.

It's gonna get really ugly before it gets any better. There is no clear cut solution to any of our problems right now in NA.

Also i think if there were to be a separation if would only come after the collapse of the NAU, if that ever happens. It's the only way people would feel as though they needed to be seperate to operate the way they would want to operate.

After seeing unity fall into ruins the only other logical solution would be seperation. ( not that i think it so, but the general population isn't that smar either)

With the economic situation of North America what is is now, about the last thing that will happen will be any form of separation.

Even in good economic times a separation would entail assuming the astronomic expense of losing shared resources and revenues. Billions
would be needed in loans and securities to set up even the most basic infrastructures like social services, power, transportation, communication,
etc. For starters, you'd have to buy your own oil.

An isolated but autonomous Quebec in 5 years would look like Gaza.


MF

What it amounts to is the nwo, or planned assault on liberties in the US. Obviously still on or Harper wouldn't have called an election just one year after his election, so dissatisfied with his minority that he went for a majority and lost that, still a minority. People say he won 2 elections. He's only been in for a relatively short while, sorry. Now he did a transparent move within a couple months to force another election. Having a temper tantrum is he?

Canada is not folding. He can leave anytime, bon voyage Harpur!

I think he was hoping for a majority to slam in the soon to rear its ugly head codex food rules, which aren't even going down in Canada.


[edit on 1-1-2009 by mystiq]

Originally posted by mystiq
What it amounts to is the nwo, or planned assault on liberties in the US. Obviously still on or Harper wouldn't have called an election just one year after his election, so dissatisfied with his minority that he went for a majority and lost that, still a minority. People say he won 2 elections. He's only been in for a relatively short while, sorry. Now he did a transparent move within a couple months to force another election. Having a temper tantrum is he?

Canada is not folding. He can leave anytime, bon voyage Harpur!

I think he was hoping for a majority to slam in the soon to rear its ugly head codex food rules, which aren't even going down in Canada.


[edit on 1-1-2009 by mystiq]

My first impulse is just to laugh at this spin on something you apparently have no handle on, but I see this type of response all over ATS.

Nothing personal.

You have no comprehension how Candian parliament works or what has been happening here. Since the country was formed with it's Briitsh style constitution, governments have been formed and fallen due to what we call non-confidence, a lack of clear majority in the upper house.

Harper doesn't have a 51% majority of seats which he need to operate without the support of another party. This has been occured before in Canada and will again.

In Italy, with a similar parliamentary system, there have had 50 governments formed and fallen apart since WWII. You might want to examine these annual collapses and start attributing nefarious NWO agendas to them.

We have a system that proves to be counterproductive sometimes, but it's the price to be paid for the people choosing their leadership.

This may come as a shock, but in the vast majority of events in the world, something pretty close to what the press tells us is happening really is going on.


Mike F

Canada's parliamentary system has intrinsically built in safeguards to ensure the government continually acts for the people.

The latest crisis displayed fully the capacity for Canadian politics to function amidst a "non-confidence" motion. The coalition merely capitalised on the mandate given it by the federal legislations governing the House of Commons.

Unfortunately, what Harper does not understand is that in a minority government situation, a single party leader is the last thing the country needs. What is required is a "FACILITATOR". I do not believe Harper even understands the meaning of that term.

It is imperative, indeed, legislated that minority governments in Canada require support from opposition members in order to pass legislation. Harper has done nothing to gain support from opposition members.

Canada does not need a dictatorial leader now. We require a facilitator who is receptive to ideas that will coalesce the country, not divide it as he has recently done.

Voters need to stop focussing on the leaders of the parties and their particular personality traits. We need to look beyond the faces and delve deeper into the heart of the issues at hand.



reply to post by Cynic

I agree with what you've said about the checks and balances in our parliamentary system.

I have no great love for Harper, but think he's been crucified by the press.
The Liberal Party has shown us how they do business and I believe earned time off for bad behaviour. Harper may be right-wing and inflexible but I think there's some attempt to get the country back on track with the current Conservative almost majority.

Peter C. Newman has called Jean Chretien a "thug." With a little insider knowledge of the workings of the Liberal Party, I have seen no reason to disagree with his characterization.

Canada needs better politicians.


Mike F

Originally posted by solo32_98

Unfortunately, what Harper does not understand is that in a minority government situation, a single party leader is the last thing the country needs. What is required is a "FACILITATOR". I do not believe Harper even understands the meaning of that term.

--------------------------------

Do you honestly believe that the "coalition" would have been facilitators?? C'mon man, they were opportunists plain and simple. There's not a single conciliatory act that they could agree upom, shy of dumping the Conservatives. The tape of Layton at his caucus meeting is proof enough for me of that conspiracy.
--------------------------------------

Canada does not need a dictatorial leader now. We require a facilitator who is receptive to ideas that will coalesce the country, not divide it as he has recently done.
-------------------------------------

Dictatorial - No. Decisive - Yes. Harper is as decisive as he is divisive however there is no doubt proof that he is doing exactly what he set out to do and is accomplishing more in two years, than prior governments did in 13 I don't see a problem with that, but I'm sure the moonbats on the left of center are just pissed.

Originally posted by Cynic
Dictatorial - No. Decisive - Yes.

Seeing as the PMO has ordered the Ombudsman that they will vet anything that they wish to publish smacks of a dictatorship to me.

reply to post by intrepid


Guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

Had the coalition made it to power, we would have had to stomach Mr. "Dithers" Dion. (We already have his cousin in power in Ontario now, that's another story though) He has enough trouble deciding on what to put on every day; heaven help us if he made it to PM....

If you believe that we have a dictatorship in Harper, pray, tell me what you imagine we had under Chretien or Trudeau??? At least Harper is doing what he promised, not what popular opinion would direct him to do. That's leadership, not showmanship or
games-man-ship.

Any monkey can make a promise, gawd knows we've had lots of those! But it takes courage and conviction of purpose to keep them, and not to make new ones just because you want or need to win a popularity contest. These are what we have had up until now, and Canadians have begun to wake up to the fact that they have been had by the Liberals and the left as a whole.

I thought you were a little smarter than that Intrepid.

Peace dude.

Originally posted by Cynic
Had the coalition made it to power, we would have had to stomach Mr. "Dithers" Dion. (We already have his cousin in power in Ontario now, that's another story though) He has enough trouble deciding on what to put on every day; heaven help us if he made it to PM....

Actually that would be Iggy and that possibility is still on the table.

If you believe that we have a dictatorship in Harper, pray, tell me what you imagine we had under Chretien or Trudeau??? At least Harper is doing what he promised, not what popular opinion would direct him to do. That's leadership, not showmanship or
games-man-ship.

You see a difference between the two? I don't. Well with the exception of Chretien. He wasn't as cocky as the other two.

Any monkey can make a promise, gawd knows we've had lots of those! But it takes courage and conviction of purpose to keep them, and not to make new ones just because you want or need to win a popularity contest.

Well Harper is going to have to make changes now or he's out and the coalition is in. Business as usual. If Harper had left the other parties alone all would be well. He gambled, called an election thinking he would get his majority. He didn't. So he pushed the parties to overthrow and call an election. They didn't. They used a legal and precidented option. A coalition. He's going to have to compromise now.