The Shotgun Blog
« Liberal MP Jim Karygiannis says coalition is finished, Dion should resign | Main | Prorogued »
Thursday, December 04, 2008
Democracy delayed is democracy denied: Green Party
Green Party leader Elizabeth May comments on the prorogation of parliament:
At a time of great economic turmoil, Canadians are now saddled with a government who has no plan to deal with the crisis, has lost the confidence of the House, and who now plans to take an extended break in order to dodge democracy.
“Canadian’s wanted action, they wanted cooperation. What they don’t want is nasty partisan commercials paid for with their tax money and airing throughout the holiday season,” said Elizabeth May, Leader of the Green Party of Canada.
“Unfortunately, we now have a devastating precedent that the Prime Minister can avoid a confidence vote by shutting down the House out of fear that the measure will fail. This is a denial of democracy and undermines the parliamentary system.”
“Harper seems willing to take any steps for the sake of holding on to power. He has violated the spirit of democracy in Canada.”
First, the Harper Conservatives do have a plan to deal with the economy; it is just not a plan the opposition supports.
Second, it will be a sad day indeed if the Harper Conservatives ever win the confidence of the socialist-separatist-opportunist Coalition of the Shilling. (OK. It’s not a good name for the coalition, but I haven’t heard anything better. Any ideas?)
Finally, this "time out" is exactly what is needed. If Harper can use this time to regain control of the House, he’ll stay on as Prime Minister. If he can’t, he won’t. That's democracy, for good or ill.
Posted by Matthew Johnston on December 4, 2008 in Canadian Politics | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d834515b5d69e2010536393153970c
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Democracy delayed is democracy denied: Green Party:
Comments
Lizzie sez: "What they don’t want is nasty partisan commercials paid for with their tax money and airing throughout the holiday season,"
ummmm... The ads currently running were paid for by the conservative party, not taxdollars.
Mrs. Piggy is a little bit pissed, methinks, that her senate seat just disappeared...
Posted by: Richard Evans | 2008-12-04 2:00:12 PM
I had that exact same name in mind too. It's perfect.
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-12-04 2:04:16 PM
Matthew,
"Second, it will be a sad day indeed if the Harper Conservatives ever win the confidence of the socialist-separatist-opportunist Coalition of the Shilling."
Ok, but...
"If Harper can use this time to regain control of the House, he’ll stay on as Prime Minister. If he can’t, he won’t."
The ONLY way to do that, he will need to win the support of the socialists, the separatists, or the opportunists. It seems like he will need to either given them MOST of what they want to stave off a non-confidence vote or else let them take over, giving them ALL that they want. It's a lose-lose proposition for him.
Posted by: Fact Check | 2008-12-04 2:08:58 PM
Best thing would be for the Liberals to have their leadership change now and get Iggy in there. I think he is a man that would be willing and able to work with the CPC. He has less at stake in the embarrassment department.
If the CPC falls in January, we need an election to clear the air. A coup is not democracy. I DON'T GIVE A SHIT WHAT THEY DO IN EUROPE ... THIS ISN'T EUROPE ... IT IS THE FREE WORLD!
What we really need is a complete revamp of our system so we can actually elect a government and live with it four years at a time.
We also need to de-certify the Bloc as a federal party ... it is a bad joke that these culture hustlers can continue to skew elections and extort billions from the rest of Canada.
Enough already.
Posted by: John V | 2008-12-04 2:24:12 PM
Matthew - Stephen Harper just needs to find a few opposition members with integrity who will vote with the government or abstain. There is no coalition if the Bloc only 'supports' it but is not a part.
Lizzie May talks about "denial of democracy" when this whole nasty cabal of election losers was trying to do just that. Note to Dion: My vote is worth as much as yours; I accepted it when my party didn't win, accept it when yours doesn't.
Posted by: Aviator | 2008-12-04 2:25:55 PM
Fact Check:
Do you think there's any chance that Harper might be able to peel off some Liberal MPs who are unhappy about joining up with the NDP and the Bloc?
If so, maybe he could crack the coalition without having to give the other parties everything they want.
Posted by: Terrence Watson | 2008-12-04 2:31:02 PM
Funny Mrs. Piggy (I like that too) talking about tax dollars paying for partisan ads. First, it'll be CPC money, assuredly. Second - it was Harper's trying to STOP tax money for partisan purposes that started this whole thing!
What bugs me most is this manufactured crisis in the economy. GDP is up. Auto sales were up. Even the worst unemployment rate projections are no worse than 5 years ago. The biggest drop in the TSX in recent months was Monday after all this coalition talk dropped. It's all fear-mongering to paint Harper as unwilling to act (when there's no need).
Posted by: Greg | 2008-12-04 2:36:21 PM
Methinks, from all of Lizzie's hyperbole, she must have been the one who lent Inspector Clouseau that "Hot Air" book that appeared in his infomercial last night...
Posted by: Brent Cameron | 2008-12-04 2:37:29 PM
'Democracy delayed is democracy denied'
Yea, that's pretty well what the western grain farmers under the CWB have been saying since 1946.
Does it mean anything to Ottawa?
Nada, zilch, nothing, zippo
Go whine somewhere else Lizzy.
Posted by: Rocky Thompson | 2008-12-04 2:50:51 PM
Terrence,
Two days ago I replied to a post by you with this:
"I'd say we are heading into a non-election campaign. Over the next few weeks the political parties will all be out in the press campaigning either for public support for their right to govern. Public support will eventually coalesce either for or against the coalition takeover and without the trouble of actually voting. This will apply pressure to force the side that loses to back down."
I still think that's right, but find it harder to see what Harper wins if he is able to smash the coalition. Even if he breaks up their marriage he still has to entice one of them to hop in bed with him. I don't see that happening without him making significanct concessions. His best bet is to try to concede just enough to get the Liberals to abstain (just like old times!), but even that will cost him most of what he wants to do. Hell, he ALREADY has taken off the table two big chunks of his economic "update" and that STILL was not enough.
No, I think he will keep the title of "Prime Minister", but at the price of doing more of what the Liberals want done than what he wants done. I don't see any viable road for him to get his own policies in place.
Posted by: Fact Check | 2008-12-04 3:03:25 PM
Maybe this is all moot. Next week, if the PQ wins big, the bloc might actually have to earn it's mandate to help Quebec separate rather than rule (or shakedown) Canada for which it has no mandate nor moral right. Unless it's only real purpose is to exist as an opportunistic regional shakedown party.
I like "Miss Piggy" too.
Posted by: John Chittick | 2008-12-04 3:24:10 PM
If the CPC falls in January, we need an election to clear the air. A coup is not democracy. I DON'T GIVE A SHIT WHAT THEY DO IN EUROPE ... THIS ISN'T EUROPE ... IT IS THE FREE WORLD!
Posted by: John V | 4-Dec-08 2:24:12 PM
Apparently a world free of any knowledge how the parliamentary system works or what a coup actually is. But hey, be loud, be proud and all that.
-------------------
What we really need is a complete revamp of our system so we can actually elect a government and live with it four years at a time.
Posted by: John V | 4-Dec-08 2:24:12 PM
And that would accomplish what? It would require proportional representation which would make it pretty certain that whoever wants to run the Government would have to form a collation... You know, just like in Europe.
------------------
We also need to de-certify the Bloc as a federal party ... it is a bad joke that these culture hustlers can continue to skew elections and extort billions from the rest of Canada.
Posted by: John V | 4-Dec-08 2:24:12 PM
Ah, so instead of allowing the free forming of parties we only allow what kind of parties? The ones that you approve of?
So let me get this straight:
1. You want to directly elect the leader.
2. You want to remove any party that you don't agree with him.
3. You still want to claim you live in a democracy.
Did I miss something?
---------------------
Enough already.
Posted by: John V | 4-Dec-08 2:24:12 PM
Yes, could you please stop? I mean if you're serious and don't just try to yank people's chains here.
Posted by: Snowrunner | 2008-12-04 3:27:08 PM
ummmm... The ads currently running were paid for by the conservative party, not taxdollars.
Posted by: Richard Evans | 4-Dec-08 2:00:12 PM
Come on now, those ads *are* partially funded by tax dollars. That's what supposedly started this thing, remember.
Now Lizzie is criticizing Harper for actually *using* the funding he is obviously quite willing to do without, but is apparently "essential to democracy" for the other parties.
Hell, the Conservative party should just adopt a policy of using the millions from their $1.95/vote to run nasty partisan commercials. They don't need it for anything else... Perhaps a 30 second Superbowl commercial next February is in order. That would annoy them.
Posted by: K Stricker | 2008-12-04 3:44:04 PM
"Coalition of the Shilling. (OK. It’s not a good name for the coalition, but I haven’t heard anything better. Any ideas?)"
Someone in the chat room of the Al & Mike show, I don't remember who, suggested the "Axis of Feeble"
Posted by: Kalim Kassam | 2008-12-04 4:45:45 PM
How about "Axis of the Freebie"
Posted by: Zebulon Pike | 2008-12-04 5:22:18 PM
Posted by: Richard Evans | 4-Dec-08 2:00:12 PM
"Lizzie sez: "What they don’t want is nasty partisan commercials paid for with their tax money and airing throughout the holiday season,"
ummmm... The ads currently running were paid for by the conservative party, not taxdollars."
Ignorance is bliss eh? The fact that the average donation to the CPC, $135 scored a fully refundable tax credit of just over $100 for the donor, plus of course the highest level of funding on pay per vote subsidy. Who're the Piggies at the trough now? I didn't notice the CPC rushing to eliminate the ONLY fully refundable tax credit available now, did they?
Piggy Harper also played sleight of hand to stiff, and I mean literally defraud the taxpayer by shifting spending from the National Campaign to local campaigns, so that they could steal 65% back as a subsidy from the taxpayer, while breaking the elction spending limits at the same time. Piggy Piggy Piggy.
Posted by: bluegreenblogger | 2008-12-04 7:21:04 PM
There is another alternative. That is for the CPC to show the people of Canada that economic stimuli have not worked in the long run. Andrew Coyne had an excellent article on this very subjec in the latest McLeans magazine. The truth will prevail over the big lie if you advertise it enough.
Saw Mr. Dion's performance in the Commons. Its interesting how some think that lots of volume can take the place of a cogent argument.
Posted by: DML | 2008-12-04 7:42:19 PM
snowrunner quotes: "What we really need is a complete revamp of our system so we can actually elect a government and live with it four years at a time. Posted by: John V | 4-Dec-08 2:24:12 PM"
snowrunner sez: "And that would accomplish what? It would require proportional representation which would make it pretty certain that whoever wants to run the Government would have to form a collation... You know, just like in Europe."
The last time I checked, snowrunner, the U.S. system works just fine and it has nothing to do with either proportional representation or Europe. Your eagerness to provide your own desired outcome as the only viable option is extremely disingenuous and intellectually dishonest. Like your pal Dion, you're failing...
bluegreenblogger sez: "The fact that the average donation to the CPC, $135 scored a fully refundable tax credit of just over $100 for the donor, plus of course the highest level of funding on pay per vote subsidy. Who're the Piggies at the trough now?"
Alright you mental midget, let's get something clear right here and now:
THE INDIVIDUAL TAX BREAK IS EXACTLY THE SAME WHETHER THE DONATION GOES TO THE LIBS, NDP, BLOC, CPC OR GPC! IF A LIB OR GREEN DONOR GIVES A DONATION OF $135 TO THEIR PARTY, THEY'LL GET THE EXACT! SAME! 100! FREAKIN'! DOLLAR! TAX! CREDIT!. WHAT PART OF THAT IS CAUSING A SHORT CIRCUIT IN YOUR TINY FREAKIN' GERBIL BRAIN? Oh wait... It looks like you're a Green Party supporter... That explains everything...
Posted by: Richard Evans | 2008-12-04 8:05:54 PM
I'm sorry bluegreenblogger, I skipped over one of your points:
"...plus of course the highest level of funding on pay per vote subsidy"
You're absolutely correct, of course. The CPC did receive more than the other parties in the pay-per-vote subsidy. That's because THEY GOT MORE FREAKIN' VOTES THAN THE OTHER PARTIES!!!
I'm sorry, bluegreenblogger, but your math teachers need to be fired for gross incompetence. No, wait... I was wrong... They need to be fined for creating the likes of you and then they need to be fired for gross incompetence.
Posted by: Richard Evans | 2008-12-04 8:20:26 PM
In response to this charmer:
Posted by: Richard Evans | 4-Dec-08 8:20:26 PM
The ads were paid for by the CRAP, but were of course funded by the taxpayer, either directly through pay per vote subsidy, or indirectly, through refundable tax credits offered to donors. Therefore the majority of all politcal party's spending is funded by the taxpayer. Some hypocrites would have it that their party is defending the taxpayer from rapacious socialist money grubbing politicians. The fact is that the loudest such defender of the taxpayer is the most rapacious pocket picker. Not to mention the infamous in and out transfers in the federal election which further defrauded the taxpayer by channeling federal election expenses through local riding associations makingthem eligible for an additional 65% refund of election expenses to the EDA, these transfers totalled over $448,000 in the province of BC alone, which is a swindle of about $291,200 IN ONE PROVINCE ALONE. So, I reiterate my admittedly infantile conclusion, Piggy, Piggy, Piggy Harper
Posted by: bluegreenblogger | 2008-12-04 9:59:37 PM
You know who else had a plan for an economy? Hank Paulson with input from his Wall Street buddies. That was $700 billion down the drain, which is now $3 trillion and it has done SQUAT for the economy. I will take the "do-nothing" approach any day of the week over fiscal stimulus.
Posted by: Faramir | 2008-12-04 10:09:27 PM
By the time the House resumes it will all look different. In my wildest dreams i can't see the three stooge coalition lasting that long without pushing Dion off a bridge somewhere. Great entertainment.
Posted by: peterj | 2008-12-04 10:18:01 PM
Faramir,
Good point. I don't need anyone making central plans for the economy. I thought the world learned that didn't work when the Soviet Union collapsed.
bluegreenblogger,
"The ads were paid for by the CRAP, but were of course funded by the taxpayer, either directly through pay per vote subsidy, or indirectly, through refundable tax credits offered to donors"
I thought as a fiscal conservative, you would understand that tax credits aren't taken from the taxpayer -- in fact quite the opposite, non-refundable credits leave money in the hands of the people that earned it.
Posted by: Kalim Kassam | 2008-12-04 10:37:44 PM
this is just what canada needs. they should prorouge government for two years and get out of our lives. let the market and economy start to fix themselves. it would be great to show this huge massive government that they only get in the way of liberty and prosperity. do the country a favor and prorogue forever.
Posted by: lovilla | 2008-12-04 10:52:32 PM
"I thought as a fiscal conservative, you would understand that tax credits aren't taken from the taxpayer -- in fact quite the opposite, non-refundable credits leave money in the hands of the people that earned it."
Bluegreen evidently thinks that the government owns all wealth and hence that giving people tax credits is wrong.
Posted by: Terrence Watson | 2008-12-04 10:53:53 PM
I'm not a staunch defender of the CPC, nor am I a member of the party bgb. What I am is pissed that morons like you go and spread your "green party math" all over the place in the hopes of misleading folks and then change the subject when you get called on it. Let's bring things back into focus, shall we? OK, good. Two simple questions as they relate to your original comment:
1) Under the PPV scheme, a vote for the CPC pays the exact same amount as a vote for the greens. Is that correct? Yes, or, no?
2) An individual who gives $1,000 to the Green Party gets the exact same tax break as an individual who gives $1,000 to the CPC. Is that correct? Yes, or, no?
They're not hard questions, bluegreenblogger, and you, especially, shouldn't have any problems answering them as you, yourself, brought financing into the discussion.
At this point bgb, you have numerous options. You can;
a) answer the questions honestly and admit that you were wrong with your initial comment,
b) not answer at all, thus proving that you're a coward,
c) change the subject, thus proving that you're a coward,
d) try to spin it by saying that we misread what you typed, thus proving that you're actually Lizzie May herself (Mrs. Piggy),
e) start swearing or
f) let fly with the ad-homs.
Choose wisely.
Posted by: Richard Evans | 2008-12-04 10:58:49 PM
***crickets chirping***
Posted by: Richard Evans | 2008-12-05 10:50:28 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.