Make a Contribution to Remove NSFW Ads

Anyone paying attention to Harper in Canada?

Makkonnen

Makkonnen

The Quizatz Haderach
BGOL Investor
The queen's governor just prorogued parliament(suspended it) because they were gonna have a vote of no confidence and throw out the right wing prime minister. Parliament is suspended until Jan 26. The right wingers tried to kill all government funding for the liberal opposition parties so they all joined up and together they can control the parliament with 60 some off percent, while the right wing Tories(?) have like 30%.
Anyway, the right wingers are responding by trying to say that the opposition wants to overthrow Canada and break it into smaller parts.

I never want to hear shit about how British Commonwealth nations are free and democratic.

This bitch here
Micha%C3%ABlle_Jean_1_11072007.jpg


is the Governor General - appointed by the Queen on a recommendation by the Prime Minister to represent the Queen on matters of state. She basically can shutdown the government at any time. So when the business representative Harper asked her to save his ass, she did. This shit is wild.

Hit google news up about this. Most media in the US arent covering this shit at all.
Remember that Harper had his staff try to take out Obama in the primaries by intentionally lying to reporters about a conversation had with one of Obama's economic advisors.
 
Interesting, the way Parliament functions and that the Queen still has a representative in Canada's government with that kind of power.
 
<IFRAME SRC="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7765206.stm" WIDTH=780 HEIGHT=1500>
<A HREF="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7765206.stm">link</A>

</IFRAME>
 
QueEx said:
Interesting, the way Parliament functions and that the Queen still has a representative in Canada's government with that kind of power.
Click to expand...
its funny to me how people in commonwealth states will try to tell you the queen is powerless :lol: a multibillionaire who can shutdown the majority of commonwealth govts any time she wants
 
The funny thing is Harper government is trying to paint
the opposition of attempting an undemocratic takeover
even though he considered doing the same thing a few years ago
with the same separtist bloc Quebecoi......
Basically a bunch of western Canada oil bred, backwards neo-cons
running the country....
 
ukblack said:
The funny thing is Harper government is trying to paint
the opposition of attempting an undemocratic takeover
even though he considered doing the same thing a few years ago
with the same separtist bloc Quebecoi......
Basically a bunch of western Canada oil bred, backwards neo-cons
running the country....
Click to expand...
word
and that oil soaked sand theyve been getting money off of is about to be damn near worthless with falling light crude prices - harper's backing is about to be dead anyway unless he can convince the country he's the only thing standing between them and separatist fascist lefties
 
So you're saying Mak that the office of Head of State and Head of Government shouldn't be seperate?

That they should be republics? This is one instance, how about the constant non-interference by Governor-Generals around the Commonwealth. They don't get involved in day to day politics.

This issue with Harper isn't over - yet. I'm waiting to January BEFORE I condemn Michelle Jean (who is married to a rich white guy, by the way).
 
Found this on a message board, for anyone interested in how the
Canadian political system works.

Civcs 101 Reminder: We do not live in a direct democracy.
We elect MPs.

Those MPS have already decided who their leader is.

The group with the most MPs forms the government and thus their leader becomes Primer Minister.
The other groups of MPs form the Opposition.
The Opposition keeps the Government accountable and reflects a differing perspective to balance and temper the influence the extremes of the governing party.
The MPs that form the government must maintain the confidence of the House should they be in a minority situation.
Should they lose the confidence of the House the Opposition may be asked by the GG (who is the Head of State) to form a government.
OR the GG may accede to the PMs request for an election call. (there are obviously more options)
These are all however within the acceptable parameters of a healthy functioning constitutional democracy.
Yes. This is how the system works.

"Watch for it though as the Conservatives will take advantage of the general public's ignorance of these things and sow panic and doubt to apopletic proportions.
Harper's hubris created this unpalatable mess. He must go and go now for the good of his party and for the good of the country."
 
Wobble Wobble said:
So you're saying Mak that the office of Head of State and Head of Government shouldn't be seperate?

That they should be republics? This is one instance, how about the constant non-interference by Governor-Generals around the Commonwealth. They don't get involved in day to day politics.

This issue with Harper isn't over - yet. I'm waiting to January BEFORE I condemn Michelle Jean (who is married to a rich white guy, by the way).
Click to expand...
all im saying is the rules permit the gov general to do what she did. the fact that most others have never tried such a thing is immaterial. The system has a big gaping hole with the monarchy still inserted in it. I personally like a parliamentary system better than what the US has.
yeah i know jean is married to that director guy
 
Bottomline, Harper believe it or not is the lesser of the evils here. The coalition's TEMPORARY appointed member just got booted (Dion) Bob Rae and Michael Ignatief (Sp?) do not know what's going on. Read up on Michael Ingatief's books and you'll know. And who knows what deal the Coalition has made to the Separtists. The Coalition has no real action plan or a leader or a timetable. Right now shouldn't be the time to be squabbling about who is in charge.



http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/12/05/f-vp-mallick.html
 
The Conservatives have made deals with the Bloc Quebecois before. Everybody has made deals with them, so for Harper to try and score points now is ridiculous. As an opposition party, they've sworn to uphold the laws of the land and swear an oath to the monarch.

Mak, I understand the Westminster style Constitutional Monarchy. I know that others - particularly Americans - have a reactionary view of it. I've lived in two British Commonwealth countries and two Overseas Territories and the United States and France. Jamaica is a Constitutional Monarchy while Trinidad and Tobago is a republic. Both are Commonwealth countries.

I know the role of the monarch is to sit back and only get involved in specific, serious situations to protect the rights of his or her subjects. I know that this monarch has since 1953 insisted on opening freedom for people in both colonies and former colonies. Does that mean I wave the Union Jack, no. Does that mean I understand that when the situation in Grenada became untenuous, the United States may have obtained the invitation of the Governor General to invade, yes. Does that mean I understand that the Governor of Turks and Caicos has asked London to send investigators to check Missick's government's dealings, yes. (You know Missick - Lisa Raye's husband.)

I'm saying its just a different form of democracy. The Constitutional Monarch can't "just shut down the government at any time". I can't remember the British term, but "seperation of powers" isn't just a US thing. Losing the 13 North American colonies kick started Great Britain into true representative democracy.
 
Wobble Wobble said:
The Conservatives have made deals with the Bloc Quebecois before. Everybody has made deals with them, so for Harper to try and score points now is ridiculous. As an opposition party, they've sworn to uphold the laws of the land and swear an oath to the monarch.

Mak, I understand the Westminster style Constitutional Monarchy. I know that others - particularly Americans - have a reactionary view of it. I've lived in two British Commonwealth countries and two Overseas Territories and the United States and France. Jamaica is a Constitutional Monarchy while Trinidad and Tobago is a republic. Both are Commonwealth countries.

I know the role of the monarch is to sit back and only get involved in specific, serious situations to protect the rights of his or her subjects. I know that this monarch has since 1953 insisted on opening freedom for people in both colonies and former colonies. Does that mean I wave the Union Jack, no. Does that mean I understand that when the situation in Grenada became untenuous, the United States may have obtained the invitation of the Governor General to invade, yes. Does that mean I understand that the Governor of Turks and Caicos has asked London to send investigators to check Missick's government's dealings, yes. (You know Missick - Lisa Raye's husband.)

I'm saying its just a different form of democracy. The Constitutional Monarch can't "just shut down the government at any time". I can't remember the British term, but "seperation of powers" isn't just a US thing. Losing the 13 North American colonies kick started Great Britain into true representative democracy.
Click to expand...
no doubt bruh im not saying all the commonwealth govs are fatally flawed or more flawed than the our crap in the US

thanks for the details and distinguishing between the different forms of gov in different countries

what are the advantages of remaining in the commonwealth? trading? economic? isnt India in it still too? I want to say I remember something about money being involved.
 
Makkonnen said:
what are the advantages of remaining in the commonwealth? trading? economic? isnt India in it still too? I want to say I remember something about money being involved.
Click to expand...

The advantages? There are no "advantages" per se, but it is just an association. One hundred years ago, Canada, South Africa, Australia and New Zealand joined Britiain to form the Commonwealth to be in association. They have a common history, common language and a common outlook. As more and more former colonies became independent, they joined the commonwealth. Some of them took the further step of becoming republics within the commonwealth.

The monarch doesn't direct them on anything. She just shows up at the opening ceremony, reads a general speech and then leaves. The Commonwealth can vote to expell a member for bad deeds. Eventually, after great pressure from African and West Indian countries, South Africa was expelled. Pakistan has been in and out, Burma is out right now and Zimbabwe is out right now.

Mozambique - the former Portuguese colony - joined in the 1990s. It was never British territory and joined because it felt it was in its interests and was granted the right as a reward because of its invaluable help in the fight against Apartheid. I'll go out on a limb and say Apartheid wouldn't have ended without Samora Machel of Mozambique - that's why South Africa killed him.

I've got triple citizenship, US, British and an overseas territory and have been a small part of four or five Commonwealth events. I've met a Muslim Kashmiri who serves in the Indian parliament. I've talked cricket with a Fijian and Maldivian in Canada. That's why there's a Commonwealth.

By the way, there is the Organisation of Iberio-American States which is made up of Spain and Portugal, Equitorial Guinea and the Spanish and Portuguese latin American countries. There is also the Lusophone summit of Portugual and its former colonies. East Timor joined a few years ago, joining Mozambique, Angola and a couple other African countries and Brazil.

Ultimately, it's an association of countries with similar cultures and legal traditions. It's in the self interest of countries to unite.

By the way, in no way am I a royalist. I just understand the role that the monarch plays.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top