Canadian Budget vote to decide fate of minority government

[3chordcharlie]

Parliament prepares for a showdown

CBC News
OTTAWA - After a week away in their ridings, members of Parliament return to Ottawa on Monday for a political showdown that could bring the end of the minority government.

Despite some polls showing most Canadians do not want an election right now, the Conservative party and the Bloc Québécois appear prepared to use their combined strength to try to bring the government down.

The New Democratic Party has agreed to support the Liberal government until the budget is passed, and it is not clear which side will win the critical votes of three Independent MPs in the almost evenly split House.

CBC link

The Conservative and Bloc parties in Canada have decided now is the time to force an election, and they will be doing everything in their power to accomplish this in the coming weeks - I have more to post - I'll comment on the potential consequences in a few minutes.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Polls show Tories have lost their lead

CBC News
OTTAWA - Two new polls show the federal Conservative party has lost its lead in public opinion across Canada in the past week.

And a third poll, taken just in Quebec, indicates support for separatism may not be as high as another survey showed earlier this week.

The two national polls, by GPC Research and Strategic Counsel, each have a margin of error that puts the Liberals and Conservatives in a statistical tie.

But they are a substantial turnaround from other recent polls, which have shown the Conservatives ahead of the Liberals by as much as seven percentage points.

"As it stands now, it looks like there's still life in the Liberal party, which comes as a surprise for a number of people," Gail Haarsma, vice-president of research for GPC, told the Canadian Press. Her firm interviewed 1,215 voters by telephone between Monday and Wednesday of this week.

Allen Gregg, chairman of Strategic Counsel, said his firm's polling, done for the Globe and Mail newspaper and the CTV network, indicated there is a ceiling to Conservative support.

"For example, they are running third in cities over a million in population right now, at 18 per cent, behind the New Democrats," he told the Globe.

Strategic Counsel polled 1,000 Canadians between Sunday and Wednesday.

Both polls were taken after Prime Minister Paul Martin's television address last week, in which he said an election should not be held until Justice John Gomery has made his report on the federal sponsorship scandal.

CBC link
Conservative and Bloc support is waning slightly as Harper and Duceppe make more noise about forcing an election at the earliest possible date.

It probably isn't helping them that it was Martin who called for the Gomery inquiry, it is becoming clear that the current Liberal cabinet is pretty celean WRT the current scandal, and Martin has pro,ised an election call within 30 days of the delivery of the final Gomery report.

 

[Cruise51]

No matter how it works out, you will still have a minority government. It's a waste of time and money.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Federal sponsorship scandal

CBC News Online | April 27, 2005

Justice John Gomery watches as Prime Minister Paul Martin testifies before the inquiry, on Thursday, Feb 10, 2005. (CP Photo/Tom Hanson)
Not since Canada was a mere six years old has a sitting prime minister given testimony before a public inquiry.

On Feb. 8, 2005, former prime minister Jean Chrétien appeared before the Gomery Inquiry. He vigorously defended the federal sponsorship as an important part of the battle against Quebec sovereigntists in the wake of the 1995 referendum.

CBC in depth feature on sponsorship scandal and the Gomery inquiry.
This is just a teaser - there's quite a lot to the sponsorship scandal, and I'm not going to try to post it all here. No registration needed for this link, and you can find more at any of the major newspapers' websites, the CBC, and probably Global and other broadcasters' sites as well.

National Post / Canada.com in depth feature">http://www.canada.com/national/features/gomery/index.html</a>

Edit - added second link.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Independent MPs poised for key role

CBC News
OTTAWA - Three Independent members of Parliament, including two former Liberals, could play a crucial role in the upcoming budget vote if Paul Martin's Liberal government strikes a deal with Jack Layton and the New Democrats.

The prime minister is trying to get enough support to push through the budget and keep his Liberal minority government in power.

Early Tuesday evening, NDP Leader Jack Layton announced that the Liberals and New Democrats had reached a "likely agreement-in-principle" on support for the minority government's budget.

If the Liberals, with 131 seats, gain the support of the 19 NDP members, they would have 150 votes. The Liberals actually have 132 seats, but that includes the House Speaker, who only votes when there is a tie.

With the support of the three Independents, the Liberal government would have 153 votes.

Together, the Conservatives and Bloc Québécois would equal 153 votes, but two Conservative MPs are sick. Darrel Stinson and David Chatters are battling cancer and may not be able to show up for the vote.

A vote from the Speaker, Liberal Peter Milliken, could sway the vote to the government's side.

CBC link
Normally with illnesses, parties would sit out representatives, to preserve the balance of votes - there is no trust in parliament at the moment, and that is unlikely to happen here - more on this in a minute.

Carolyn Parrish is almost certain to support the Liberals, Kilgour is a Liberal who left the party because of the sponsirship scandal; he will liekly support them as well, though that is uncertain.

Chuck Cadman is a former Reform/Alliance MP (sort of the same as the Conservative party), but his vote could certainly depend on whether he thinks Canadians want an election at this time, and the fact is they do not.

One MP could decide whether there is an election, by their vote or by their absence from Parliament at the time of a vote!

Chuck Cadman's position
Cadman has indicated personal willingness to wait for the Gomery inquiry, but reports mixed messages from his constituency - many want him to side with the Conservative party and bring the government down now, but many want him to keep his current position.

Significantly, Cadman is recovering from chemotherapy for melanoma at the moment; his health has to be considered yet another questionmark in this whole situation.

Edit - forgot link

 

[3chordcharlie]

Expect a wild week in Ottawa
Non-confidence motion on agenda as MPs return to work
It now appears Liberals may get a reprieve ? at least briefly

OTTAWA?The Liberal minority government appears to have won a reprieve from a forced election for a couple of weeks, Conservatives admit.

That's because a non-confidence motion the Tories were hoping to pass in a committee today ? for a possible vote in the Commons on Wednesday or Thursday ? appears doomed to defeat.

"It looks like it will fail now that the NDP has changed position and will vote with the government," Conservative House leader Jay Hill said in an interview.

The next key date, Hill said, is May 18, when the Commons must deal with a motion by Tory Leader Stephen Harper that calls on the government to resign.

Toronto Star Link

With three non-confidence motions and the federal budget ahead, the minority Liberal government is certainly in trouble. However, with the NDP now supporting the budget, this will really boil down only to the budget - if Martin can pass his budget, or if it appears that he will be able to do so, he will likely last until December, when he has promised to call an election anyway (after the findings of the Gomery inquiry are released).

Both the Conservatives and the Bloc have lost some support due to their naked power play over a budget they originally supported:

"There's nothing in this budget that would justify an election at this time," Harper told reporters. Harper supports budget

 

[3chordcharlie]

Liberals pull minister home from Europe

CBC News
OTTAWA - The federal Liberals have called Minister of Veterans Affairs Albina Guarnieri back to Canada, just one day after she arrived in Holland for ceremonies leading up to the 60th anniversary of VE-Day.
The Liberals will need her vote in the House of Commons if one of the opposition parties launches an effort to defeat Prime Minister Paul Martin's minority government when Parliament resumes Monday after a weeklong break.

The move leaves no federally elected politicians marking this week's commemorations of the end of the Second World War in Europe.

The Conservative party and Bloc Québécois had declined to send any MPs to the VE-Day events.

linky

This one disappoints me a little - I think representation at these events is important, and it shouldn't have been a big deal for the Conservative and Bloc parties to either send representatives, or agree to bury one vote each to allow Canada to attend a fairly significant event.

I guess it's pretty clear that this is about to come to a head.

 

[StageLeft]

Down with the libs~!

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
Down with the libs~!

Come on - do better!

 

[Stunt]

Good idea 3chord, i was going to start a thread on this a while back, but i was going through exams and coundn't find time.

I am disgusted with the current government, there is just too much corruption and waste from a party who has been in power since 1993. Most of what i say here will inherently be skewed towards my belief that the conservatives should be the next party to lead the nation. The only two parties i would consider at this time are the conservatives and liberals. I think most of the canadians on these forums are stunch liberals, maybe i can represent the other side of the equation.

I guess my first entry into this thread will be the 2 thinks i am most disgusted with with this goverment. a) the scandal, b) the deal with the ndp.
a) The scandal was an utter disgrace, the liberal party on all levels gave a no-bid contract to friends of the party. Absolutely no product was produced and the money was redonated into the liberal party. This not only allowed the liberal party to be the only debt free party, but allowed their stranglehold on the canadian people. Advertising fear mongering techniques to trick Canadians into voting for them last election.
b) The NDP deal is brutal. $4.6billion to keep a corrupt government in power that the majority of people do not want. This deal is no better than the scandal itself. The government is wasting federal funds to keep a party in power for not even a year. These funds never would have been spent under liberal rule or conservative rule. The liberals and conservatives collectively command the will of 70% of canadians, this budget is absolutely unacceptable and is tending to the ideals of a fringe, extremist party with minimal support in the population. This money as far as i am concerned is yet another example of waste under liberal watch.

I consider the additional spending un-democratic and a massive flaw in our country's electoral system. With the average minority in canada lasting only 18 months and our people so disgusted with a party that almost can't be voted out. We are stuck with a very bad situation were government cannot work under these conditions. Looks like minorities are here to stay for the next while and the outcome seems to be a wastefulness and frivolousness of an effective extremist left wing coalition agenda. :thumbsdown:

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
Down with the libs~!

I fully agree

 

[3chordcharlie]

Stunt - I'm not a big fan of the deal, but don't expect too much mileage out of it. While not the best use of money, it is at least marginally constructive, and it isn't actually that much money.

More importantly, Canadians have made it clear they don't want an election yet; they want the representatives they sent to Ottawa to simply run the country, at least for now.Harper had the opportunity to make some small changes to the budget, if he was interested in representing his constituents, instead of embarking on a naked power play at the first opportunity. He feigns disgust at the sponsorship scandal, but we're all disgusted, and yet most of us do not want an election yet. Call it grovelling if you want, but Martin's position (wait for the inquiry to finish) is far more in tune with public opinion than Harper's.

I think most of us will want the opportunity to vote once the Gomery inquiry is complete, and I imagine the result then will be either a Liberal or a Conservative majority, partly depending on the outcome of the inquiry, and partly on whether Harper manages to stop sounding like a used-car salesman. If we go to the polls now, it might be a Conservative government, and it might be Liberal, but it will be another minority, and we will be voting yet again far too soon.

Now, I wouldn't entirely object to the Liberal government resigning, and a Conservative minority taking over, without an election (perfectly possible); in fact, given the Conservative position, and the balance of power, this would force a coalition between the CP and the Liberals, which is what Canadians asked for in the first place, and haven't received because Harper has such big stars in his eyes. He is the man who said "There's nothing in this budget that would justify an election at this time", and now says he will absolutely not support it (this is before the NDP deal), afterall.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Text of Prime Minister Paul Martin's speech

Good evening.

I want to talk to you directly tonight ? about the problems in the sponsorship program; about how I?ve responded to them as your prime minister; and about the timing of the next general election.

Let me speak plainly: what happened with the sponsorship file occurred on the watch of a Liberal government. Those who were in power are to be held responsible. And that includes me.

I was the Minister of Finance. Knowing what I've learned this past year, I am sorry that we weren?t more vigilant - that I wasn't more vigilant. Public money was misdirected and misused. That?s unacceptable. And that is why I apologized to the Canadian people a year ago.

CBC link to transcript of Martin's address

Not much to say about this - Martin said all the right things, the only real disagreement can be over motivation.

Harper's reaction to the PM's speech

My fellow Canadians.

We have all just witnessed a sad spectacle -- a prime minister so burdened with corruption in his own party that he is unable to do his job and lead the country, a party leader playing for time, begging for another chance.

This is not how a prime minister should act.

A prime minister should not be addressing the population on this partisan issue, but rather on the concerns and challenges with which we are confronted: the health-care system, international trade, agriculture, the fiscal imbalance, safer communities, stronger families and a cleaner environment.

CBC Link - Harper's response to Martin address

I have a lot to say about the used-car salesman, but this post is mostly informational - the other leader's responses are linked on the CBC site as well. Suffice to say for now that the sponsorship scandal is not a partisan issue, it is clearly a national issue, that Martin absolutely should be speaking to Canadians about it, and that it more the opposition's doing than the governments that parliament has ground to a halt. If Harper wants to defend or justify why he has made this happen, against the wishes of the majority of Canadians, he is more than welcome to do so, and I'll be listening. For the moment, this speech has more spin than a Greg Maddux breaking ball.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: Cruise51
No matter how it works out, you will still have a minority government. It's a waste of time and money.

Agreed. Though I think this could backfire on the Conservatives giving the Liberals a majority. Canadians don't want an election(other than in Quebec where the Bloc will gain seats), Canadians want to wait for the conclusions given by the current Inquiry, and other than Party affiliation the current government has little if anything to do with the scandal.

Martin can better make the "They just want Power" card, he can point out that he initiated the Inquiry, and he also has the promise of calling an Election within 30 days of the Inquiries conclusion card. He certainly doesn't sound like someone trying to hold Power at any cost.

We'll have to wait and see how it all works out though.

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
Stunt - I'm not a big fan of the deal, but don't expect too much mileage out of it. While not the best use of money, it is at least marginally constructive, and it isn't actually that much money.

More importantly, Canadians have made it clear they don't want an election yet; they want the representatives they sent to Ottawa to simply run the country, at least for now.Harper had the opportunity to make some small changes to the budget, if he was interested in representing his constituents, instead of embarking on a naked power play at the first opportunity. He feigns disgust at the sponsorship scandal, but we're all disgusted, and yet most of us do not want an election yet. Call it grovelling if you want, but Martin's position (wait for the inquiry to finish) is far more in tune with public opinion than Harper's.

I think most of us will want the opportunity to vote once the Gomery inquiry is complete, and I imagine the result then will be either a Liberal or a Conservative majority, partly depending on the outcome of the inquiry, and partly on whether Harper manages to stop sounding like a used-car salesman. If we go to the polls now, it might be a Conservative government, and it might be Liberal, but it will be another minority, and we will be voting yet again far too soon.

Now, I wouldn't entirely object to the Liberal government resigning, and a Conservative minority taking over, without an election (perfectly possible); in fact, given the Conservative position, and the balance of power, this would force a coalition between the CP and the Liberals, which is what Canadians asked for in the first place, and haven't received because Harper has such big stars in his eyes. He is the man who said "There's nothing in this budget that would justify an election at this time", and now says he will absolutely not support it (this is before the NDP deal), afterall.

a) the deal will not go because the conservatives have enough sense to block this wasteful use of funds.
b) 4.6billion = marginally constructive?...the key being marginally, it is mostly a waste and not warrented. After Chretien's farewell spending blitz, we are due for significant tax breaks, especially with the dollar so high (with no drop in sight) and reduced corporate profits.
c)i think 4.6billion is plenty of money, and we must hold gov't to account for all spending whether it be low cost housing/foreign aid/environment or SPONSORSHIP SCANDAL.

I want the liberals out of power, the majority of canadians want to vote out the liberals, they just need to come to grips with the very viable alternatives and what they have to offer objectively without liberal spin.

Martin wants to hang onto power as long as he can. There was some talk of a snap election before the inquiry got messy. The liberals worse than the conservatives, because unlike the conservatives who are making principled decisions (unsupportive of budget/the liberal's self admitted ineffectiveness of parliament) not how they can cling to power that much longer. This mindset was very much exemplified by chretien's announced 8 months until retirement. Also keep in mind, martin held the election last year before any witnesses were seen, before any of this came to light. He was too busy mudslinging harper with outlandish claims.

Speak for yourself when canadians want to vote. Most Canadians want the liberals out of power, most are holding their noses voting liberal, and people want these crooks held to account. This will not get done under liberal rule, you are foolish to thinkso.

Conservative minority is not much better, but at least they will get prosecuted as they should, the inquiry will be open to the public, people will actually know what is going on. I mentioned above that our system is not set up for times of several minorities, could be an expensive next few years.

PS. I want a Conservative Majority.

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: sandorski
He certainly doesn't sound like someone trying to hold Power at any cost.

Yes he does, right now martin is a loser, he sounds like one, he looks like one.
He is doing precisely what you are saying he isn't doing.
Every single thing martin has done or contemplated over the last year has been to hold power at any cost. This time the cost was 4.6billion.
We'll see how much it will cost next time, inquiry has a long way to go.
Lets see how sneaky and persuasive the liberals really can be.

Remember, the last time the PM talked to the nation was before the refferendum, martin is despirate, just as chretien was to hold this country together. Unfortunately, it doesn't look like it's going to happen, as he is tending to an extremist minority who the vast majority do not consider.

 

[sandorski]

We'll see how it turns out. Be prepared for disappointment.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: Stunt
a) the deal will not go because the conservatives have enough sense to block this wasteful use of funds.

Count the votes - this is going to come down to one or two votes, and may in fact come down to Chuck Cadman, who is clearly undecided. Harper had his chance to influence the budget constructively, and sadly chose to embark on a naked power play. That was his decision, and if the NDP deal is passed, Harper bears a lot of responsibility for that. He heard some testimony in the Gomery inquiry, and his face lit up like a Christmas tree. Now he's being hit over the head with polls that show Canadians still don't want an election, and he's already committed to a position that isn't popular. Harper lost 5-7 points of voter support this weekend. I'm guessing he regrets his decision at the moment, since all signs pointed to a Conservative win, once an election is called, and now that is less certain.

b) 4.6billion = marginally constructive?...the key being marginally, it is mostly a waste and not warrented. After Chretien's farewell spending blitz, we are due for significant tax breaks, especially with the dollar so high (with no drop in sight) and reduced corporate profits.
c)i think 4.6billion is plenty of money, and we must hold gov't to account for all spending whether it be low cost housing/foreign aid/environment or SPONSORSHIP SCANDAL.

The money isn't 'wasted' it just isn't the best possible use of funds. The tax breaks were preserved for small businesses, and delayed by a little bit for large corporations. If Mr. "There is nothing in this budget that..." had been intellignet about things, there could have been larger tax cuts instead of delayed ones.

I want the liberals out of power, the majority of canadians want to vote out the liberals, they just need to come to grips with the very viable alternatives and what they have to offer objectively without liberal spin.

Harper's response to to the Martin address has put me squarely back in the camp that he is nothing more than snake oil and can't be trusted. Too bad, maybe Peter McKay would have been more believable.

Martin wants to hang onto power as long as he can.

Why then would he promise an election after the Gomery inquiry, instead of 'pending the outcome of the Gomery inquiry'? Why do you so badly want an election before all the information is available? There is a much better chance of a Conservative majority in January than there is now. You could at least pay lip service to having interest in the truth

There was some talk of a snap election before the inquiry got messy. The liberals worse than the conservatives, because unlike the conservatives who are making principled decisions (unsupportive of budget/the liberal's self admitted ineffectiveness of parliament) not how they can cling to power that much longer. This mindset was very much exemplified by chretien's announced 8 months until retirement. Also keep in mind, martin held the election last year before any witnesses were seen, before any of this came to light. He was too busy mudslinging harper with outlandish claims.

There is some valid grounds for criticism there. But it's hard to say whether Martin knew the depth of the sponsorship scandal before the inquiry was called. Maybe we'll have a better idea after the report is finished. You do realize that if the report suggests that the current leadership had significant knowledge of the scam, the Liberals will be turfed out harder than Mulroney was, and you'll really get what you want, right?

Speak for yourself when canadians want to vote. Most Canadians want the liberals out of power, most are holding their noses voting liberal, and people want these crooks held to account. This will not get done under liberal rule, you are foolish to thinkso.

I'm not speaking for myself, or for you - polls still consistently show Canadians do not want an election - if they did, Harper could have forced one months ago, and he would have. New testimony came out, Harper over-estimated how damaging it would be, and committed to an unpopular position. Oops.

Conservative minority is not much better, but at least they will get prosecuted as they should, the inquiry will be open to the public, people will actually know what is going on. I mentioned above that our system is not set up for times of several minorities, could be an expensive next few years.

PS. I want a Conservative Majority.

Conservative minority would be much better - you don't have any ideological problems with the Liberals, based on what you've said, and the NDP would be irrelevant under a Conservative minority.

But if you want a majority, you should be looking to January/February, not June.

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: sandorski
We'll see how it turns out. Be prepared for disappointment.

This election i only hope for majority of ontario going conservative, a seat in quebec (new conservative member who was ex-liberal cabinet minister in quebec) and a lot of left vote split.
I'll be happy. Even if the conservatives win by 2 seats i'll be happy.
They are growing to be a national alternative to the liberals, this is what i truly want

 

[Stunt]

3chord:
The independents will not all side with the liberals, cadman will most likely side with his similarly viewed conservative family. Kilgour after leaving the liberals and being a former PC from alberta will definately vote down parliament, he has said this. Parrish is voting for gov't as she will definately lose her job after next election, similar to the liberals she is despirate to hold onto power.

If the money was not the best use of funds, it was a waste. Esspecially in this case where the vast majority of taxpayers do not want their money spent on these extremely weak proposals. Being an economics guy you should remember that money is a scarce and limited resource, using it frivolously when the ndp demands is not productive for our society.

That's great that you don't like harper, i do like him, although you have tended to believe in the kooky fear mongering the liberals have been spewing for years.

I really don't care for an election right now. But i do think an election now is justified given the events. And the liberals know it is justified, this is why they are attempting to appeal to pissed off voters saying that their time will come, meanwhile making deals with the devil.

In all honesty, I think what is best for the conservatives is to have two elections based on the liberal waste. This is the only way they will get their majority with all the mudslinging and fear-mongering that has come out of the liberals in past elecitons.
The first will to get their star candidates into quebec, get a seat or two there, showing they are an option in the province, just as the alliance did in ontario when it won 2 seats. Now they have broken into ontario very significatly, enough so to challenge the liberals without quebec. Now once they get into quebec, they have a huge inherent base. I feel the quebec people have been voting bloc because of a distaste with the liberals, not for separatism. (this can be seen provincially with the parti-quebecois and their severe loss, where charest (ex-conservative won) allong with mario dumont and the heavy right party action democratique who got 20% of the vote last election). Huge gains can be had there by the conservatives. They just need to show they are an option, just one seat will prove this. The PCs have a long history there. (Buchard was an ex-PC).

That's how i see a potential conservative majority/national alternative to the liberals.
So if i want a majority, i need 2 elections, no matter when they come. It isn't until an election when people actually get to hear harper and some of his great ideas...in between you have the liberals and ndp doing their regular old spin.

 

[Stunt]

I honestly think the Conservatives are more ready to lead the country, i don't know if you have noticed, but the conservative party is full of all-stars and the liberals are full of loser no-names. Hell i think i could put together a better cabinet with the NDP caucus.
Liberals:

Paul Martin, Jacob Austin, Jean-C. Lapierre, Ralph E. Goodale, Anne McLellan, Lucienne Robillard, Stéphane Dion, Pierre Stewart Pettigrew, Andy Scott, James Scott Peterson, Andrew Mitchell, William Graham, Albina Guarnieri, Reginald B. Alcock, Geoff Regan, Tony Valeri, M. Aileen Carroll, Irwin Cotler, Ruben John Efford, Liza Frulla, Giuseppe (Joseph) Volpe, Joseph Frank Fontana, Scott Brison, Ujjal Dosanjh, Ken Dryden, David Emerson, Ethel Blondin-Andrew, Raymond Chan, Claudette Bradshaw, John McCallum, Stephen Owen, Joseph McGuire, Joseph Robert Comuzzi, Mauril Bélanger, Carolyn Bennett, Jacques Saada, John Ferguson Godfrey, Tony Ianno

Conservatives:

Stephen Harper, Noël Kinsella, Rob Nicholson, Monte Solberg, Peter MacKay, Jason Kenney, Rona Ambrose, Bob Mills, Stockwell Day, Jim Prentice, Gary Lunn, Belinda Stronach, Diane Finley, Gordon O'Connor, Betty Hinton, Guy Lauzon, David Anderson, Loyola Hearn, Ted Menzies, Vic Toews, Diane Ablonczy, John Duncan, Bev Oda, Lynne Yelich, Peter Van Loan, Ed Komarnicki, James Moore, Steven Fletcher, Carol Skelton, James Rajotte, Deepak Obhrai, Brian Pallister, Merv Tweed, Greg Thompson, Scott Reid, Dave Mackenzie, Josée Verner, Rahim Jaffer, Norm Doyle, Jay Hill

 

[3chordcharlie]

Your list is fun, but uninformative. Maybe you have something to say about your allstars?

I like Peter MacKay.

I don't think you need two elections, and if history teaches you anything, it is that the party forcing an early election is going to lose support because of it. The Liberals are perfectly capable of working with a Conservative minority, meaning that under your scenario, the Conservatives will need to force two elections - that's a lot of pissed off voters!

If the current inquiry places significant blame at the feet of anyone in cabinet right now, you'll get your majority. What Harper needs to do is back off the snake oil, voice his displeasure at the Martin/NDP deal, and bide his time until december. You can't honestly read his response to Martin's address to the nation without realizing how contrived it is. Don't make me add in Harper's comments calling Layton a prostitute

As for the 'wasted' money, it is ill-spent, but that's not the same as entirely wasted - how much do Canadians value that spending? Probably at less than the cost, but certainly at more than $0 - the difference is the amount of waste actually generated.

 

[Stunt]

3chord: My link has biographies on all the allstars, if you read up on them, you will see just how experienced and worthy of respect the conservative party is. I don't think the liberals can pin this election on conservatives as the NDP has voted against government, the bloc has and will, the conservatives cannot support legislation that they were sent there to counter. So what is a party to do but vote against it? The liberals already went on national TV to say that the scandal is what is causing the ineffective gov't: NOT THE CONSERVATIVES.
The conservatives to win a majority will need two elections, they will not call the second, i see the liberals pulling a similar thing the conservatives and bloc are doing to bring it down. Although i think the Bloc and Conservatives will hold it with more power and money for the provinces.
Winning over support of all the regions of the country. Ontario wants transfers back, newfies want more power, alberta wants more power, etc. This is an area the conservatives have touted for a long time. It can and will work.

I don't think much of Layton...any man who cries during a campaign over homeless people should not be given the power over public money.
So most canadians would value $4.6billion as more than $0, i should hope so...i mean 4.6billion buying things they do not want is a tough pill to swallow.

 

[Stunt]

Conservatives have no plans for abortion legislation

Proud to see three progressive parties in canada, and a fiscally responsible, socially progressive alternative to the liberals.

Tories reject push for legislation on abortion
By ALEXANDER PANETTA
MONTREAL (CP) - The Conservative party abandoned the fight for an abortion law Saturday after four decades of bitter national debate that sparked court challenges, police raids and passionate protest.

The historic vote at a party convention left anti-abortion advocates with no mainstream political vehicle for the first time ever as the party opted to stake its fortunes a little closer to the political centre.

Conservative officials insisted they had wrenched away a cudgel Liberals used to bash them for more than a generation.

One jubilant pro-choice delegate crowed that the decision will instantly make the party a more viable force in the next election campaign - especially with female voters.

"Legislatures have no place in women's bodies," said Nargis Kheran of St. John, N.B., who earlier told the convention crowd that women "do not need you to tell us what to do."

Conservatives had maintained a diplomatic silence on abortion for years. Although the party was opposed to the lack of regulation of abortion, no Conservative leader mounted an organized attempt to draft legislation since Brian Mulroney in 1989.

Conservative Leader Stephen Harper decided to end the ambiguity. He told delegates Friday there will be no abortion law if he becomes prime minister.


Results of the vote were not a slam-dunk. The vast convention hall remained relatively quiet when the numbers were read while some delegates, mostly female, stood to applaud the news: the party's 2,900 delegates had voted 55 per cent in favour of maintaining the status quo on abortion, and 45 per cent against.

Harper hopes a more moderate face for his party will help attract urban and eastern Canadian voters who abandoned him in droves in the final days of last year's election campaign.

Anti-abortion forces insisted they have not abandoned their fight.

Former MP Elsie Wayne was most blunt.

"Society has gone to hell in a handbag. And that isn't the way the Conservatives want us to be," she said after the results were announced.

"I do not believe that the majority of our people at this convention are in favour of killing babies," she said earlier to scattered applause, some boos and several rolled eyeballs on the convention floor. "You know that abortion kills babies."

Wary of provoking further ire from social conservatives within his party, Harper denied suggestions Saturday's vote marked a definitive final chapter in the abortion debate.

"The nature of a democracy is that any previous decision can be challenged and overturned because there's no final winners and no final losers," he said.

"But do I think that's an issue we're going to see it debated in Parliament in the next few years? No."

Mary Ellen, a delegate and national organizer for Campaign Life Coalition from Kingston, Ont., said she's unhappy with the decision but will keep lobbying to change the party's position.

"That's what a party is all about, that's what democracy is all about," she said.

"We've killed three million babies in Canada. This issue needs to be debated."

Canada has not had any abortion rules since 1988, when the Supreme Court of Canada struck down previous laws as unconstitutional. A subsequent attempt by the Mulroney government to legislate guidelines on abortion was defeated in a free vote in Parliament.

Abortion was a crime punishable by life in prison when Henry Morgentaler, a Montreal obstetrician, began performing them in the 1960s.

His clinics in different cities were raided by police and he was once lunged at by a protester brandishing garden shears. The Supreme Court ultimately sided with Morgentaler.

One high-profile Quebec Conservative told delegates it was time to turn the page on the abortion debate.

"I'm expressing myself in the name of our grandmothers and mothers who fought for women's rights, and for our daughters and ourselves," said Josee Verner, a Harper aide.

"The abortion question was settled by . . . Brian Mulroney and must remain untouched."

But one delegate wearing a No Left Turn button said Canada will eventually need to address the issue to set legal ground rules for emerging technologies on reproduction and genetic engineering.

"At some point I think we're going to have to answer the difficult legal question of, 'When does life begin,' for the purposes of criminal law," said Alan McDonnell of Burnaby, B.C.

"It's a mess, it's a free for all, and I don't think we'll go the next 10 years before having to bring back the debate."

Fears that the Tories would re-open the abortion debate dealt them a critical blow in urban areas in the final days of the last election campaign.

Prime Minister Paul Martin exploited those fears by constantly accusing Harper of having a hidden agenda on abortion and other morality issues, and he vowed to "protect a woman's right to choose."

He rode that message to victory as urban voters - especially women - abandoned the Conservatives and NDP in the final days of the campaign to help him defeat Harper.

 

[3chordcharlie]

*shrug*

Anti-abortion forces insisted they have not abandoned their fight.

Former MP Elsie Wayne was most blunt.

"Society has gone to hell in a handbag. And that isn't the way the Conservatives want us to be," she said after the results were announced.

Your link, not mine

I should say a little more - until I'm convinced that abortion legislation is a permanent non-starter in Canada, it may play a part in any voting decisions I make. I'm more convinced now that I would have been five years ago, when I was first old enough to vote, but comments like the above mean I still don't feel like it's been put to rest.