Archives

A sample text widget

Etiam pulvinar consectetur dolor sed malesuada. Ut convallis euismod dolor nec pretium. Nunc ut tristique massa.

Nam sodales mi vitae dolor ullamcorper et vulputate enim accumsan. Morbi orci magna, tincidunt vitae molestie nec, molestie at mi. Nulla nulla lorem, suscipit in posuere in, interdum non magna.

A little history lesson.

As Harper carries on with his threats and bluster about how Parliament isn’t working anymore and how a fixed date law won’t stop him from dissolving the House in order to force an election on his terms, shall we go back to Sept 2004 for a minute and look at how things were a tad different then? Back then, before there was a fixed date election law, then opposition leader Stephen Harper was writing a joint letter with Gilles Duceppe and Jack Layton to then Governor-General Adrienne Clarkson admonishing her not to let Prime Minister Paul Martin dissolve the Parliament on a whim:

The leaders have also written a letter to Governor General Adrienne Clarkson requesting that they be consulted should the prime minister request a dissolution of Parliament to call an election.

In otherwards, they were asking the G-G to not automatically allow Martin to pick the time and choosing of his own defeat or dissolution of Parliament without talking to them first. Don’t let it be frivolous, Ms. Clarkson!

How times change, eh Harper?

[email protected]:40 pm: Steve over at his blog reads Hansard so you don’t have to, and picks out some quite moralistic stuff coming from Conservatives as they extol their fixed-term election law during Parliamentary debate and decry how the current system allows a Prime Minister to call an election at will. Unfortunately for them, Hansard debates aren’t erasable, so it’s easy to find stuff like this to throw back in their faces. I particularly love this quote by Conservative Jay Hill that Steve found during the debate over the Fixed Term Law in Parliament:

If a prime minister went against the spirit of this legislation and purely called an election because he or she felt the opportunity was ripe, that the situation for his or her particular political party was very advantageous to go to the polls, I suspect that person would quite likely be punished by the Canadian people in the subsequent election campaign.

Bravo Jay.. I hope your words are prophetic.. and it would be delicious irony, wouldn’t it?

7 comments to A little history lesson.

  • ALW

    I was just making a joke. Lighten the f*ck up.

  • @ALW

    Yup, just pointing out more of Harper being a hypocrite, ALW. It’s shockingly easy.

    Same old same old from you as well I see. Hansard and old news footage of Harper being two-faced, and you can’t even offer up a defence of it.

  • ALW

    Same old same old eh Scott? See you on the hustings.

  • Wilson: please stop being a Con parrot for once and take a look at the situation.

    -Two weeks ago, Harper and company are mocking Dion, daring him to take them down in the Fall and boldly predicting that he wouldn’t.

    – An article in the Hill Times quotes an anonymous Conservative strategist as predicting Dion would not take the Cons. down, but even if he did want to, the Bloc wouldn’t, in this guys opinion. He predicted they’d still be governing into the spring.

    Not 10 days later, all of a sudden we have PM Harper demanding that the opposition parties bend to support his agenda, or else Parliament is dysfunctional and so he needs to call an election, breaking the spirit, if not the letter of his fixed term election law.

    So what changed?

    1) Harper knows the economy is going to tank in a few months, or he’s going to be in the red with his next Budget, so he prefers to go now then later.

    2) The Committees looking at the in-and out scandal will be highly embarrassing for him, as perhaps will the actual court case against Elections Canada

    3) He knows he’s faring crappy in the 4 byelections, knows he wont win any of them, and doesn’t want Liberal momentum going into the House this Fall

    4) A combination of some or all of the above.

  • wilson

    So you think PMSH and the Conservatives have an advantage and are sure to win the election, right Scott?

    If not, then please explain how PMSH is going against the spirit of the law, unless he is sure to win.

    Libs and Cons have been tied in the polls for a year. Where is the advantage? (fair or unfair advantage).

  • Joseph

    Gee, you’d think the press might pick up on that little tidbit instead of perpetuating the myth that Harper is actually weighing a decision.

    But then we’re talking ancient history, aren’t we . . . I see you had to go all the way back to 2004 to find that one ; ).

    Good catch.

  • […] weeding out Conservative corruption (In-and-Out, Cadscam) and ethical problems (10%ers, Bernier). Scott provides a link to why an early election call is preposterous if Harper wants to save […]

unique visitors since the change to this site domain on Nov 12, 2008.