http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xe-DFZA6pR0

This is simply a maturation of Canadian politics. Sadly Stephen Harper is one of the only ones standing in the way. For all those conspiracy theorists saying it’s all about the state funding, well no party had denied state funding is a component for why they no longer support the conservatives. Actually the conservative government already abandoned the idea because of the fierce opposition to it. So clearly the opposition is very public and well known. However the parties are STILL opposed to the conservative government and furthermore the conservative party itself has in fact demonstrated that some of the ground work for this was laid back several months ago (which is not surprising given the ‘anything but conservative’ campaign). Clearly then, the claim it’s all about the state funding is bullshit, in fact this has been in the works for a while and Stephen Harper’s government sealed his fate when he showed he has absolutely no idea how to handle the crisis by the crap proposal which was oppose by all others, and not just because of the state funding.

*Indeed while I’ve never looked at the results, I presume as with all countries that use FPTP the three smaller parties actually gained a larger share of the vote then they received in seats so it’s even more obvious that the conservative government no longer command the support of a majority of voters

Politicians? Grow up? I think I see a new Tui ad in the works …

http://www.cbc.ca/news/pdf/081201_Accord_en.pdf

This threat to the other parties funding base (since state funding they had become very dependent on it) was intolerable, so they got together to roll the Government on the grounds of an inadequate response to the credit crisis.

Another good reason my New Zealand shouldn’t adopt state funding of political parties. Let Labour and the Greens beg for money from the public.

Alberta should secede and leave the rest to rot I reckon P

Canada’s First Past the Post voting system gets messed up by their extreme regionalism (especially the Quebec factor). In fact, it militates against parties with a truly national appeal (witness the Greens – a significant cross-country appeal, just not enough voters in any one riding to gain MPs). Unfortunately, the two provinces to seriously consider PR voting didn’t end up adopting it … be interesting to see what the present events do to that debate at a national level.

If we do dump MMP we could also adopt a second chamber much like the oh so useful Canadian Senate.

Here’s a funny song
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rt1_6uz_sVU

Its quite good

Have a look at:

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/posted/archive/2008/12/02/fact-check-no-flag-behind-the-coalition-photo-op.aspx

There were three Canadian flags clearly visible behind the party leaders. DPF was simply channeling Harper’s “let’s make sh*t up” talking points … part of the vast right wing conspiracy at work?

The baby sprog is 27, I think he knows the words.

BTW, it’s the British Colombian Anthem – not enough girlies to go around over there!

[DPF: The general opinion of constitutional experts is the Queen must follow the advice of her PM, and it is not her job to ascertain the confidence of the House]

…includes a suggestion that Harper could advise the Queen to sack Jean and appoint a GG sure to give him a dissolution

[Sad though it is that I'm getting excited over antiquated constitutional conventions... thank goodness Kevin Rudd's ridiculous proposed net "purity of thought and deed" net filter won't be triggered by such things... I think]

That’d just throw the hot potato squarely in the lap of the Queen, who (rightly IMHO) tends to defer to her local representatives on such matters, figuring that they have the depth of knowledge and are closer to being able to understand what the people want. She certainly didn’t stop Sir John Kerr famously tossing Gough Whitlam out of office. But then again even Gough wouldn’t have had the chutzpah to ring Buck House and ask her to flip Kerr for a GG more accommodating to his whims.

Is the National Post trying to stir things up, or is it remotely possible that Harper would set off such a constitutional high explosive??!!

[DPF: Actually Kerr was worried Whitlam would get the Queen to sack him before he could sack Whitlam, hence why he kept his intentions a secret]

The mythical 5-headed beast, er, Government reportedly glimpsed in NZ, now sighted in Canada?

“This does put Michaelle Jean in an interesting position. Anyone have a feel for her probable thinking?”

I haven’t seen any speculation on this – aside from saying she’d “want to talk” with Harper before granting any dissolution.

In its coverage of “what happens next?”, the National Post (Canada’s right-of-center paper) includes a suggestion that Harper could advise the Queen to sack Jean and appoint a GG sure to give him a dissolution. That would, I think, be the nuclear option … maybe the trigger to move Canada to a republic?

This does put Michaelle Jean in an interesting position. Anyone have a feel for her probable thinking? I was familiar enough with Adrienne Clarkson to be able to hazard a guess, but I know nothing at all about Jean.

Given that, as AG points out above, there’s no clear mandate for either “side” it’s presumably going to come down to the Governor General making a very personal judgement as to what’s best for the country.

Mr. Trudeau was the ONLY Canadian Prime Minister that had a big enough sense of humour to run Canada’s Federal Government. (He also had a similar situation resulting in his last Primministership!)

He also made Joe Who (anyone remember him) wait 4 years before they could celebrate his final departure from Politics – but that’s another story!

As my children regularly sing

“God keep our land
Glorious and free
Oh! Canada we stand on guard for thee
Though now Kiwi we stand on guard for thee”.

Guess they’ll have to go ‘home’ and vote
Eh?