Democracy On The Skids In Canada ?  

Posted by Big Gav in , ,

Has Canadian PM Harper become Canadian Dictator Harper ? Reuters reports that in order to avoid a no confidence vote he has suspended parliament - how can that happen ? From Reuters - Canadian PM wins suspension of Parliament.

Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper won a rare suspension of Parliament on Thursday, managing to avoid being ousted by opposition parties angry over the minority Conservative government’s economic plans and an attempt to cut off party financing.

Governor General Michaelle Jean — the representative of Queen Elizabeth, Canada’s head of state — agreed to Harper’s request to shut down Parliament until Jan 26. Parliament was reconvened just weeks ago after the October 14 election.

Harper’s request for suspension was unprecedented. No prime minister had asked for Parliament to be suspended to avoid a confidence vote in the House of Commons.

Such a vote had been set for Monday and the Conservatives almost certainly would have lost it, and faced the possibility of being replaced by a coalition of opposition parties.

After a two-hour meeting with the governor general, Harper reaffirmed his promise to present a budget on Jan 27 and called on the opposition to work with the government over the next few weeks to tackle the effects of the global financial crisis.

“Today’s decision will give us an opportunity — and I’m talking about all the parties — to focus on the economy and to work together,” he told reporters.

The opposition Liberals, New Democrats and the separatist Bloc Quebecois — all to the left of the Conservatives — had signed a deal to defeat the Conservatives and put forward a Liberal-New Democrat coalition to form a new government.

The Bloc, which wants to take French-speaking Quebec out of Canada, pledged to back the coalition’s budgets and general policy direction.

The governor general’s role in government, as representative of the Crown, is largely ceremonial, though she has the final word on constitutional matters. Should the government be defeated in a confidence vote, she would decide whether to call a new election or allow the opposition to form a coalition government.

5 comments

It's quite constitutional for the GG to prorogue Parliament. Bear in mind that no laws or budgets can be passed except through Parliament. So getting it suspended just buys the PM some time, at some point they have to stand there and get knocked down.

Perhaps the PM said to the GG, "once they see my budget they'll want to keep me!"

GG are there to enhance the stability of the whole system. If the GG felt that the proposed coalition might not be stable, then they would be happy to try to buy the current PM some time.

I mean honestly, would you expect a coalition of Liberals, New Democrats and Bloc Quebecois to last more than five minutes? It'd be like Labor, Democrats, Green and Family First all together.

They can still roll him when he presents his Budget; traditionally in the Westminster system, a House rejection of the Budget is the same as losing a vote of confidence.

I don't see the point in buying him more time - if he hasn't got the confidence of parliament he should go, not get the GG to delay the inevitable.

The new coalition may not be stable either, in which case they'll probably need another election before too long...

Well, it depends on your view of the role of the GG. Historically, this has been to ensure the stability and continuity of government. For example, if a PM dies, or an election results in a hung parliament, the GG is meant to choose as PM someone who has the confidence of Parliament. They're not meant to stuff around with that, someone should always be PM. The Aussie Constitution gives the GG the power to appoint whoever they like as Ministers, including PM, for up to 90 days - so in principle they could have a different 24 people as their Cabinet Ministers and PM every 90 days, and never anyone from Parliament. Such a government would not be continuous, but interrupted, and would lack the confidence of Parliament.

So as GG you have to decide how important stability and continuity are, compared to how important the "confidence of Parliament" is.

This was the problem Kerr faced with Whitlam and Fraser. Whitlam was unable to continue the day-to-day functions of government - he couldn't pass money bills. Confidence but no stability. Whitlam had the confidence of Parliament in the House, but not the Senate; Fraser could ensure stable and continuous government, at least for the month or so until the election.

So the Canadian GG has obviously favoured stable and continuous government over the confidence of Parliament, but only temporarily, until it sits again.

Whereas if they let the confidence vote go ahead, there'd be a new PM today, and maybe there'd be the same problem six weeks from now, and then again, and so on. Yes, the GG can just dissolve Parliament and call fresh elections, but would they lead to someone with a clear majority? Maybe, maybe not. Gets messy.

If we or the Canadians wanted an unstable and interrupted government we could become a republic.

It's the Christmas/New Year break, governments do nothing over that period anyway. There is effectively no government then. So the guy gets the chance to redeem himself with a Budget, and if they reject that, whoever the ragtag coalition puts up gets to be PM instead.

I'm not sure you're argument comparing Harper and Whitlam is valid (i fact, it seems completely wrong to me).

Whitlam's party had a majority in the lower house and should not have been overthrown - it was the lawful government.

Harper's party does not have a majority - it governs as part of a coalition, and now his partners don't want to be part of it anymore, it no longer has any legitimacy and should be disposed of immediately.

Anonymous   says 6:34 AM

Big Gav,

In fact the Harper government is a minority one, not part of any coalition.

Post a Comment

Statistics

Locations of visitors to this page

blogspot visitor
Stat Counter

Total Pageviews

Ads

Books

Followers

Blog Archive

Labels

australia (619) global warming (423) solar power (397) peak oil (355) renewable energy (302) electric vehicles (250) wind power (194) ocean energy (165) csp (159) solar thermal power (145) geothermal energy (144) energy storage (142) smart grids (140) oil (139) solar pv (138) tidal power (137) coal seam gas (131) nuclear power (129) china (120) lng (117) iraq (113) geothermal power (112) green buildings (110) natural gas (110) agriculture (91) oil price (80) biofuel (78) wave power (73) smart meters (72) coal (70) uk (69) electricity grid (67) energy efficiency (64) google (58) internet (50) surveillance (50) bicycle (49) big brother (49) shale gas (49) food prices (48) tesla (46) thin film solar (42) biomimicry (40) canada (40) scotland (38) ocean power (37) politics (37) shale oil (37) new zealand (35) air transport (34) algae (34) water (34) arctic ice (33) concentrating solar power (33) saudi arabia (33) queensland (32) california (31) credit crunch (31) bioplastic (30) offshore wind power (30) population (30) cogeneration (28) geoengineering (28) batteries (26) drought (26) resource wars (26) woodside (26) censorship (25) cleantech (25) bruce sterling (24) ctl (23) limits to growth (23) carbon tax (22) economics (22) exxon (22) lithium (22) buckminster fuller (21) distributed manufacturing (21) iraq oil law (21) coal to liquids (20) indonesia (20) origin energy (20) brightsource (19) rail transport (19) ultracapacitor (19) santos (18) ausra (17) collapse (17) electric bikes (17) michael klare (17) atlantis (16) cellulosic ethanol (16) iceland (16) lithium ion batteries (16) mapping (16) ucg (16) bees (15) concentrating solar thermal power (15) ethanol (15) geodynamics (15) psychology (15) al gore (14) brazil (14) bucky fuller (14) carbon emissions (14) fertiliser (14) matthew simmons (14) ambient energy (13) biodiesel (13) investment (13) kenya (13) public transport (13) big oil (12) biochar (12) chile (12) cities (12) desertec (12) internet of things (12) otec (12) texas (12) victoria (12) antarctica (11) cradle to cradle (11) energy policy (11) hybrid car (11) terra preta (11) tinfoil (11) toyota (11) amory lovins (10) fabber (10) gazprom (10) goldman sachs (10) gtl (10) severn estuary (10) volt (10) afghanistan (9) alaska (9) biomass (9) carbon trading (9) distributed generation (9) esolar (9) four day week (9) fuel cells (9) jeremy leggett (9) methane hydrates (9) pge (9) sweden (9) arrow energy (8) bolivia (8) eroei (8) fish (8) floating offshore wind power (8) guerilla gardening (8) linc energy (8) methane (8) nanosolar (8) natural gas pipelines (8) pentland firth (8) saul griffith (8) stirling engine (8) us elections (8) western australia (8) airborne wind turbines (7) bloom energy (7) boeing (7) chp (7) climategate (7) copenhagen (7) scenario planning (7) vinod khosla (7) apocaphilia (6) ceramic fuel cells (6) cigs (6) futurism (6) jatropha (6) nigeria (6) ocean acidification (6) relocalisation (6) somalia (6) t boone pickens (6) local currencies (5) space based solar power (5) varanus island (5) garbage (4) global energy grid (4) kevin kelly (4) low temperature geothermal power (4) oled (4) tim flannery (4) v2g (4) club of rome (3) norman borlaug (2) peak oil portfolio (1)