What outcome would you like to see happen in the parliamentary crisis?

[Loachman]

Which is why I want to crush the Lieberals, to see them driven before us, and to hear the lamentation of their women.

 

[cp140tech]

You get one vote.  Parties forming agreements with each other have done nothing to affect the vote you just cast. 
Like it or not, you don't get much say in what goes on day to day once your one vote has been cast.
Members are free to cross the floor to join other parties, or sit as independents... it doesn't void the election results.

The Hitler thing is just farm animal stupid.

I like the Conan thing myself.

 

[tabernac]

I think it has been well publicized that this coalition is perfectly legal.

Legal? Yes. Loophole in the system? Most definitely. Morally correct? Not by any measure.

It doesn't matter if the majority of Canadians voted against Harper. Canadians did NOT go to the polls to vote in a coalition. So the 62 or 63% majority argument doesn't fly particularly well. Or at all.

 

[cp140tech]

In my post I also said I was not a fan of the coalition.  Morally correct is subjective, legal not so much.  As ridiculous as I may personally believe the concept to be, it is a legitimate option.  The danger in a minority government is very real for a PM who rankles the opposition as much as Mr Harper seems to have done, way she goes.... the f@#kin way she goes.

We can argue all day... they'll do whatever they do.  I have had too much of this fine Irish whiskey to continue posting, good night folks.

 

[a_majoor]

I believe the so called coalition is actually unable to form a government as currently constituted, and the GG was correct to prorogue the Parliament.

1. The coalition caucus only consists of the Liberals and NDP=114 seats.
2. The BQ is not formally part of the coalition, nor do they have the means to take part in such a government as they have no ministers nor do they caucus with the coalition
3. There are no guarantees that the BQ will support the coalition in government, only that they will not motion or support a non confidence motion.

We need to clear the air, and I am starting to believe that Prime Minister Harper engineered this (knowing or suspecting that a coalition deal was in the works) with the long term goal of clearing out the deadwood parties and preventing future "pizza parliaments" and unstable minorities. I suspect that he would be comfortable with mergers or party extinctions that result in national parties and a clear "Left/Right" choice for voters, and would graciously head the opposition should a real majority of voters elect one opposition party to power, since that would reflect his desired outcome. (If he would be allowed to gracefully lead the Opposition is a different story, of course).

 

[Scratch_043]

^
This is the best explanation of the current situation, and motivation that I have seen so far. Harper is no dunce, he has seen and realized that no matter who is the "sitting" government that party can not effectively lead, given that there is pretty much no chance of a majority government on the horizon (up until this chain of events), and all other parties would effectively be 'waiting in the wings' for them to screw up on something, no matter how small, to get their chance to vote them down and get their chance.

 

[Marshall]

I believe the so called coalition is actually unable to form a government as currently constituted, and the GG was correct to prorogue the Parliament.

1. The coalition caucus only consists of the Liberals and NDP=114 seats.
2. The BQ is not formally part of the coalition, nor do they have the means to take part in such a government as they have no ministers nor do they caucus with the coalition
3. There are no guarantees that the BQ will support the coalition in government, only that they will not motion or support a non confidence motion.

We need to clear the air, and I am starting to believe that Prime Minister Harper engineered this (knowing or suspecting that a coalition deal was in the works) with the long term goal of clearing out the deadwood parties and preventing future "pizza parliaments" and unstable minorities. I suspect that he would be comfortable with mergers or party extinctions that result in national parties and a clear "Left/Right" choice for voters, and would graciously head the opposition should a real majority of voters elect one opposition party to power, since that would reflect his desired outcome. (If he would be allowed to gracefully lead the Opposition is a different story, of course).

Very good explanation.

I myself hope the Tories stay in power with Mr. Harper. A coalition seems foolish, the public obviously voted for a Conservative government and that is what we should be entitled to for the next several years. January will be a interesting month.