I rememeber once, a lad by the name of Bowie. James Bowie.
One day Bowie said this:
"So Harper's comments on 'checks and balances' should be taken with a grain of salt. As I mentioned before, the Senate will not help curtail Harper's mandate (if he gets on, which I hope he doesn't). Harper will pass his budget, because nobody wants the next election so soon."
Oh really now? I remember that this Canuck's little diatribe earned this response from myself:
Maybe you don't exactly understand the situation my friend. How exactly is Harper supposed to bi-pass the Liberal senate? Mulroney did it by stacking it with Conservative members, but Harper has pledged to make them elected... Not to mention the fact that he has the Supreme Court, the RCMP, and every other government agency or anything else the Liberals have managed to infiltrate over the last 13 years stacked against him... Me thinkee you don't thinkee that one out too much.
This "me being right" thing is not doing any good for the size of my head right now.
Hello!!!
ReplyDeleteThanks for reading so thuroughly. So many people just read the title and comment. You've digested. Hats off.
Now as to the senate thing. I stand by the original statement. The Liberal Senate will not be a significanot opposition. Joe Day came out and said he wants to kick ass, so I reported on that; however, the Senate will not interfere with a Bill that relates to an election platform issue.
The Senate is the house of sober second thought, but it has shown that it is unwilling to substitute its own judgement for the judgement of Canadians. The NAFTA blockage was possible because it wasn't mentioned in the '84 campaign. The '88 campaign was all about NAFTA, and the same Senators thereafter voted to allow free trade to proceed.
Harper makes noise about electing them, but on his first day he broke that promise and appointed Michael Fortier to the Upper Chamber.
So I am comfortable with my position on the Senate, which has not changed. Please do not take Senator Day's statement to represent my position or the position of the Liberal Majority in the Senate.
The leader of the Liberals in the Senate is the Hon. Dan Hayes; moreover, unlike MP's, Senators cannot be whipped and controlled as to their public statements. Senator Day can say whatever he likes, and it doesn't necessarily reflect the position of the Senatorial caucus.
What's more, Dan Hayes is a cool dude. I met him once. He's awesome.
Thanks again for reading. I hope it's sunny where you are.
JB
"Now as to the senate thing. I stand by the original statement. The Liberal Senate will not be a significanot opposition. Joe Day came out and said he wants to kick ass, so I reported on that; however, the Senate will not interfere with a Bill that relates to an election platform issue."
ReplyDeleteWell we'll see what happens. Also I find it hard then to understand why after Mulroney stacked the Senate, that Chretien did the same right after. If the Senate is so completely unwilling to fillibuster a thing why do so many Prime Minister's take an interest into stacking it one way or another?
"Harper makes noise about electing them, but on his first day he broke that promise and appointed Michael Fortier to the Upper Chamber."
Touche. Though I found that decision to be more "dancing" on the line of ethical behaviour instead of crossing it. The Emerson fiasco is what worried me a lot more.
"So I am comfortable with my position on the Senate, which has not changed. Please do not take Senator Day's statement to represent my position or the position of the Liberal Majority in the Senate."
Interesting. Again, we'll see what happens. Though my opinion on your original post hasn't changed.
Harper was right when he said there would be ample checks and balances on his government. If governing in a minority was so easy, Joe Clark would have had a different political career don't you think?
I'm enjoying this conversation. You're a very reasonable conservative.
ReplyDeleteMy first priority is to be clear that I did not contradict myself. I am not Joe Day. Joe Day contradicted me.
You're entirely right about the Senate phillibuster. We don't have anyone like Royce Frith, from the looks of it. I spoke with Dan Hayes about whether we should change the rules back. He said 'no.'
So it looks like closure is going to stay on the books. But you're right to use the word 'interesting' as much as you do, because anything can happen.
And David Emerson is a jerk. Thank you for telling it like it is.
And I hope I can change your opinion of my work. At the outset, I wanted to say that Harper was wrong about the checks he'd face. In the second article, I wanted to draw attention to a rogue Liberal senator who wants to kick ass. I don't think I'm a hypocrite.
"My first priority is to be clear that I did not contradict myself. I am not Joe Day. Joe Day contradicted me."
ReplyDeletePoint taken.
"And David Emerson is a jerk. Thank you for telling it like it is."
Now if you guys could only take him back so he's not our problem anymore :-P
"And I hope I can change your opinion of my work. At the outset, I wanted to say that Harper was wrong about the checks he'd face. In the second article, I wanted to draw attention to a rogue Liberal senator who wants to kick ass. I don't think I'm a hypocrite."
I wouldn't say that you are, but all I was saying is that I still think Harper is right about the checks he'd face. I think he's facing them now. Between you and me there's no doubt there will be areas where we will have to "agree to disagree."
Though I'm finding this conversation alot more constructive than most of the other conversations I have with rabid toothed foul mouthed Liberals that peruse around here from time to time. You seem level headed and reasonable. I certainly don't mean to attack your work only to disagree with you where I do and to do it in a fun way.
I hope Harper faces a check from the Senate. I hope he (and you) are right.
ReplyDeleteBut I don't see any serious opposition coming from the Senate on any issue mentioned during the campaign.
But let's hope I'm wrong.
PS: I'm giving you a link.
ReplyDelete