|
Post by chrisfan on Jan 25, 2006 11:54:24 GMT -5
The timing in the polls makes a lot of sense. I had failed to take that into consideration when I was thinking about how things would play out. Obviously, if the no confidence motion went through and the PM called for new elections, and the same people were elected, it'd be useless ... duh Chrisfan! By political chaos, i was thinking about the way that things go by partisian lines rather than independent commitment to what is right often times here. As an example, the judiciary committee vote on Sam Alito yesterday. The vote was straight down party lines, and it's hard to believe that it was done for anything other than party loyalty anda concern for how to strengthen each side's own party. So I was just imagining how it would be for an action like a no confidence motion to be used when party affiliation was your only concern. But as I just stated, I was failing to take into consideration the realistic opportunity to win that election once you got it, which is obviously an essential piece of the puzzle.
|
|
|
Post by Dr. Drum on Jan 25, 2006 13:31:54 GMT -5
Yeah, a government will do everything it can do to avoid falling if it thinks the public mood is running against it. Similarly, the opposition will avoid bringing down a government unless it thinks public opinion is running in its direction.
As for voting along party lines, in the Canadian system, as it worked up until the last Parliament anyway, practically everything is done this way. This used to hold for all votes from minor procedural items to clear matters of confidence like budget votes. If you were Liberal, you voted with the Liberal caucus; if you were Conservative, you voted with the Conservatives and so on.
The Martin government introduced a feature, borrowed from the British Parliament, known as the three-line whip. Items on the order paper were divided into one of three categories. Single-line items were considered free votes. Two-line items required government ministers to vote the party line but allowed backbench MPs to vote their conscience. Three-line items, measures of confidence or items otherwise considered top priority, required all government MPs to be present and vote with the government.
The Liberals were hoping this system would catch on with the other parties, but they were embarrassed on a couple of two-line votes where the other parties voted along party lines, so I’m not even sure if they’ll stick with it in the new parliament or not. The Conservatives had something in their platform about making everything but the budget and main estimates free votes for all MPs but cabinet ministers. Not sure how they’ll feel about that one now that they have a government to run.
|
|
|
Post by Meursault on Jan 26, 2006 12:05:40 GMT -5
I went Green this year.
|
|
|
Post by Dr. Drum on Jan 26, 2006 19:28:06 GMT -5
Good to see you around, Shane. You're back in Brison's riding, aren't you?
|
|
|
Post by riley on Jan 27, 2006 9:56:52 GMT -5
I went Green this year. I voted for the Bloc so there.
|
|
|
Post by Dr. Drum on Jan 30, 2006 8:01:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by riley on Jan 30, 2006 8:22:04 GMT -5
I hadn't, but it's very interesting.
|
|
|
Post by rockkid on Feb 1, 2006 9:47:36 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Rit on Feb 1, 2006 9:55:16 GMT -5
sooo, i take it u don't like the Liberals
|
|
|
Post by rockkid on Feb 1, 2006 10:33:03 GMT -5
ye'd be right
|
|
|
Post by Rit on Feb 1, 2006 10:33:55 GMT -5
because of corruption?
|
|
|
Post by rockkid on Feb 1, 2006 22:16:42 GMT -5
Oh my lad t'is but one reason of many.
Sigh
|
|
|
Post by phil on Feb 1, 2006 22:26:20 GMT -5
Conservatives never get to stay in power long enough to really get a shot at lining their pockets ... !!
|
|
|
Post by Dr. Drum on Feb 2, 2006 11:14:52 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by phil on Feb 2, 2006 11:21:12 GMT -5
That memory is a forgetful faculty ... Mercifully ! !
|
|