babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » canadian politics   » Time to dust off books about the Joe Clark regime

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Time to dust off books about the Joe Clark regime
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 10 February 2006 01:40 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So far, Harper is making such incalculable mistakes in the first week as PM, I think its worth re-reading books written about how the Joe Clark Tories managed to win a minority government in May 1979 - and then three months later they were already 18 points behind the Liberals in the polls!
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Alexander
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8032

posted 10 February 2006 02:58 AM      Profile for Alexander     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
So far, Harper is making such incalculable mistakes in the first week as PM, I think its worth re-reading books written about how the Joe Clark Tories managed to win a minority government in May 1979 - and then three months later they were already 18 points behind the Liberals in the polls!

Lets all just hope that happens here ...


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
Vansterdam Kid
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5474

posted 10 February 2006 03:07 AM      Profile for Vansterdam Kid   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Except for the Liberal Majority part.
From: bleh.... | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
longtime lurker
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10920

posted 10 February 2006 05:47 AM      Profile for longtime lurker        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stockholm:
So far, Harper is making such incalculable mistakes in the first week as PM, I think its worth re-reading books written about how the Joe Clark Tories managed to win a minority government in May 1979 - and then three months later they were already 18 points behind the Liberals in the polls!

The Mulroney airbus stuff resurfacing was not exactly the best thing that could have happened either from Harper's standpoint. Child care could be the issue that precipitates an early election.


From: London, Ont. | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 10 February 2006 10:29 AM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The new budget will be the first vote of confidence. With Flaherty in Finance, it'll get a lot of scrutiny, as Flaherty has already said (on 'Politics'), even before he got the department's briefing books, that there will NOT be a deficit. Harpoon's child care proposal will be opposed by all three Opposition parties, but I don't think it's a confidence matter - Harpoon is pushing it, but he's leading a small minority, so he's going to get frustrated. Maybe even enough to throw a hissy fit in the House.
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
thwap
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5062

posted 10 February 2006 11:57 AM      Profile for thwap        Edit/Delete Post
And of course, Flaherty didn't have deficits when he was in charge in Ontario.


From: Hamilton | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
longtime lurker
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10920

posted 10 February 2006 03:16 PM      Profile for longtime lurker        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Boom Boom:
The new budget will be the first vote of confidence. With Flaherty in Finance, it'll get a lot of scrutiny, as Flaherty has already said (on 'Politics'), even before he got the department's briefing books, that there will NOT be a deficit. Harpoon's child care proposal will be opposed by all three Opposition parties, but I don't think it's a confidence matter - Harpoon is pushing it, but he's leading a small minority, so he's going to get frustrated. Maybe even enough to throw a hissy fit in the House.

Wouldn't child care changes have to form part of the budget? Specifically the $1200 cheques.

[ 10 February 2006: Message edited by: longtime lurker ]


From: London, Ont. | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 10 February 2006 03:45 PM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Quote: Wouldn't child care changes have to form part of the budget? Specifically the $1200 cheques.

You're right - I must have been asleep at the switch in my earlier post. This will be Harpoon's first test, obviously - how will the Opposition react?


From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Michael Watkins
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11256

posted 10 February 2006 04:43 PM      Profile for Michael Watkins   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The challenge for Harper will be to package a budget that offends only in a few targeted areas, designed so as to paint the opposition as being somehow "anti-canadian" (read: anti-taxpayer).

Its likely to be a Joe Clark like gambit, but with one key difference: Clark wanted to raise a wildly unpopular tax; Harper is trying to give Canadians money in their pockets. If he's successful in giving that appearance, it'll be the prelude to the next election.

Perhaps after the Emerson debacle the tactics may need to be changed...


From: Vancouver Kingway - Democracy In Peril | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Aristotleded24
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9327

posted 10 February 2006 04:53 PM      Profile for Aristotleded24   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I would caution that WRT speculating about a Conservative government falling, we are playing with fire. Canadians didn't want the last election, they aren't going to want one now, and if it looks like the opposition brought down the Conservatives, expect a Harper majority. The Liberal scandal is still fresh in people's minds, plus they are in a rebuilding phase, so they aren't going to suddenly overtake Harper.
From: Winnipeg | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
F.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10725

posted 10 February 2006 05:02 PM      Profile for F.     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
And of course, Flaherty didn't have deficits when he was in charge in Ontario.

It takes a very special kind of incompetence to make Janet Ecker appear to be an improvement to the portfolio.


From: here | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
peterjcassidy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 372

posted 10 February 2006 06:50 PM      Profile for peterjcassidy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Actualy, if the government fails on a confidence test, especially this early, there doesn't have to be an election. The GG could turn to someone other than Harper to see if they can form a govenment. Think Frank Miller in Ontario in 1985 when Rae and PEterson did their accord.As I recall the conservite govnerment th thad ruled for 42 years was defeated in its first sitting on a non confidence motion and the Lt. GG. accepted that Peterson, witht the support of the NDP, had the ight to govern. There had been neogitations going on for weeks and the accord with the Libs committed them to certain agenda items, with the promise to not call an elecion for two years, and the NDP not to vote Non confidence in the governent for two years, sounds like a good deal now?

Supposedly someting like this came close to happening after the 2004 election, when all three opposition parties were working together on amendments to the Throne Speech. Jack, so the story goes, backed out of the meetings when he sae the goal was to make Stephen Harper PM but ws tillefeitve in getting some amndmednt to thre Sppech If the Bloc, the Cons and NDP had told the representative of the monarch (the GG) that they did not have confidence in her Ministry headed by Martin then the GG probably would have tunred to Harper to see if he could form a government rther than have an eleciton so soon after the last inconlcusive one.

Theoreticaly, I beleive the GG also could have tried Jack, Giles or any other qulaified individual with a reasonable case they could governn.The basic test is coudl you command the support fo a majority of the Hosue of Commons.

Personally I think it would make sense for Jack to fire a few warning shots over Harpers bow, as may have happened with Peter Julian's complaint about Emerson.
http://tinyurl.com/cwnnt

"Stephen HAper has in the first few days shown the new boss is the same as the old boss- with inappropriate cabinet positions. He has also threatened to scrap the child care arrangment we pushed thorugh the Liberals. Be advised if this conduct continues we will not be supporting this government."

Then to push the envelope a bit, how about Jack for PM?. The Bloc and cons worked with him on a numer of matters, including but not limited to defeating the Libs, the Libs tried to make a deal with Jcd during the election to stop the Cons.
Could the Libs, the Bloc and maybe Garth Turner agree to give Jack a try?
Go JACK GO.



Right now, the person who made Stephen Harper PM was Parul martin who decided not to face the House and see if he could surive a vote of confidence.


From: Screaming in language no-one understands.. | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
NWOntarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9295

posted 01 April 2006 02:30 AM      Profile for NWOntarian   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Minority Governments: Harper vs Clark

quote:
For the second time in modern Canadian history, the country faces an uncertain minority government headed by a youngish man from Alberta about whom not a lot is known. Stephen Who?

Ah, but we get ahead of ourselves with that. Stephen Harper, Joe Clark, two men who caught the political bug at a young age, apprenticed in Ottawa's backrooms and then went on to head Conservative governments with near identical shares of the popular vote: 36 per cent.

We could go on in this vein – the mutual preoccupation with winning over Quebec; the advocacy of a more decentralized, provincially respectful Confederation; the fact that both came to power when oil prices, Alberta's resource revenues, were spiking into the stratosphere – but there are also the superficial similarities to consider.

Both men married vivacious, strong-minded women who kept their own name (though the former Laureen Teskey said a few months ago she now prefers to be known as Laureen Harper). Both are closet sports fans and both (how do we say this kindly?), weren't born to wear a Stetson.

...

Even Clark's closest friends and advisers would remark, when pressed, that he did have an exceptional stubborn streak. He was convinced, almost up to the moment of that fateful vote in the Commons, that the opposition parties would not defeat him; that he alone knew the path ahead; and that he would continue to govern, as he had resolved from the outset – and with that kind of stone-faced conviction that Harper seems to share as well – as though he had a majority.



From: London, ON | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
JPG
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10478

posted 01 April 2006 03:57 AM      Profile for JPG     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Deleted b/c of stupidity.

[ 01 April 2006: Message edited by: JPG ]


From: Toronto/Ottawa | Registered: Sep 2005  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca