The revolution gets bumped up two days -

The revolution gets bumped up two days

Michael Chong to table his bill on Tuesday


Michael Chong announces that “due to the interest surrounding” his bill on parliamentary reform will be tabled on Tuesday, two days earlier than originally planned.

The bill should not be viewed as a critique on any of the current leaders in the House of Commons. To suggest otherwise, misinterprets the intent of the bill…

I look forward to a vigourous debate on the merits of these proposed reforms to Canada’s Parliament and hope the bill will receive multi-party support.

NDP MP Linda Duncan seemed not terribly interested in Mr. Chong’s proposals on Friday, but Craig Scott, the NDP’s democratic reform critic, says he had an “interesting” chat with Mr. Chong and is looking forward to seeing the bill. Liberal MP Hedy Fry seems interested as well. Independent MP Brent Rathgeber says if the bill has been accurately reported, he’ll support it.

The bill already has its own hashtag and an unofficial website (setup by the deputy leader of the Green party of Ontario).


The revolution gets bumped up two days

  1. I’ve e-mailed my MP (yes, that guy) asking if he supports the bill. I doubt it, but you never know.

    • Well now that he is freed from his Parliamentary Secretary duties and CPC caucus member obligations, he’ll . . . look to see what the PM says he should do.

    • Throw in a plate of meatballs.

  2. Trudeau won’t support it.

    • But Stephen Harper will!

      • He will but only if they can give it a catchy name that somehow implies the Harper Government TM is protecting Canadians from the scourge of illegal jaywalking by child pornographers or some such.

      • Even IF Harper would support the bill, then you have something other negative to say about him. So who cares.

        People are just envious of Harper’s success.

        Time for people to grow up.

        The Refromact bill is not as straightforward as you may believe.

        In Australia, the caucus ousted one PM who was then replaced by another ousting by caucus and that did caucus members gain, in the end? Nothing, absolutely nothing. Just show. Show. Show. Show.

        • Yes, you’re right – if Harper supports the bill, it won’t change my overall view of him. But I would nonetheless applaud it as his first genuine step toward political reform.

        • “People are just envious of Harper’s success.”
          His success of making the middle class be the number one contributor of government funding?
          His success at making the general economic statement of Canada look more and more like the American one prior to it FAILING in 2007?
          IMO success means the majority of the population benefiting from it’s governing not just the corporate and top 5% of the population.
          And Alberta does not constitute the majority of the population.

          Lets not even, at this point, name off his internationally recognized and noted failures.

        • What success? All he’s succeeded in doing is poisoning the Conservative brand for another generation and that’s more of a Liberal success than a Conservative one.

      • On a more serious note, I would applaud if Harper (and the other party leaders) supported it, but that would come with a big caveat: No tampering with the content, and ensuring it is not so full of holes as to be meaningless other than as a name that can pointed to . . . in other words, unlike the vaunted Accountability Act

    • Why do you think that? I can’t find anything to indicate his potential stand on this bill. And do you expect Harper will vote in favour?

    • Harper won’t support it.

      • Why should Harper support it? The bill gives nothing of value to the caucus.

        In Australia, the backbench ousted one PM who was then promptly replaced by the backbench ousting the PM who was put in place after the first ousting. And what purpose did it serve? Nothing. Nothing at all.

        • Nothing but being accountable to your caucus and democracy, but you don’t seem to much care about that.

        • I wouldn’t say it achieved nothing. Rudd was ousted in 2010 by Gillard because, while Rudd was popular with voters, he is/was apparently a nightmare to work with in Cabinet. Gillard promptly called an election which resulted in a hung parliament and Labor formed a minority gov’t. Coming up on an election in 2013 (AUS has elections every 3 years), Labor was dropping like crazy in the polls, and many blamed Gillard for being unpopular with voters, while Rudd was still quite popular with the people. So they dumped Gillard for Rudd, and while Labor still lost the 2013 election, they didn’t do as badly as many thought they might – in fact, after the change of leadership, their numbers improved significantly.

          The bill gives everything of value to the caucus – it reverses the current balance of power. Which is exactly why someone like Harper would never support it.

  3. This should be fun. Rick Omen thinks Harper will support Chong’s bill (why else would he retort that Trudeau won’t?). Franny the Spammer asserts that there’s no way he will. We’re going to need a bathysphere to follow the depths of this debate, folks. If there was some way to get that Emily thing into it, we might create a thread that is practically infinite.

    • Fran the Spam.

      I like that.

      I don’t think she’s a person at all- I think she’s an algorithm. An algorithm that needs serious tweaking.

    • Why else indeed!

  4. Even that redoubtable icon of right-wing politics, Maggie Thatcher, was ultimately dumped by her own caucus. That’s how Westminster parliaments traditionally function.