Something bad this way comes


 

The Star ends its Shamocracy series with a vague warning of possible doom.

As he did in December when opposition parties threatened to topple the Tory minority, the Prime Minister suggested such a move would be akin to a coup d’état … It’s a refrain that has worked well for Harper. When his government teetered on the brink of defeat last winter, Canadians responded very favourably to his proposition that only the voters can determine which party rules – not the MPs they send to Parliament to represent them.

But it might not be such a good thing for Canada. Harper’s interpretation of the principles of Canadian democracy has set off alarms among many who worry about the potential for abuse of power under this country’s unwritten rules for governing.


 

Something bad this way comes

  1. while i am no fan of near-apocalyptic vague warnings of what might be without sufficient evidence to support said predictions, I agree with the Star's assessment of SH's behaviour. I think it is completely inappropriate for a PM to unilaterally reinterpret the foundations of our system of democracy based on what serves his own politically expedient needs at any given point, both as a matter of principle and practical application. while it might not be the stuff of the end of world, nothing good can come out of it.

  2. Where was this Shamocracy feature during the one-party-dominant rule of the Liberals? Guess the Star couldn't care less about our democracy at that point, eh?

    sea_n_mountains, where did SH "unilaterally reinterpret the foundations of our democracy"? There's a difference between calling something illegal and calling it illegitimate.

    Seeing as the Harper government won a vote of confidence from the House on its Throne Speech, on November 27th, AFTER the Fall Economic Update, and seeing as the combined opposition never once thought to move a Motion to Adjourn in the days afterward (which if successful, would've instantly brought the government's command of the House into question), GG Jean had no reason to believe that her government didn't enjoy the confidence of the House.

  3. (cont'd) We don't know what behind-the-scenes machinations were going on in that time. I have a sneaking suspicion that the reason it took over two hours for the GG to grant Harper's request was that advisers to the GG had been in contact with Mr. Dion, informing him that he would have to move a successful Motion to Adjourn in the House in order to stop the prorogation from happening. I'm sure also that he wouldn't be able to do it, as the Ignatieff posse would've refused. I'm sure the background story will eventually come out.