The will of the House -

The will of the House


The NDP’s motion calling for a limit on prorogation has just now passed the House by a 139-135 vote.

Over then to the constitutional scholars to debate what this meaning, its precise significance undefined, one supposes, until some Prime Minister dares test it.


The will of the House

  1. Harper defies a Parliamentary subpoena approved by the majority of our democratically elected representatives.

    Harper announces that he will just ignore the ban on 10%ers approved by the majority of our democratically elected representatives.

    Dare he ignore this motion as well, also approved by the majority of our democratically elected representatives?

    Add to that the last election he called, defying his own fixed election date also approved by the majority of our democratically elected representatives. Not to mention the dozens and dozens of significant broken promises.

    He is creating quite an interesting and telling narrative, all by himself.

    • If subpoena, and it indeed is, then Parliament, in effect, Opposition, has to enforce it. We've waited long enough: democrats or not? Democracy or not? Contempt Motion Now-ish!

  2. Would Harper take another 5-7% poll hit and actually prorogue again?

    This a case of closing the barn door after the conservatives have left the building.

  3. My moneys on Harper testing it. I dont think he'd be overly concerned if he reduced the whole place down to shoe fights, guards, and policy announcements every long weekend. Well of course that could only occur with a completely castrated opposition.

  4. Wasn't this the guy who said he wanted to make individual MPs and Parliament stronger?

  5. Unfortunately, we didn't understand at the time that he only meant one particular MP, and for Parliament, he was talking about the language used to describe it.

  6. It goes to the Board of Internal Economy where the NDP will make a deal with the Tories to keep it going.

  7. Did it turn into the "will" of the House? Wasn't it just the "opinion" of the House earlier?

    It will no doubt be a while before Hansard gives us the precise words. Any witness with a recording device able to provide us the full text of the motion?

    Depending on how powerless the wording is, the constitutional scholars may not be required.

  8. The motion was worded "in the opinion of the House" … it's not binding. It would've needed "the House directs …" or something to that effect.

    Plus the motion allows Harper to prorogue, just to have the time between sessions be 7 days or less.

    Harper's in line to have a majority in the Senate as of Dec. 7th of this year. That would be the next time there would be any advantage for Harper in proroguing, and really, at that time, it would be just to get PC Senator Lowell Murray off one of the Senate committees, or rather, to make it so that he's not the deciding vote on that committee (which he is now).

  9. I'm surprised that the Liberasl didn't find a way to kill this since the Liberals have a chance of returning to government sometime in the next 10-20 years or so.

    • Wikipedia of the future:

      "While Harper ultimately became the longest serving prime minster, with a record 27 years in office, he was never able to 'seal the deal' with the Canadian public and win a majority. Despite numerous periods of low standing in the polls, a series of weak Liberal Party leaders, including a deaf man who could not speak English, an American, a rodeo clown, the dark lord Sauron, and a piece of toast that looked like the Virgin Mary, guaranteed that Harper never faced a significant opponent on election day. However, continued fears that Harper had a secret plan to move Hockey Night in Canada to Tuesday prevented him from ever winning a majority."

  10. My money's on this making absolutely zero difference. When Harper next prorogues, some people will write some editorials complaining about it, the opposition parties will complain and have some "Thinker's Conferences" or something, and when parliament resumes they'll make a speech about it and then fixate on something new.

    Only parliament can police its members, and it is so far unwilling to do so. It's no surprise what comes from that situation.

  11. i cannot see anyway in which this motion is enforceable.

    • Which, of course, is why it passed.

      • yup. our opposition parties are dropping to incredible level of being embarrassing.