Harper’S Resignation Would Defuse Crisis

Posted on Wednesday, December 03 at 08:26 by robertjb

There can be no doubt this present crisis centers around the prime minister and not his party. He was the one who put forth the volatile legislation against the advice of his own staff and MPs. It is well known decision making in his government emanates from his office and it is very much in his nature to want to stick it to the Opposition; recklessly and very irresponsibly using a time of national crisis for partisan games.  His actions have the appearance of a childish act of spite – so the electorate won’t give me a majority I will govern as if I have one-and screw the Opposition.

 

But Harper’s role of the dice was a bad one. It galvanized the opposition parties and now his government teeters on the verge of collapse only weeks after the election.

 

Needless to say the national media’s right wing boo-birds are in full chorus denouncing the coalition as a bunch of shameless, arrogant upstarts. The coalition though is only doing what Oppositions are supposed to do: challenge the right to govern at a time of egregious effrontery. The right wing boo-birds render themselves fools as they try vainly to defend the indefensible- like the earth is flat, black is white, and the PM did nothing wrong.

 

The boo-birds also argue who has the legitimate right to govern?  They might be reminded that Harper’s conservatives   only have 38 per cent of the popular vote. They might also be reminded that this is Harper’s second minority government.  When the right was split Jean Chretien had no problem gaining successive majority governments. Now, facing a split left, and the once daunting Liberals struggling to survive Harper cannot gain a majority.  This says something about Harper, his party, and this country called Canada!

 

In the previous election Harper was granted the most grudging minority in the history of the country. He might have taken a hint and vacated the leadership, paving the way for a successor who would distance the party from its radical Reform/Alliance roots and package it as a more acceptable option to Canadian voters- and this most recent election could have had a much more pleasing outcome for this neophyte party. Harper though is a person blind with personal ambition and consumed by a vindictive partisanship. He is willing to sacrifice the national interest and his party to his excessive ego-centrism.

 

When the right was united there was a drive to find a star candidate to lead the newly minted CPC party. None was found so Harper became leader by default. Because of his close association with both Reform and the Alliance he could only be a transitional leader. But again, by default, he became prime minister. Harper is so fixated on his personal ambition to establish a conservative dynasty he has failed to realize the stark political reality that he can only be a transitional leader. The CPC may be two or three leaders away from a majority-if ever.

 

 Majority governments in Canadian politics may indeed be a thing of the past as the country fractures into regionalism and wariness in granting any party a majority. This newly minted coalition may be the first of many.  Where our political elites have refused to establish an effective system of proportionate representation it will come about in a cruder form as coalition governments- but that is another subject for another time.

 

Harper’s conservatives have no doubt gloated over the Liberal’s leadership woes and there can be no doubt Harper saw this as an opportune time to try and slide his wicked legislation past them; but he under estimated the enemy. 

 

The CPC party has been so preoccupied with the expedience of exercising power and its rambunctious partisanship it has failed to address its own leadership crisis. Harper as transitional leader should have been gone by now and with the present crisis his resignation becomes mandatory.  The only question now is: Will he do it gracefully, or will he take his party and government down with him? By unwittingly deferring their own leadership crisis Conservatives may now propel Liberals back to being the natural governing party.

 

 Harper is in contempt of Parliament and guilty of putting partisanship ahead of the national interest in a time crisis.  His further presence as prime minister is politically toxic.

 

We are about to find out if the Right Honorable member is indeed honorable.                 

 

 

Contributed By



Article Rating

 (0 votes) 

Options




Comments

  1. Wed Dec 03, 2008 7:56 pm
    This would be a beautiful dream: Never have to see Harper on TV, or in the papers, again.

    But it won't happen, because the multinational corporations and all big business are behind him to fulfill his mandate, which is continental corporate dictatorship.

    I'm all for the coalition, but my guess is that the GG will agree with him to stop parliament, one way, or another, until the end of Jan. as a "cooling off period".

    Meanwhile he'll come back with a new Minister, who'll deliver a goodies filled budget, especially for the PQ. and there'll be the biggest propaganda campaign by the Reform/CRAPP/Alliance/ under the "Conservative" guise against the "separatist coalition", ongoing right now.

    The controlled media is already full with the organized polls, giving Harper a 60-70% chance. Guess why ?

    Years ago, when the Reform Party was raising its ugly head, there used to be polls on BCTV, now "Global" under Asper control. All those polls showed about 90% support for Reform policies. They don't have them now on the screen, only on their website.

    The nazis and communists were rank amateurs compared to this scum.

    Ed Deak.

  2. Wed Dec 03, 2008 10:00 pm
    Robert, an excellent analysis! You rightly lay the cause of the impasse at the feet of Stephen Harper and rightly so. It is the arrogance and greed of Harper and the disdain that he has for anyone who does not support his viewpoints, that are at the heart of this issue.

    I hope the opposition parties are able to pull this off without creating other problems.

  3. Thu Dec 04, 2008 12:02 am
    I can't understand those who are screaming from the rooftops that this is not democracy. They would rather support a potential dictator, ready to give up their freedoms to support Harper.

  4. Thu Dec 04, 2008 2:28 am
    What is vital to discern here is NOT how Harper will handle the leadup to his party's funeral procession, but instead, what type of incompetent leadership allowed the Cons to get into this stinkin' mess in the first place. Much has been made of Dion's lack of charisma and English language "barrier" (who cares? Chretien didn't even speak one language), but little has been made by the MSM BooBirds of Harper's inability to fulfill lofty party expectations. In any event, I don't thaink anybody really takes the right wing media here in Canada very seriously (see Conrad Black conviction). There is an entertainment value to reading them, as with all fictional works.

    It has been specualted that Harper called the recent election to roll the dice for a majority, knowing full well that Global Economic MeltDown News was on the near horizon. He is an "Economist", after all and may have been tipped off to such, at least six months in advance. Let's face it: both Georgie and Stevie have damaged the Conservative brand by placing an extremist pseudo-religious tint on the ideology (there is nothing wrong with giving yourself to Christ - there is something very wrong with fighting a war in his name - especially whether or not you're a real Christian is debatable).

    It's time for some new Right-Centrist Conservative leaders to take the party back to its hey day, when fiscal responsibility, not lunatic ideology, was the GOP's main order of business.

  5. Thu Dec 04, 2008 2:52 am
    "I don't think anybody really takes the right wing media here in Canada very seriously (see Conrad Black conviction). There is an entertainment value to reading them, as with all fictional works."

    Hahaha! Love that comment.

    Sadly, living in Alberta, I can say that it seems many people around me take their media as literally as they do their Bibles.

    Steve-O is supposed to be this excellent tactician, and yet this was clearly a massive tactical error. There's no question he will have to answer that at some point, sooner, or later. You can just imagine the mutterings within the party, after the shock of facing losing power so quickly after being re-elected.

    It is interesting to ponder what will happen to the monolithic united right party if it's head gets lopped off. Will it hold together? Or will the Red Tory wing reassert itself?

  6. Thu Dec 04, 2008 4:52 am
    Ed is probably right, once again. We will likely be unable to get rid of the bully. I never had much faith in the GG (it's all show) but perhaps she will pleasantly surprise us this time. I certainly hope so.

  7. Thu Dec 04, 2008 5:00 am
    Harper will never leave willingly.

    And it seems he also wants to take the country down with him as well.

    And people still support this guy. Go figure.

  8. by Rural
    Thu Dec 04, 2008 1:16 pm
    Harper (or more accurately The Harper Regime) cannot see the difference between Democracy and Dictatorship, or maybe he can and simply does not care. If he is allowed to suspend parliament for two months to (temporarily?) avoid a vote of non confidence the we will, for that period at least, be governed by an Oligarchy verging on a Dictatorship.
    As others have said, Harper wants power above all and will destroy our Parliamentary Democracy and ignore the needs of the Country to keep it!

  9. by Rural
    Thu Dec 04, 2008 2:43 pm
    Just found this from a New York Time piece, hardly a Canadian source but if true is even more scary given his threat to "use every legal means possible" to remain in power.

    ...there is wide speculation, which the prime minister has not denied, that he may try to prevent the vote by asking Ms. Jean to end the current session of Parliament, which is just over two weeks old, before Monday.

    Such a request by the prime minister usually follows a long session that has passed a substantial amount of legislation. But it would allow Mr. Harper to continue to govern for up to a year before he would be legally required to ask the governor general to call the House of Commons back into session.

    I attempted to find further information on this but was unsucessful, any one out there with better google skills or a link to the rules on this one?

  10. Thu Dec 04, 2008 11:06 pm
    It is interesting to ponder what will happen to the monolithic united right party if it's head gets lopped off. Will it hold together? Or will the Red Tory wing reassert itself?


    Ah, such wishful thinking. Sorry Susan, but the days of Camp, Kierans and Lewis (aka Left, Lefter and Leftest) are long gone. Canada now has a genuine conservative voice, instead of the stuffy organ of Disraeliesque paternalism and noblesse oblige that was the Stanfield-Clark PCs.

    Thank you Preston Manning for enlarging the debate and challenging Trudeau's (un)Just Society! And thank you Stephen Harper for tearing down at least part of that rotten, oppressive structure.

  11. Thu Dec 04, 2008 11:17 pm
    Actually, the present incarnation of the party is hardly conservative in the Canadian tradition. It is far more radical and American-style. If you consider tearing apart Canadian institutions and ideals, healthcare etc., or trying to, conservative, then I suppose you can be happy. But to me, being a conservative means conserving things, particularly long traditions.

    The current party is unquestionably Stephen Harper's baby, as well.

    I'm sadly certain that with the prorogue now, there will be a renewed admiration from Conservative quarters, for the next short while at least, for Harper's strategic abilities. However, it depends how this all plays out in the court of public opinion, and what happens when parliament is allowed to return in late January.

    And above all, what happens to the economy in the meantime and where Canadians lay the blame for it.

    What is certain is that Harper has burned his bridges in Quebec, and there is probably no way the Conservative party can ever now win a majority with Harper at its head as a result. That has to be part of the planning and consideration of the Conservative party before any future federal election.

  12. Fri Dec 05, 2008 12:28 am
    Actually, the present incarnation of the party is hardly conservative in the Canadian tradition. It is far more radical and American-style.


    Well, your party's ideas are arguably more Scandinavian than Canadian. What's wrong with being influenced by ideas arising in other countries? I suppose, however, I'm neglecting the fact that "American", in your left-nationalist lexicon, is a synonym for "bad" or "wrong".

    What is so "radical" about meritocracy and the concept of earning one's keep? How is the most qualified applicant getting the job or the best employee getting the promotion or the company that bids the best product at the lowest price getting the contract "radical"? How is constraining the federal government to its constitionally-defined powers "radical"? How is punishing violent criminals "radical"? How are trade and cooperation with a neighbouring country "radical"? How is cutting funding to programs that accomplish little more than to send Avi Lewis on overseas junkets "radical"?

    It's the heavy-handed economic winner picking and social engineering begun by Pierre Trudeau and perpetuated by Liberal and Red Tory regimes alike that was truly radical.

  13. Fri Dec 05, 2008 12:52 pm
    Nothing radical about promising transparency during an election campaign and then proceeding to operate a Government in complete secrecy. Nothing radical about muzzling the press, which already practices an alarming amount of self-censorship. Nothing radical about wanting to imprison 12 year old children. Nothing radical about perpetuating the phony War on Drugs by passing laws to ruin someone's life for smoking a joint. Nothing radical about blindly supporting a phony War on Terror, which servers to limit freedoms at home and increase spending on unnecessary crap. Nothing radical about limiting freedom of speech you don't agree with by slashing funds to the arts. Nothing radical about being a racist and insulting Quebecers, separatists or not. Nothing radical about bankrupting the opposition parties and undermining whatever little democracy we have left. Nothing radical about a copyright policy which kisses corporate ass, at the expense of turning most of your citizens into criminals. Nothing radical about giving big corporations massive tax breaks, while the average person is being taxed to death. Nothing radical about privatizing national healthcare and destroying the system. Nothing radical about having a lovefest with fellow NeoCon Christian Funnymentalist GW Bush, while the rest of the world collectively can't stand his guts. Nothing radical about going after Elections Canada when they are trying to preserve what little democracy we have left. Nothing radical about having your police taser innocent people to death and then look the other way like it never happened. Nothing radical about intimidating, strong arming and infiltrating legitimate organizations who have a "right" to protest. Nothing radical about deregulating industries to cause massive economic collapse. Nothing radical about pursuing a corporate fueled North American Agenda which is designed to further impoverish your own citizens. Nothing radical about doing everything in your power to dumb down your own people as long as it suits your piece of shit agenda. Nothing radical about ruling like you have a majority when the best you can muster is a minority, mainly due to ignorant rednecks voting for your party.

    And finally, nothing radical about having a haircut like a 2nd Grader when you're an adult male.

  14. Fri Dec 05, 2008 3:52 pm
    In regards to "defusing the crisis", finding a new leader for this coalition is probably necessary at this point. NDP Thomas Mulclair is my best bet, even if he comes from Quebec. Dion is over-reaching once again and it is not working. The polls are very clear and unfortunately(?) the rules of the parlimentary representation get tossed aside when operating in these grey zones.

    May I kindly ask why can the ROC not produce better politicians? Duceppe came across to me anyhow as a giant Statesman compared to Layton&Dion. Perhaps I am culturally biased on this matter although I have lived most most of my life in Western Canada. Perhaps it is because politics stands right next to hockey in people's life in Quebec, and it is just a burden elsewhere :?: :?: :?:



view comments in forum


You need to be a member and be logged into the site, to comment on stories.




Your Voice

To post to the site, just sign up for a free membership/user account and then hit submit. Posts in English or French are welcome. You can email any other suggestions or comments on site content to the site editor. (Please note that Vive le Canada does not necessarily endorse the opinions or comments posted on the site.)

canadian bloggers | canadian news