Comments on: The Short Parliament

By: Jacksonville Fence

Jacksonville Fence — Mon, 31 May 2010 19:15:35 +0000

Nice touch on the writing.

By: Orlando

Orlando — Sat, 29 May 2010 16:21:12 +0000

They were!

By: safety valve

safety valve — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 09:24:30 +0000

I really like this article

By: Grant Bowen

Grant Bowen — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 21:42:00 +0000

The Senate cannot block bills indefinitely. IF they send a bill back with amendments, the House can pass it in its original state and the Senate has no choice but to pass it.
The whole argument that the Senate is stopping legislation is hyperbole from Harper. It could very easily be argued that Harper has prevented more of his own legislation from passing than the Senate has. His election call in 2008 (despite a law to the contrary) and this prorogation both seriously delayed Conservative bills on crime and other matters

By: G Bowen

G Bowen — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 21:32:07 +0000

didn't your mother tell you? Two wrongs do not make a right. And, you may not know that prorogation is NORMALLY a formality to a session of Parliament that has completed the business of the Throne Speech. That is not the case here. It is true that Chretien used prorogation once to (possibly) avoid the scrutiny of an investigation into the Somalia affair, but it could just as easily have been to affect the change of leadership to Paul Martin.
Regardless, I have never equated the media's outrage with a standard of right and wrong. This prorogation was wrong. I know it. The media, if anything, have been trailing Candian opinion on this

By: Bobby Hawley

Bobby Hawley — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 03:44:15 +0000

Canadian Democracy spiralling further down the drain, Autocratic bully, Hidden agenda!! Are we in some kind of story of intrigue or espionage story about Prime Minister Harper? Really Andrew I gave you more credit than this. You of all people should be able to see some reason or rational in what Harper is doing and has very little choice in following this direction. Just look at the new Liberal bullying adds coming out. How about the add in which Harper was being assassinated? There was no hue and cry over that one. MacLeans magazine is definitely lowering its standards of late when I think of that stupid drivle you attempted last week in an attempt at humour. Harper is an honest man, a good Canadian and hopefully is not swayed by this disgusting display by some of the media and the liberals. The journalists should all try to be as objective as Bob Fife. He speaks his mind. Does not always approve of the Prime Minister but he is just.

By: Bobby Hawley

Bobby Hawley — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 01:07:21 +0000

Harper has done and is continuing to do his job. He is not the only Prime Minister to prorogue parliament nor will he be the last. It's just a time out to cool all the hot heads. It's not for 3 months as some of the tyrannts wish to make you believe but about 22 days all told. Who is the liar, the tyrannt, Hitler, the dictator? The accusers are usually the most often the people to be afraid of. It's almost an impossibility to govern in an atmosphere such as is created by the opposition in this parliament. I fear the rabble rousers and the ignorance of the masses far more than Harper. I think he is doing a great job under very strenuous circumstances in dealing with the arrogance of the media and the irrational behaviour of the opposition in their quest for power.

By: Bobby Hawley

Bobby Hawley — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 00:54:29 +0000

So why did Harper Prorogue?
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize that. It only takes someone with minimal skils of observation and a few hours of viewing parliament in session during Question Period. It was like watching a preview of ' The Snake Pit'. Even if there was a question instead of an accusation the answer would never have been heard nor was it expected. The partisan committee for studying the Afghan Detainee situation had one purpose and that was to get the Government regardless of the cost to the generals or diplomats that were being interrogated.. It was a disgusting display of partisanship. Many of the liberal senators had chosen to defy their leader and the House of Commons and not put through legislation except on their own terms.

By: Bobby Hawley

Bobby Hawley — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 00:43:56 +0000

I'm really surprised at this kind of thinking coming from a person who seemed to display real intelligence as Andrew Coyne usually did. Imagine using words such as dictator, tyrant, King, Hitler etc. to describe Prime Minister Harper. The whole lot of the people making responses here appear to be totally misguided or ignorant of the facts or just brainwashed by their Liberal loyalties. I have watched question period before and it is so irrational nothing getts accomplished on any day. Children from the schools can't believe grow people can display such behaviour. It's a waste of time. Get out into the peace and quiet of their regions and get something worthwhile done. I watched that committee set up to deal with the Afghan detainee situation and it was a Liberal feeding frenzy to try to get something on this Government. A committee as partisan as this one should never have been allowed. Senator George Baker was being interviewed by Tom Clark about the legislation being passed and he was absolutely disgusting in his own contempt for his leader (Ignatieff) and the House of Commons.

By: michaelkaer

michaelkaer — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 09:21:38 +0000

He is not dancing close- he is now effectively a dictatorship.

By: michaelkaer

michaelkaer — Sat, 09 Jan 2010 09:16:21 +0000

if that is so, why are they hiding behind national security? Either Mackay knew and he is guilty or totally incompetent and must resign. Hiding is a sign of guilt. I have another question about government secrecy, what about the 6000 paper documents around Marc Emery that are completely blacked out? Where is the issue there? A guy has the right to know what he is accused of and how the information was obtained. If we are just a sub-state of the U.S., lets just take orders from Obama directly and toss all of the house and the senate out. If we are not, I suggest the ALL politicians should be forced to give back much of their pay since they are not doing any work. As a Taxpayer I am their employer. If I had the power I would fire the lot of them. This is Dictator Harper's open government ( just one more big lie from the micro manager of all micro managers).

By: trout

trout — Tue, 05 Jan 2010 19:28:32 +0000

Harper is an Oil Company Shah, and anyone who might actually provide Opposition is barred from play.
"Revolt, you thick-skulled idiots" – Fritz the Cat

By: balrogsbane

balrogsbane — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 19:08:54 +0000

Well Mr Coyne, you have certainly taken the official Liberal view on things wholesale without any balance in understanding. Ignoring what the Liberal-dominated Senate has been doing for the past 4 years entirely in this blog is not journalism but ideology. Where is the rant that such behaviour is undemocratic when the unelected Senate blocks and amends legislation passed in the elected house of Commons?

This prorogation was necessary because of the Senate alone. Polls have shown that the Afghan detainee "scandal" means little to average Canadians outside the 416 and 514 area codes. I do not think the Tories are hiding from this one bit because it is a non-issue. Furthermore, the Liberals would also guilty in this as the Canadian Military followed the same procedure under them so Dosanjh's faux-outrage that these are war crimes is ludicrous.

By: RFS

RFS — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 18:11:50 +0000

I agree, Casey…you nail the salient points very nicely.
Harper is all about self interest, all the while ignoring the issues that ought to concern ALL Canadians…not just those among us who are currently in rough straits due to this terrible world-wide recession! The replies I've read from those in favour of Harper's undemocratic machinations are the same moronic, partisan hacks who would continue to stand behind Harper…even if he declared Canada, henceforth, a One-Party-System state. Heil Harper!
Fact is…Proportional Representation is, by far, MUCH MORE democratic. Start making sense Canada…make our democracy MORE democratic…not less. EXAMPLE: How do you reconcile that the Canadian Green Party got nearly a million votes in the last election, and yet our current system does not assign even one single seat in parliament to function as the voice of this large segment of our population!?

By: Elaine Grace Young

Elaine Grace Young — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 01:23:23 +0000

This is offensive and shameful. I do not understand how we let them get away with this. I did not vote for Mr. Harper and his ilk but my family and I suffer the actions of this dictatorship. No where else does any other employed people get a two month break. Do our taxes not pay their salaries? All Canadians should demand a tax rebate for those two months when nothing is getting done by our so called Democratic Government.

By: Calgarian

Calgarian — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 04:56:13 +0000

Andrew Coyne has called it like it is and I agree completely with his comments. Hopefully, Canadians will realize that Stephen Harper will do ANYTHING to hold on to power. The least of his concerns are the people of Canada who are struggling to make ends meet and expect our politicians to do the job they get paid to do. Our Governor General should not give in to Harper's every whim unless of course she is angling to get re-appointed to her "Royal" job.

By: Colonel Angus

Colonel Angus — Sat, 02 Jan 2010 03:35:14 +0000

Most Canadians dream of getting six weeks off, with full pay, for a holiday each year. The partisan excuses for Harper shunning his duty to Canadians are, as usual, laughable. But the partisan population is pretty stupid on the whole so it isn't exactly a surprise.

By: nahummer

nahummer — Sat, 02 Jan 2010 02:21:39 +0000

Anon #2. Guess reading at a grade two level has made it difficult for you to understand the point of the blog writer in this case. He was using a rhetorical in order to compare Harper's action to those of King Charles I a few hundred years ago.

By: nahummer

nahummer — Sat, 02 Jan 2010 02:13:05 +0000

Braindead conservative scum with your false arguments. When it was done by other governments it was done on the legitimate grounds that the business of the session was done, so it was vacation time. Harper does it first maintain power and then to hide secrets from the population. Wasn't it great when Canada was a decent society, and not populated by undereducated, disinformation spreading losers?

By: Blame Crash

Blame Crash — Sat, 02 Jan 2010 02:01:58 +0000

Now Gayle, you know as well as I do that “people” agreeing on something dosen’t make it true. That totally lacks in logic or common sense.

As I said before, democracy doesn’t exist or not exist because the outcome isn’t what was wanted by the leftist crew. Is it any wonder why the leftist are rejected in Alberta! We’re just not that dense.

“Willful Ignorance” indeed!

By: Bill Cooper

Bill Cooper — Sat, 02 Jan 2010 01:10:43 +0000

Parliament was to reconvene on Jan 25 , now a new budget will be presented on Mar 3. How that translates into " Parliament being suspended for months" is not what I expected when I subscribed to McLeans because Andrew Coyne moved there. Andrew's newly acquired "righteous indignation" is so sadly shallow and vacuous compared to his previous life at the National Post. Thank Allah for Mark Steyn and Feschuk because McLeans is not anxious to offer refunds on subscriptions.

By: DerekPearce

DerekPearce — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 23:04:14 +0000

Let's see, after the Olympics, maybe Parliament should be prorogued because the G8/G20 will be coming up. Then, it'll be summer so Parliament obviously shouldn't sit since Canadians will be focused on that. I'm sure next fall Parliament could be suspended because there must be something coming up that will distract the public from the business of government… why don't we just forget about having a legislature altogether?

By: DerekPearce

DerekPearce — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 22:56:26 +0000

"…their caring for the Taliban over and above our soldiers." You are turgid with BS. It is because we DO CARE about our soldiers and what they stand for that we an investigation into how they were ordered to turn over detainees knowing they'd be tortured. Wanting our professional, dedicated troops to be ordered to follow the Geneva conventions is NOT the same thing as supporting the Taliban and you know it. That little rhetorical trick is dead on arrival Observant.

By: Joanne (T.B.)

Joanne (T.B.) — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 22:22:51 +0000

I'm sure in all this pile of comments someone has pointed out the fact that we are talking about 15 days, right? Let's have some truth and perspective here, Mr. Coyne.

By: old fogey

old fogey — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 21:26:06 +0000

Would it not be terrible if Canada got it right and Jack Layton was elected as P.M. ?

By: V.S.

V.S. — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 20:48:13 +0000

You have it exactly right!!. How come Nanos has Harper's Conservatives at 39.5% and Harper at 94.5% as most trustworthy prime minister????? Are Canadians stupid? Or are you and I the only ones that can see through Harper and the CPC?

By: shrilankalanka

shrilankalanka — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 18:49:10 +0000

The question should be: why are Canadians dying for Bushes wars?
The sooner Canada pulls out of this fiasco the better.
Why are we wasting taxpayers money to debate if some Taliban was slapped by the Afgans? their own people must have a reason to do so because they have been harassed by the Taliban for so long. Why is it Canada's role to defend the terrorists?
Mr. Coyne should be answering these questions.
Perhaps we need a better Governor General that would not give in every time a PM asks to prorogue parliament.
The Liberals have caused much of the problem, by bringing to Canada all the terrorists as refugees.

By: Gayle

Gayle — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 16:46:20 +0000

My first reply was lost in cyberspace. Allow me to direct you here:

http://www.canada.com/topics/news/story.html?id=5…

where you will learn the age of consent bill first passed in May of 2007. That was lost because Harper prorogued. Same goes for the reverse onus on bail for gun crimes and several other bills I cannot remember. Therefore, they were not passed again until a year later – all because Harper decided playing politics was more important than his precious legislation.

Now why would the opposition pass these bills in May, and then roadblock them in October? Answer: they wouldn't.

Time for you to stop relying on the CPC website/talkiong points for all your research.

By: Gayle

Gayle — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 16:34:58 +0000

Actually, I am totally right. Those bills had already passed. Why would the opposition decide not to pass them a few months after they already passed them.

Interesting how you did not bother to research this subject and simply swallowed Harper's line without any critical thought on your part.

By: dumbfrenchie

dumbfrenchie — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 15:55:22 +0000

Dumb frenchie, dumb

By: Bernie F.

Bernie F. — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 15:32:01 +0000

Hooray For the Primeminister!! Its about time he stood up to the immature "children" that are called the "opposition". Has anyone including Mr. Coyne heard of the Olympics. Canadians are focusing on them, not the rowdy bunch who talk about nothing and keep trying to stop any form of parliamentary business from taking place. Enough said!

By: Gerry Whiteley

Gerry Whiteley — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 04:23:49 +0000

Where did you ever come up with this drivel?!

By: Gerry Whiteley

Gerry Whiteley — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 04:21:23 +0000

This action on the part of ONE MAN is definitely dictatorial! He should be immediately removed, by force if necessary.
The Governor-General must refuse this request to enforce our democratic way of life.

By: 3491stargazer

3491stargazer — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 23:45:13 +0000

I also wonder about our so-called "democracy", but more about the work ethic of our government. After an election in Great Britain, The House of Commons typically meets the NEXT DAY to begin the new session, not three or four months down the road. It is as if the Brits understand that they were elected to actually run the country, not sit down with their winning colleagues to figure out what they might be able to get away with and what they can conveniently shuffle into a corner until action is absollutely required.
In the USA, the House and Senate both worked until close to Christmas Eve to try to pass legislation. And they don't take great long breaks from their jobs, either. Granted, many of their laws are so convoluted and subject to so much jerrymandering and lobbying that these things create massive bottlenecks, but they work through them, rather than proroguing the assemblies and waiting for the legislatures to expire.
I was once a supporter of Harper, because I was tired of the Liberal system of rewarding only the jurisdictions who voted their way. But even that was better than a government that doesn't want to sit at all, and would rather make policy from the Tory backrooms and present them as decrees with no debate. Isn't this what the French revolted against in 1789?

By: estelle

estelle — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 23:31:59 +0000

Unbelievable that the government can shut down parliament. To avoid the questions that the opposition would ask on our behalf, & sideline new legislation etc: for their own interests, rather than that of the people they are pledged to serve. Perhaps we should suspend Tory paycheques until March. This action very clearly tells Canadians that we have a government who main agenda is to bolster Mr Harper's ego & power & allows him to obey his multi-national friends . You know, the ones with deep pockets who finance him & his co-horts, buying govenment privilege. I am truly sorry that the governor general doesn't have the authority to tell him to face parliament, or allow her to call an election so that parliament can work as it is supposed to "FOR CANADA". Mr Harper said "we wouldn't recognize Canada when he is through". I believe him. He has destroyed Canada's image & prestige around the world & leaders are already showing that they no longer respect him or Canada under his management.

By: Sharon in Edmonton

Sharon in Edmonton — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 22:00:09 +0000

Precisely! This is silly and simply an embarrassment to the Conservatives and a waste of time and money for Canadians. I am a Conservative supporter but have been more and more put-off by their foolish game-playing over the last few years. If Harper thinks it makes him look smart he is wrong. And just because the self-satisfied Liberal, Chretien gov't did it doesn't make it any better. In fact, it makes it even more deplorable. I would hope that Conservatives were above this – but, sadly, apparently not.

By: Jesse

Jesse — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 21:59:41 +0000

Wrong, just flat out wrong.

The opposition refused to allow several key components of crime legislation to be re-introduced so Harper pulled them all, wrapped them up in a single omnibus bill and dared the oppo to oppose it.

Interesting that you left out the key point about the opposition obstructing criminal justice legislation eh ?

By: absolutezero273

absolutezero273 — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 18:44:47 +0000

There is a difference between proroguing parliament because it has finished its business, and proroguing parliament because you dont WANT it to finish its business. This is clearly the latter. That is clearly wrong.

By: Hardrations

Hardrations — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 18:17:31 +0000

Let's face up to it. The P.M. is a pathetic figure, hungering for political power. Nothing to do with running the affairs of Canada. The old story of taking his bat and ball home because he's not winning.

By: prairieexile

prairieexile — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 17:40:14 +0000

If you want to see what the real agenda of the current government is, go to this link, of the National Citizen's Coalition. This is their Agenda for Canada. You have to go further down the page and click on the agenda link as it is a pdf file. Our current King was president of this secretive right-wing group. The agenda has been updated, is amazingly full of inaccuracies and outright lies, and is not the Canada I want. https://nationalcitizens.ca/cgi-bin/oms.cgi?rm=sh...

By: prairieexile

prairieexile — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 17:29:10 +0000

and which one are you suggesting applies to King Stephen and his sychophants?

By: Gayle

Gayle — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 16:51:12 +0000

I will make this easier for you. Despite the fact it is irrelevant and none of your business anyway, the fact that I have never been a member of a political party means I never bought a membership to the PCs, which means I could not possibly have voted in the leadership race.

Sorry for being too subtle on that point.

As for the rest, I stand by my comment. I have no doubt there are people who understand what I mean, despite your willful ignorance on the subject.

You take care now. I am heading to the mountains for NYE.

By: Thruxomatic

Thruxomatic — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 16:20:48 +0000

Oh, for crying out loud …

Chretien's prorogues were done with a MAJORITY. Harper has a minority, and so must answer to that MAJORITY. That's the difference. Using prorogue to avoid answering to the parliamentary majority, especially when it means the possible defeat of your government or undermining an investigation into possible malfeasance by your government, is something Chretien never once touched. With a majority, he had the parliamentary will, he wasn't defying it. Get it?

Yes, he prorogued for political reasons. No, his government's future didn't hang on any of those prorogues.

As for this notion that once the CPC have a majority in the Senate all those senate reform bills will pass … boy, I can't believe they let you guys into politics when you have such a poor grasp of your own parliament and constitution. Lifetime senate terms are written directly into the constitutional documents, as is the GG's power to appoint them. You are not simply going to pass a bill and change that. We have an amending formula for the constitution and if you ignore that, every last one of those bills will die in the courts. When it happens, will you shift the blame to the "activist judges" from the "activist senators" or will you finally grow up and realize your own party leader has been playing you for fools, pinning the blame for his unconstitutional legislation's failure on the opposition parties?

By: Be_rad

Be_rad — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 16:20:17 +0000

If I'm wrong, forgive me, but even if a committee amends a bill, a majority in the Senate could change that, couldn't it?

By: NorthernPoV

NorthernPoV — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 15:41:52 +0000

Thank you cageyt