Beyond The Commons

 Beyond The Commons

Aaron Wherry covers all the goings-on in and around Parliament Hill. Follow Aaron on Twitter: @aaronwherry

Categories: Beyond The Commons, Capital Read

151-151

by Aaron Wherry on Monday, September 13, 2010 2:07pm - 0 Comments

Malcolm Allen has apparently decided to vote against C-391, which puts our unofficial count back to a tie.

The last NDP MP yet to comment is Niki Ashton. Carol Hughes has said she will not vote in favour of a Liberal motion to scrap C-391, but has not committed to voting one way or another should C-391 come to a vote on third reading.

Tags: , , , , , ,
Bookmark and Share
  • RayK

    Someone could write a great post (hint, hint) on what happens in the event of a tie vote on either (or both) the motion to abandon the bill at the end of September or the final vote on the bill itself.

    • Style

      The Speaker breaks the tie. Wouldn't he follow his party whip?

      • ChrisWPG

        No his position if called upon to vote would be to maintain the status quo, which in this case would defeat Hoepner's bill.

        • Style

          Thanks. Since the first vote will be on the Liberal motion, Milliken could find himself voting to defeat the Liberal motion to defeat Hoepner's bill…That would be amusing.

          • ChrisWPG

            Sounds about right….

        • Marion

          Actually, the Speaker traditionally votes in whichever way will continue debate.

          • ChrisWPG

            Um, no, history and tradition is abundantly clear. The Speaker votes to maintain the status quo. And given that Milliken is a stickler for rules, there will be no doubting how he will vote.

          • ChrisWPG

            Um, no, ok I'll concede your point on first and second reading that the Speaker will vote to extend the debate to third reading, but upon the final vote, the Speaker votes to maintain the status quo.

          • MarionKl

            So the Speaker would always vote agains the bill if there is a tie at 3rd reading? I would assume that a bill would always change the status quo in some form or another.

          • ChrisWPG

            Um, well, you see…. sheesh kind of looks that way when you put it into perspective.

          • Marion

            I'm not saying you're wrong. I will have to look into this further.

          • ChrisWPG

            Please enlighten me if you find something : )

          • RayK

            I think the exceptions would be things like budgets (but perhaps not budget implementation bills), throne speeches and estimates. In these cases I think the Speaker might maintain the status quo by continuing government funding for government programs and/or allow the debate to continue on individual pieces of legislation.

    • ChrisWPG

      http://www.cbc.ca/politics/insidepolitics/2010/09…

      Looks like Kady is reading the comments here :P

      • john g

        Probably wistfully remembering the days when she could post a blog entry and still get 100+ comments, rather than the dozen or so she gets now. Probably also thinking that Macleans has a much better photographer for the blog pages too.

        • RayK

          Yeah, the need to register in order to leave comments over the Ceeb is a big disinsentive.

          • Jenn_

            That and having to write @RayK three pages after your comment (where there is little likelihood of your seeing it) really stifles the debate.

  • Patchouli

    Candace Hoeppner insists this is a private member's bill and must be voted on as is — ie: NO COMPROMISE.

    No room for compromise on an emotional issue that has Canadians divided and polarized? Her way or the highway?

    Pick highway — dump her bill — insist on some compromise.

  • john g

    So why are the Liberals already saying they're going to lose by a couple of votes???

    • Style

      They can't count?

    • Patchouli

      where did they (who?) say that?

      • john g

        That's what the CBC is reporting.
        http://www.cbc.ca/politics/insidepolitics/2010/09…

        "The Liberals admit that they will probably lose the upcoming vote on the long gun registry on Sept. 22 by a couple of votes. So, they're looking at their town hall events as a chance to win some votes from the public."

        • Charles H.

          I'd say expectations of some combination of the below as possible reasons why they're saying that:

          * Niki Ashton votes to abolish it.
          * They expect someone from their party not to show up to vote.
          * They expect someone from their party to break ranks.
          * They hadn't heard about Allen when they made said comments.

          Pick and choose as you see fit.

          • john g

            OK, but your points 1 and 4 are unknowns. Given they have all the momentum, why would the Liberals admit defeat before learning what those members plan to do?

            If they are already saying to the media that they expect to lose, given everything we know now, I would say points 2 or 3 are the most likely candidates.

          • ChrisWPG

            You missed the obvious,
            *Liberals can't count.

        • Patchouli

          Okay, I THINK the vote on Sept 22 is for the Liberal motion to stop Hoepner's bill. So that's the bill the Liberals expect to lose by a vote or two in the CBC article.

          The actual vote on the bill is later; maybe Sept 29?

          Anyone?

          • MarionKl

            If the bill doesn't die on the 22, there would have to be at least 2 hours of debate on it before the vote (on separate days, as PMBs are allocated one hour a day.) Usually, the PMB items are dealt with on a rotation basis, but dates can be traded. The vote would take place on the Wednesday after the second hour of 3rd reading debate.

          • Patchouli

            Thank you, Marion. And private member's bills aren't usually given the amount of debate as government bills, which I guess is why the cons tried to get it through this way.

            Anyway, thank you; I am now less-confused, albeit still somewhat (alas a general condition).

  • Derek

    I think the Liberals are freaking out at the possibility that their motion might pass. They have been counting on it losing and the gun registry being scrapped so they can use all their carefully crafted talking points. What happens if Layton convinces enough of his caucus to switch sides and the registry survives? All that effort by the Liberals to smear the NDP will have gone to waste!

    • Patchouli

      That's a strange read of the situation.

  • Derek

    What's strange about it – sure you aren't gullible to believe for one second that the Liberals actual care about whether the gun registry lives or dies. They only see it as a political wedge issue. In fact they hope it dies – so they can use mock outrage at the NDP and than insulate their (few) rural MPs from any anger from them having been whipped.

Previous

Next

From Macleans