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

'The House has lost confidence in the government'

by Aaron Wherry on Wednesday, March 23, 2011 12:39pm - 47 Comments

Mr. Harper has now appealed for the opposition parties to reconsider their objections to the budget, while Mr. Ignatieff has announced that the Liberals will table the following motion to be voted on Friday.

The the House agrees with the finding of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs that the government is in contempt of Parliament, which is unprecedented in Canadian Parliamentary history, and consequently, the House has lost confidence in the government.

Mr. Layton says he is still open to working with Mr. Harper to amend the budget, but if Mr. Harper is not so interested, the NDP will support the Liberal motion.

The Prime Minister’s statement is here.

Tags: Budget, democracy, electiond, house of commons, Jack Layton, Michael Ignatieff, Parliament, Stephen Harper

More by Aaron Wherry

McC_

whatever else it might be, the motion is clear.
NorthernPoV

Sick of Harper?
Me too.
Make your vote count! Check out Catch22
http://catch22campaign.ca/
OriginalEmily1

Harper sure didn't pick much of a hill to die on.

Jan

Harper opened his budget promotion this morning with the Ecorefitwhatsit. What a visionary.

OriginalEmily1

Yeah, a totally unmemorable budget nobody will miss….and the Libs are going ahead on contempt for democracy….not Harp's best start.

AT1

Jeff Simpson, that incorrigible Con, seems to think this budget will go over well with average Canadians (whoever they are): http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/opin…

OriginalEmily1

Jeff Simpson thinks any number of silly things…often all in the same day.
Orson Bean

Up until today, Simpson has been extremely, scathingly critical of Harper and the Conservatives, in a number of columns. And yet you accuse him of thinking silly things. Interesting.
OriginalEmily1

No he hasn't. You guys always see media bias.
Orson Bean

Emily, if I wanted, I could link to multiple columns by Jeffrey Simpson in which he was essentially tearing Harper & Co. a new one. He has positively excoriated the Harper govt (rightly so) over issues like the long-form census, climate change policy, polarizing tendencies, rabid partisanship, the list goes on and on. You are being positively delusional here. To wit, just as a sampler:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/the-…
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/the-…
http://www.canadians.org/campaignblog/?p=2054
Jan

I wouldn't call Simpsons endorsement particularly glowing. Did you read the whole thing?
Orson Bean

I wouldn't even call it an endorsement. He was simply saying it was a fairly effective political budget — suitable for campaigning on. What I thought was interesting was his criticism of the Liberal party braintrust, where he practically accused them of being delusional in their hope (in his view) that a campaign will somehow turn their fortunes around. I'm not as convinced as Simpson is on this point, but there is I think an element of gambling in the LPC strategy. And like most gambling moves, it's either going to work or it will blow up in their faces. We'll see.

LdKitchenersOwn

I don't think most Canadians care which hill he dies on. What triggered an election isn't generally an issue 5 minutes after the election is triggered.

OriginalEmily1

Then Harper is in big trouble.

austinso

It is silly for Jack to hold out on the budget when everything they were ever promised by the CPC has only resulted in token gestures of which very few have ever seen the light of day.

I'm wondering why he doesn't want to play the "they need a time out" card again….
chet

So the Liberals think their inside baseball, partisan motion,

takes precedence over

the budget: the principal document which funds support for all government programs, and which impacts the well being of every man, woman and child in this great land of ours?

It seems the Liberals haven't quite left the insular echo chamber that is Ottawa politics.

They will have to leave their comfy cocoon and hit the ridings shortly. We'll see how that turns out for them.

Thwim

You know, if you want to send me your keyboard, I can probably get the dust out of it that's causing those wayward returns.

http://halooverride.blogspot.com/ Halo_Override

Insert "diminishing returns" joke here.

Jan

Fifty lousy bucks a month for impoverished seniors – some well being.
gottabesaid

Still haven't heard a defense from you how the government was right in withholding that information that started this whole mess… other than the fact that 'people don't care.'

But please, continue… when you've abandoned principle, there's always partisanship.

Guest

I think it is more than 'people don't care'. They don't understand it. The process comes off as far to partisan to be taken a serious as it obviously should.
chet

As Coyne stated awhile ago, Harper's response was routine. The Libs did it all the time under Chretien/Martin.

Just another "sky is falling" threat to democracy partisan hyperventilating.

Just like prorogue. Happens 104 other times, including several under Chretien….shrug. That 105th time (under Harper)? Political apocalypse.

J-walking isn't "right" either, but I wouldn't argue that doing it justified a life sentence.

It's called perspective, my friend, and the desperate hyperpartisan Liberals appear to be wholly lacking in it.

Everyday Candadians have it in spades though. Which is why Liberals on this blog and in Ottawa are going to be hit by a ton of bricks when those everyday Canadians deliver a majority to Harper.

gottabesaid

Did you just compare refusing to release critical budget information on key government policy planks against the wishes of a majority of MPs to jaywalking? Huh. I thought 'majority rules' was about as fundamental to democracy as just about anything. So, no, it's not jaywalking.

As I've told other posters before, I would never defend Chretien's style of governing. That's why, when Harper shows the same disdain as Chretien did, well, I'm doubly frustrated. However, Chretien had one key factor on his side: he had a majority of MPs under his sway. I'd have loved to see Chretien get his comeuppance. I'm not shedding a tear for Harper now, either.

LdKitchenersOwn

Well, I do agree that perception can be stronger than reality, so that's a good point too.

Mike R

Well, in politics perception can be reality. The other adage to remember is that you generally aren't competing against perfection, just the alternatives. I don't get the feeling people are ready to put the Liberals back in government, either on their own or in a coalition – and I think that is the choice the Tories will make it very clear is going to be on the ballot.

E_B_

With regard to what issue(s) will move the electorate Ethics/Budget, can we look to the past as to what happened that caused the government to change hands?

What brought Mulroney to power?
What brought Chretien to power?
What brought Harper to power?

I will argue that the at least the last three times government has actually changed in this country, the electorate was thoroughly P.O.d at 'ethical' lapses of the regime in power. In government, there really isn't a heck of a difference between the Liberals and Conservatives so we are usually more or less satisfied with the status quo.

For the Liberals to make gains, they are going to have to hammer on the ethical lapses (and there are many even if they are relatively minor) and hope that the electorate can be roused enough to be convinced that the Conservatives have 'cheated'.

wellwell

This is exactly right. Even the tens of billions in questionable spending projects has an ethical dimension.

Herb

Followed the link to the PM's website. What I saw on it has nothing to do with the Government of Canada and everything to do with the CPC and partisan warfare.

Here we go again providing the CPC and its leader with free advertising paid for by our taxes. Of course, if the website is maintained by volunteeres or paid for by the CPC, I will apologize humbly, but will demand that the crest of Canada and any other insinuation of official status be removed.
NorthernPoV

thanks – well rebutted
Kyle

So Mr. Layton agrees with the committee's contempt finding but if the Conservatives spend more money on seniors then he won't agree with the committee's report.
Does the committee report have anything to do with funding for seniors?
danby

All the more reason for Mr Harper to pull the plug ASAP – fixed election law be damned
LdKitchenersOwn

It's pretty silly, but I loved Ignatieff's (unintentional?) Matrix reference.

"There's a blue door, there's a red door…"

LOL Take the red door Neo!
Keith in Brampton

The opposition parties would be smart to have their non-confidence vote on the contempt motion and make it an ethics campaign, rather than bring them down on the budget. In fact, they should have simply reserved judgment on the budget yesterday and proceeded with this.
Mike T.

He already laughed in Canadians' face by breaking it once, why not twice?
NorthernPoV

I agree that they should bring down Harper on the ethics issues.
It was important to piddle on the silly budget too, not leave it hanging unchallenged.
They need to connect the financial and ethical issues via the (lack of) TRUST argument. http://catch22campaign.ca/
Guest

So the contempt charge is just a way to avoid voting against the budget?
LdKitchenersOwn

The opposition parties would be smart to have their non-confidence vote on the contempt motion and make it an ethics campaign, rather than bring them down on the budget.

I really don't think anyone will remember what vote triggered the election once the election's on. I happen to agree that the ethics issues are very serious, but I don't think that sentiment is widely held among typical voters, and I'm not sure that the Liberals in particular should want to fight an election primarily on that basis. I've been surprised, frankly, at the inability of the Liberals to bounce back since adscam, and it makes me think that the electorate writ large is still blaming the Liberals for what went on from 1999-2004 seven years, two leaders and three elections later. That being the case, I think the Tories could be very effective in neutralizing the ethics issue with a lot of "pot calling the kettle black" / "nothing but political games while the world teeters on the edge" type rhetoric, and constant reminders that Michael Ignatieff is a Russian prince sent by the Americans to turn us all in to pansy social scientists so that they can invade us unopposed and turn us into the 51st state… or something.
OriginalEmily1

Libs are stressing that the Cons want to spend big money on planes, prisons and corportate tax cuts, not on Canadian families, and the budget proves that….so that, along with the ethics issue is where they start from.
Mike R

The Liberals may want to run an election on their issues, but campaigns almost never turn on the issues raised in the non-confidence motion that is used as a pretext for causing the election.
OriginalEmily1

The vote for both occurs on the same day.
NorthernPoV

no, it simply helps frame the election as an attempt to thwart a sorry excuse for a gov't that is both:
"Incompetent AND In Contempt"
OriginalEmily1

Well Cons haven't much to run on, except their fantasy about a coalition.
Loraine Lamontagne

If Harper doesn't pull the plug I'll lose a bet…
AT1

NPoV- Isn't that like being stupid AND devious?
Mike R

I agree. I wouldn't deny ethics are important, and an impression of corruption can clearly harm a government (as it should), but the examples, so far, that the opposition are pinning their hopes on aren't the type that really capture public imagination, at least not so far. No manila envelopes appear to have changed hands.
Still, the examples they are using would be more harmful if it weren't for the Liberal party's own reputation. As you say, if it is simply a matter of the pot calling the kettle black, as the public appears to see it, then it won't be a ballot issue. More likely people will be moved by issues regarding more general questions of competence, the economy, health care, etc.
LdKitchenersOwn

More likely people will be moved by issues regarding more general questions of competence, the economy, health care, etc.

And I think there are issues there where the opposition could HAMMER the Tories, if they're smart.

We'll see…
Guest

I might need some help here, But if the Opposition vote "non confidence" on the Contempt motion you are saying there would still be a vote on the budget? Why?