I agree, not a good way to start: it's like stumbling when just out of the gate.
But in all fairness, when Belinda Stronach crossed the floor I don't recall anyone in her riding putting on a protest. The voters actually REWARDED her by returning her to power in the next election. Wherefore the double standard?
I'd previously posted this to www.garth.ca (weblog).If the Liberals/NDP love you, and the media loves you - you have to question your tactics and your motives. As of this morning, after hearing from hundreds of Canadians, Mr. Turner has revised his position. Amazing how facts can alter your stand:
To Garth Turner:
After taking time to review these blogs - not out of boredom, but rather out of interest - I must say that from the comments, it doesn’t seem that most know exactly what they’re protesting or what they are defending. (Comments quoting sensational headlines don’t qualify as facts) There has been no Conservative hypocrisy or unethical behaviour or secret agenda. The NDP is entirely off base asking for a costly investigation - Of what? To retain a Cabinet post? Mr. Emerson will serve his constituents and his country well with admirable motivation (not simply selling his vote in return for a promotion). Mr. Emerson was a successful businessman, chosen by Mr. Martin to serve in a particular capacity in Cabinet, and he performed well. How could the Conservatives be perceived as offering an incentive, when all Mr. Emerson is being asked to do is to finish the job he began in Cabinet? As he said - Mr. Martin moved on…now Mr. Emerson wants to complete what he began - in government. Consistently during the election and even at the time of Stronach’s crossing, Mr. Harper has said he’s not prepared to stop MP’s from crossing the floor - since that prohibition would give too much power to the Leader. He’s always said there needs to be more debate around this issue. Where’s the hypocrisy? Mr. Harper does want to introduce for vote in the House, the issue of elected senators. In the meantime - Mr. Fortier (an extremely well qualified individual) will serve until the next election at which time he’ll step down and run for election. As Mr. Fortier himself says - It’s an imperfect solution, but it is a solution. Don’t fall for the line that he can’t be held accountable! The Prime Minister is accountable for this portfolio as with all portfolios. Even Mr. Chretien acknowledged where the buck stops. Mr. Fortier will answer to the Senate and to the House as required. Hopefully Canadians will recognize that Mr. Harper is honest, intelligent and is entirely committed to keeping his commitments to Canadians. Please! Take the emotion (and media frenzy) out of this and it’s clear that the best is yet to come for Canada - honestly. Take a look…Mr. Harper is using all ethical and legal means available to him to create the strongest government possible under the existing situations. He is committed to improving the rules and the procedures for the future. Give him the room…Why all the artificial indignation?
Ann:
Why bother with such a long piece?
Why not simply state your basic position; Conservative = good, Liberal = bad (no matter what the facts, what the issue, what the previously held and expressed positions and beliefs, etc...)
It is that quality level of political debate that is so sorely needed.
This continues to live because you make it so by continually yapping your hearts out ... In a month or so, after several success or failures by this government, let's see if this is still news... I heard the same from most news hounds in the tubes ... Move on folks !!! Only those with malicious intent to bring down this government even before it starts governing, still gives credence and legs to this fiasco ... Are you willing to be a part of this??? It is time for the meat and potatoes stuff.. It is time for some governance in this country ...
Posted at 2006-02-12 10:24:51 [PermaLink]Damian: good to see you make up your own mind on this as opposed to accepting the Conservative stance on the issue.
Ellie: it's not exactly a double standard. It comes down to the riding. Belinda's accepted it, Emerson's has not. Keep in mind, Belinda's did not just accept it as is. There were many who opposed it. There just weren't as many or weren't as many willing to put up a fight.
If you can't understand the issue, Anne and Ellie, that would be YOUR issue. The majority of voters in Vancouver Kingsway voted for a candidate that professed to be a social democrat, as they ALWAYS do. The fact that you, as a non-constituent, don't approve is totally irrelevant.
Those people that had their choice stolen from them by a self serving carpetbagger, who has freely admitted after the fact that he has no committment to ANY parties principles, have lost their voice in Parliament. What chance is there that Emmerson will stand up and speak in opposition to any legislation that the constituents feel strongly against. THAT'S HIS JOB! That's what MPs DO! If you can't understand that than this country is on a very slippery slope.
Like most Conservatives did, I opposed Belinda crossing the floor to the Liberals. But Belinda had only beaten Martha Hall Findlay by 689 votes. It was a very close race in between the Liberals and the Conservatives. Everyone could see that see had become increasingly disallusioned by Harper and the the Social stances of many Conservatives. Still, I thought and still think she should have sat as an Independent.
Emerson, should sit as an Independent or ask for a by-election. The reason he doesn't is that he knows he will lose. The Conservative finished a distant third: 12,000 votes less than the Liberals, 7000 votes behind the NDP. People gave Mr. Harper a minority government because they wanted honest government. This is a bad start. Most people either oppose him crossing the floor or sigh and say its politics, it's corrupt no matter who you elect. I thought the idea was to do better?
He is the first Canadian MP to cross the floor after being officially elected, but before being officially sworn in.
Wow that is rich
I would question each and every person at that "rally" to see if they really did vote and if they really did live in the riding - this is a Liberal NDP organized rally for political optics. Unless you live in the riding and actually voted - you shouldn't bitch about how disenfranshised the voters of VK are!!!
Posted at 2006-02-12 13:34:01 [PermaLink]Trevor, Belinda may have been disillusioned by Harper's social stances, but that didn't stop her from wanting to be seen with Bill Clinton because his social views aren't all that different from the party's views.
Posted at 2006-02-12 13:40:44 [PermaLink]Alberta Girl; do you see the irony in that statement? No? Thought not...
My post would apply to any riding, any party. You either recognize democracy or you don't. Your own preferences get put on the sideline.
I have a a couple of very close friends that donated four weeks of their lives to working on Emerson's campaign; they're not even in his riding. I don't agree with their political views but I totally empathize with their fury at being stabbed in the back. Should they not have attended that rally to voice their anger?
DaninVan: Like Alberta Girl I am a little sceptical of not so much the people attending the rally but who is behind it. If these people decided on their own to protest, fine. But the word is, it was organized by NDP and Liberals.
Secondly the NDP guy who is putting this before the Ethics commissioner, why this one and not the Belinda Stronach crossing. She actually had a go between doing the negotiations for her, but nothing was said about it.
While I agree that this crossing the floor should never have happened, I think the media and the two other parties are going out of their way to make sure it stays in the news.
Re the irony of the statement - I made a few - which one do you mean?
As to your comment about your friends - you are right.
My comments come about because 40% of the people in the riding didn't vote, yet it is human nature to complain about your politicians no matter what they do. I am not saying that people don't have the right to be upset - I am making the point that the optics of this is that hundreds of people attending a rally looks good but when you check out the story behind it - how many people live in the riding - how many were bussed in, how many people voted in the last election, how many people didn't even know who DE was prior to this but attended to express their outrage. Just asking - It is my opinion that too many people jump on the outrage bandwagon without even checking the story out.
I do believe, as you say, that anyone who worked on his campaign should have the right to complain/or not.
Question:
To avoid this in the future why doesn't each party in every riding make their candidate sign a contract to run in an immediate By-election if they leave the party?
MikeP; Waddel, the NDP candidate in the riding, is leading the charge (no pun intended). I don't blame him for being pissed off. He lost to a Liberal, which would be bad enough, but the seat, the paycheque and the bonus Cabinet seat, went to the third place Conservative Party...just a different candidate than the the one that campaigned.
For the voters, sort of like ordering a GM (because you HATE Ford) and having the dealership hand you the keys to what is unmistakebly a Ford...
I don't get the outrage, Emerson was a Martinite recruit, did people who worked and vote for him expect Mother Teresa type values? don't come running crying now, its too late.
Posted at 2006-02-12 21:00:25 [PermaLink]Serves them right eh? Should've voted NDP...;)
Posted at 2006-02-12 21:33:39 [PermaLink]The outraged, disenfranchised people didn't have a problem when Emerson was dropped into their riding by Martin, but now they do? - tough. Next time do your homework or failing that vote NDP or the man on the moon.
Posted at 2006-02-12 22:22:20 [PermaLink]No argument there. But that's not really what the argument is about.
Posted at 2006-02-13 00:49:34 [PermaLink]Fortunately, the people of Vancouver Kingsway, and of Canada as a whole, will get exactly what they want and deserve. Harper's government will fall — I'm looking for that to happen in a matter of weeks — and we'll get a nice, warm, cozy Liberal majority again. We must punish the Conservatives with electoral oblivion for failing to live up to a 100% Utopian standard that they never even espoused. And we must do it even if it means rewarding the Liberals for living down to the 0% Machiavellian standard that they have so often descended to whenever they were in power in the last four decades.
The common or garden Canadian, I submit, given the choice between God and the Devil, would choose the Devil, just to save himself from the pain of being disappointed. The real bedrock ideology of Canada is the cheap cynicism of the born sucker. For a few weeks in January I thought Canadians were capable of something better, but now I see I was wrong.
Ave atque vale, Mr. Harper. We hardly knew you, and on the whole, we're happier to keep it that way.
The objections to Emerson joining cabinet are just local party tribalism. There is a long tradition in the US of selecting cabinet members from the other party.
Posted at 2006-02-13 08:16:56 [PermaLink]Exactly when did the Conservatives campaign against the right of MP's to change party, or the right to appoint Senators to Cabinet? Exactly when did they receive a mandate to change either practice?
I'm getting a little bit sick of this kind of barefaced lying about the Conservative campaign.