SerengetiGuide
Well-Known Member
Ignatieff now says he would form government should Tories lose faith of house of commons.
Guys, this is bull ****, hate to do it, but my vote is now going Tory because of this alone.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...govern-if-tories-win-minority/article1991584/
Michael Ignatieff is saying clearly for the first time that he could defeat a minority Conservative government and make a case to the Governor-General that his party could govern with the support of others – and without another trip to the polls.
Until now, Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff has only said the party that wins the most seats on May 2 can “try” to win the confidence of the House of Commons. While the comment carried an obvious implication, he spelled it out for the first time Tuesday.
“If [Conservative Leader Stephen] Harper wins the most seats and forms a government but does not secure the confidence of the House, and I’m assuming Parliament comes back, then it goes to the Governor-General. That’s what happens. That’s how the rules work.
“And then, if the Governor-General wants to call on other parties – or myself, for example – to try and form a government, then we try and form a government. That’s exactly how the rules work and what I’m trying to say to Canadians is I understand the rules, I respect the rules, I’ll follow them to the letter and I’m not going to form a coalition,” he said.
Mr. Harper began the campaign by stating that another Conservative minority is no longer an option; that only a majority mandate will keep him as prime minister. His original line of attack was that the other parties would form a coalition. Mr. Ignatieff continues to rule out a formal coalition – which would involve inviting members of another party to sit in cabinet – but he is clearly open to convincing the Governor-General that he can provide stable government with the support of other parties in the House.
‘What I’m prepared to do is talk to [NDP Leader Jack] Layton, or [Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles] Duceppe, or even Mr. Harper and say: ‘Look, we’ve got an issue here. How do we solve it? Here’s the plan I want to put before Parliament. This is the budget I would bring in.’ Then we take it from there.”
While Mr. Ignatieff is right to say that the rules of Parliament allow a party that failed to win the most seats to govern with the support of others, the scenario also raises a political dynamic.
When last year’s British elections failed to produce a majority government, for several days the second-place Labour Party debated forming a coalition with the third-place Liberal Democrats. The idea prompted strong negative reaction and was derided as a “coalition of losers.”
In the end, the Liberal Democrats rejected that offer and entered a formal coalition with the first-place Conservatives.
On Monday, Mr. Layton offered specific scenarios in an interview with Mr. Mansbridge in which a second-place party could govern.
While avoiding predictions of which party will finish first overall, Mr. Layton outlined options in which the party with the most seats is immediately defeated in Parliament and the party with the second most seats works out a governing arrangement with the remaining parties.
“Some other party gets a shot at it. We shouldn't immediately go back to an election; that would be ridiculous,” he said, describing what should happen if the party with the most seats is quickly defeated in the House of Commons.
Mr. Layton said those other parties could then craft a common agenda based on compromise.
“Let's see how much we can get done together. It could be informal; it could be case by case; it could be agreement on a speech from the Throne, or maybe agreement on the budget, or maybe agreement on a certain number of pieces of legislation, on a vote-by-vote basis; it could be some other kind of arrangement. There have been many different types of arrangements used, both in Canada and in different provinces as well, and around the world. But my goal would always be to try to get the things done that we told Canadians we would get done.”
Guys, this is bull ****, hate to do it, but my vote is now going Tory because of this alone.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...govern-if-tories-win-minority/article1991584/
Michael Ignatieff is saying clearly for the first time that he could defeat a minority Conservative government and make a case to the Governor-General that his party could govern with the support of others – and without another trip to the polls.
Until now, Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff has only said the party that wins the most seats on May 2 can “try” to win the confidence of the House of Commons. While the comment carried an obvious implication, he spelled it out for the first time Tuesday.
“If [Conservative Leader Stephen] Harper wins the most seats and forms a government but does not secure the confidence of the House, and I’m assuming Parliament comes back, then it goes to the Governor-General. That’s what happens. That’s how the rules work.
“And then, if the Governor-General wants to call on other parties – or myself, for example – to try and form a government, then we try and form a government. That’s exactly how the rules work and what I’m trying to say to Canadians is I understand the rules, I respect the rules, I’ll follow them to the letter and I’m not going to form a coalition,” he said.
Mr. Harper began the campaign by stating that another Conservative minority is no longer an option; that only a majority mandate will keep him as prime minister. His original line of attack was that the other parties would form a coalition. Mr. Ignatieff continues to rule out a formal coalition – which would involve inviting members of another party to sit in cabinet – but he is clearly open to convincing the Governor-General that he can provide stable government with the support of other parties in the House.
‘What I’m prepared to do is talk to [NDP Leader Jack] Layton, or [Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles] Duceppe, or even Mr. Harper and say: ‘Look, we’ve got an issue here. How do we solve it? Here’s the plan I want to put before Parliament. This is the budget I would bring in.’ Then we take it from there.”
While Mr. Ignatieff is right to say that the rules of Parliament allow a party that failed to win the most seats to govern with the support of others, the scenario also raises a political dynamic.
When last year’s British elections failed to produce a majority government, for several days the second-place Labour Party debated forming a coalition with the third-place Liberal Democrats. The idea prompted strong negative reaction and was derided as a “coalition of losers.”
In the end, the Liberal Democrats rejected that offer and entered a formal coalition with the first-place Conservatives.
On Monday, Mr. Layton offered specific scenarios in an interview with Mr. Mansbridge in which a second-place party could govern.
While avoiding predictions of which party will finish first overall, Mr. Layton outlined options in which the party with the most seats is immediately defeated in Parliament and the party with the second most seats works out a governing arrangement with the remaining parties.
“Some other party gets a shot at it. We shouldn't immediately go back to an election; that would be ridiculous,” he said, describing what should happen if the party with the most seats is quickly defeated in the House of Commons.
Mr. Layton said those other parties could then craft a common agenda based on compromise.
“Let's see how much we can get done together. It could be informal; it could be case by case; it could be agreement on a speech from the Throne, or maybe agreement on the budget, or maybe agreement on a certain number of pieces of legislation, on a vote-by-vote basis; it could be some other kind of arrangement. There have been many different types of arrangements used, both in Canada and in different provinces as well, and around the world. But my goal would always be to try to get the things done that we told Canadians we would get done.”
....number 1 yes, get rid of it.....holmes*
