Can someone explain this? (political - Canada)

[sweetness6280]

I have a general understanding of American politics, but can someone explain this to me?

Can you really just dissolve Parliament?

 

[jomar]

Someone will explain it more fully, but dissolve in this sense probably means he called for the parliament's session to end early. They'll be back.

 

[Liar]

Can you really just dissolve Parliament?

Yep. With a special death-ray developed at the north pole by Dr Evil.

Or in other words, I have no idea.

 

[sweetness6280]

Someone will explain it more fully, but dissolve in this sense probably means he called for the parliament's session to end early. They'll be back.

Well, I thought that's what it had to mean, but I was a little confused by the word dissolve. Dismiss, I would get, but dissolve sounds like he just relieved them of their duties and sent them home.

 

[rgraham666]

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty said Saturday that if the Conservatives win the next election, the government will lower personal taxes to make them more competitive with rates in the U.S. over the next few years.

Oh great. The one good thing about the Liberals in power for a decade is we had a decade of big surpluses. Some of the things they did were questionable, like redoing the rules for unemployment insurance so that only about 1/3 of the people who pay into it can collect it. This lead to huge surpluses in the insurance fund that were transfered to general revenues.

Now, thanks to tax cuts and increases in spending we're barely breaking even. And now this dickwad wants to make us even more like America.

Mr. Flaherty, I refuse to call him The Honorable, ran for leader of the Progressive Conservatives a few years ago. One of his policies was that the solution for homelessness would be to make it illegal. In my opinion, he's a sociopath.

Ahem. Sorry for the rant. I loathe the man.

Okay, on topic. A little bit of Canadian civics first.

Our Parliament is a combination of the executive and legislative branches, The White House and Congress as it were. Parliament consists of two parts, The Commons and the Senate.

The Senate is chosen by the Prime Minister and confirmed by the Commons and the Governor-General. The Senate is just ceremonial. It has no real power and is just a way for governments to reward faithful followers. I'd get rid of it if it were my choice.

The Commons contains the elected representatives. Every candidate must run for a single seat. Even the leaders of the parties. You don't run for Prime Minister, you run for Member of Parliament for a riding. Mine is The Beaches, for example.

Which ever party wins the most seats forms The Government. The leader of this party, assuming he wins his seat, becomes Prime Minister and chooses his Ministers from seats won by his party, usually.

The other parties form The Opposition. Since Canada has four major parties this means the Opposition could have more seats than the Government. That is the case right now.

The Governor-General is 'Representative of The Queen'. Again, this is a largely ceremonial position. They have only one real power, to dissolve The House of Commons forcing an election.

This happens in one of three cases.

In one case, the term limit of five years for The Government comes up. When this happens the Governor-General has to dissolve Parliament.

In another, The government loses a vote in Commons. This can be on a bill due to become law or a 'lack of confidence' vote. Again the Governor-General has to dissolve Parliament.

In the last case the Prime Minister can go to the Governor-General and ask then to dissolve Parliament. If this happens the GG does have a choice to say yes or no.

That's what's happening this time. The Prime Minister wanted an election and he got it.

Hope that helps, sweetness.

On another rant, this just shows what a bunch of hypocrites our current governing party is. They campaigned in the last election, partly, on a four year term for Parliament so we can be just like the States. "Which is such a much better place than Canada," they say. They won and they made that change.

Now they're ignoring their own law so they can force an election when they think it's convenient for them.

Hypocritical scumbags.

 

[jomar]

Well, I thought that's what it had to mean, but I was a little confused by the word dissolve. Dismiss, I would get, but dissolve sounds like he just relieved them of their duties and sent them home.

That's probably what happens between sessions anyway.

ETA: Thanks, Rob. So it really is dissolve - forcing an election for the whole of the Commons which could change which party is in control (or remains, in this case)?

 

[wafflemtl]

I have a general understanding of American politics, but can someone explain this to me?

Can you really just dissolve Parliament?

Well, Canada is not a democracy in the real sens it's a parlementary monarchy.
Stephen Harper is just the prime minister. Michaëlle Jean (general Governor) represent the queen of england and is the state chef.

When the Prime minister wants to have an election, he ask for a dissolution of the parlement. For that there is a pretty official meeting between the prime minister and the general Governor. It's more like a symbol than any think else. For my knowledge, no Governor ever said no

 

[oggbashan]

Yes. In parliaments based on the UK Westminster model, the party in government can call a General Election at any time that suits them.

There are limits on the maximum term of a parliament between General Elections and most parties would aim for something less than the maximum BUT there is no minimum.

If a government loses a vote of confidence on a matter of importance they are expected to dissolve parliament and call a General Election but the government decides what is "a matter of importance".

The UK's Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, was about to dissolve parliament last year. He is believed to have thought it would be to his advantage to have an election before the Credit Crunch really began to bite. He decided not to. That was the first major decision he had to face and most commentators thought he handled it badly. He should either have called an election or squashed discussion of an early election. He appeared to dither for months.

Og

 

[rgraham666]

Dion, a former environment minister who named his dog Kyoto, wants to increase taxes on greenhouse gas emitters. Dion has moved his party to the crowded left in Canada by staking his leadership on a "Green Shift" tax plan.

Another major laugh in this article. I gather by this reporter's standards everything to the left of 'The Right' is 'Left', meaning close to Communism. Oy.

 

[sweetness6280]

Yep. With a special death-ray developed at the north pole by Dr Evil.

Or in other words, I have no idea.

...The Governor-General is 'Representative of The Queen'. Again, this is a largely ceremonial position. They have only one real power, to dissolve The House of Commons forcing an election.

This happens in one of three cases.

In one case, the term limit of five years for The Government comes up. When this happens the Governor-General has to dissolve Parliament.

In another, The government loses a vote in Commons. This can be on a bill due to become law or a 'lack of confidence' vote. Again the Governor-General has to dissolve Parliament.

In the last case the Prime Minister can go to the Governor-General and ask then to dissolve Parliament. If this happens the GG does have a choice to say yes or no.

That's what's happening this time. The Prime Minister wanted an election and he got it.

Hope that helps, sweetness.
...

...
When the Prime minister wants to have an election, he ask for a dissolution of the parlement. For that there is a pretty official meeting between the prime minister and the general Governor. It's more like a symbol than any think else. For my knowledge, no Governor ever said no

So Mr. Evil has a figurative death ray.

Thanks for the explanation, gentlemen.

 

[rgraham666]

Welcome beautiful.

 

[wafflemtl]

So Mr. Evil has a figurative death ray.

Thanks for the explanation, gentlemen.

De rien

 

[incubus666]

Thanks for the very good primer on the Canadian political system.

I see from the article the Conservatives came to power in '06. I remember when the Oct. Massacre took place. When the government went back on promises on the taxation of Royal Trusts. Who was in power at that time?

Thanks

Mike S.

 

[Guest]

I have a general understanding of American politics, but can someone explain this to me?

Can you really just dissolve Parliament?

Sure. Parliament is completely soluble in common sense.

 

[rgraham666]

Thanks for the very good primer on the Canadian political system.

I see from the article the Conservatives came to power in '06. I remember when the Oct. Massacre took place. When the government went back on promises on the taxation of Royal Trusts. Who was in power at that time?

Thanks

Mike S.

I believe that was when the Progressive Conservatives were in power. They went from a majority to two (Count 'em. Two.) seats. The Progressive Conservatives never recovered.

For my American readers at that time, the early '90s, there were two 'right wing' parties in Canada. The Progressive Conservatives (who were closer to center) and Reform (which was essentially a Western Canadian party). The last had a fair number of outright secessionists among its number. One of them was the present Prime Minister who once wrote that Alberta, our equivalent of Texas, should put up a 'firewall' so they wouldn't be infected by the rest of the country.

As you can see, we Canadians are not always that bright.

 

[Emperor_Nero]

So Mr. Evil has a figurative death ray.

Thanks for the explanation, gentlemen.

That's DR. Evil ... he didn't spend six years in evil medical school just to be called Mr.

 

[gauchecritic]

That's DR. Evil ... he didn't spend six years in evil medical school just to be called Mr.

Unless he's a consultant of course, then he would insist on Mr.

 

[starrkers]

The Australian system is somehwat similar to Canada, except we have to vote for the mongrels every three years, and they regularly pull it back to two and a bit. And then they campaign for four-year terms

 

[Xelebes]

I believe that was when the Progressive Conservatives were in power. They went from a majority to two (Count 'em. Two.) seats. The Progressive Conservatives never recovered.

For my American readers at that time, the early '90s, there were two 'right wing' parties in Canada. The Progressive Conservatives (who were closer to center) and Reform (which was essentially a Western Canadian party). The last had a fair number of outright secessionists among its number. One of them was the present Prime Minister who once wrote that Alberta, our equivalent of Texas, should put up a 'firewall' so they wouldn't be infected by the rest of the country.

As you can see, we Canadians are not always that bright.

Could you be anymore condescending?

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

But do you have a religious right in your country? If not, you can borrow ours.

Oh, wait, that would be cruel to....Canada.

 

[incubus666]

But do you have a religious right in your country? If not, you can borrow ours.

Oh, wait, that would be cruel to....Canada.

Come on Max we could ship them all tp Canada and the government could pay. Oh,shit, that would make me a liberal. Having the government pay for what I want.

Talk about a quandary. I know what I want but, I don't want tp pay....... shit, shit,shit. Would anyone in Canada help us out in the U.S. ......Yeah like thats going to happen.

I am sorry we will not be able to provide you with some of out extreme right wing idiots. A great loss to both of our countries. DAMN. Although I doubt you will agree.

Mike S.

 

[SEVERUSMAX]

Naw, just give them their own country. Utah. Yeah, dump them all in Utah and let them battle it out with the Mormons for power. Should be fun to watch. American theocrats, Canadian theocrats, and Mormons of all political stripes, all clamoring for power. Oh, wait, there are no theocrats in your country, are there? Nothing against Mormons, but someone has to host the crazies, so they're nominated. They did want independence in the past, after all.

Guess, as much as I love and prefer America, you guys have an advantage there.

 

[ishtat]

The Australian system is somehwat similar to Canada, except we have to vote for the mongrels every three years, and they regularly pull it back to two and a bit. And then they campaign for four-year terms

However, the Australian Senate has real clout. They can refuse supply (money) to run the government. In those circumstances the Governor General can sack the incumbent Prime Minister and appoint a caretaker who will have to call an immediate election.

This happened once, in 1975 at a Federal level and almost caused a revolution. It also happened in a State, New South Wales in 1932. The Governor General has these reserve powers which most sensible GG's would avoid using if at all possible.

 

[rgraham666]

Could you be anymore condescending?

Sorry, but I call them as I see them. At the time Reform had only one seat east of Manitoba, so it represented only the western end of Canada. There were a fair number of Western secessionists in the party and our Prime Minister did write that a firewall should go around Alberta.

What's condescending about saying the truth?

And let's face it, that Canadians would vote into power someone who wants Confederation destroyed isn't a very smart thing to do.

Oh and Sev, thanks but no. The loud Christians are your problem to solve.

 

[starrkers]

However, the Australian Senate has real clout. They can refuse supply (money) to run the government. In those circumstances the Governor General can sack the incumbent Prime Minister and appoint a caretaker who will have to call an immediate election.

This happened once, in 1975 at a Federal level and almost caused a revolution. It also happened in a State, New South Wales in 1932. The Governor General has these reserve powers which most sensible GG's would avoid using if at all possible.

And the Senate terms are six years, so that only half the Senate gets elected at each Federal election. Unless there is a double dissolution, and then both halves of the Senate are up. And I can't remember how they resolve the problem of who comes up at the next election (3 years hence, not 6).