[unimaginative2]

Re: You're opinions can differ, just not in the Lib. Party

This is hysterical. Harper is the most harsh leader with his caucus in history, blasting far past even Chretien. No dissent is acceptable. He doesn't even let his ministers speak on their own portfolios. Of course you get kicked out of your party when you vote against the line on a budget matter. That's the whole essence of a parliamentary system. Dion would be showing inexcusable weakness if he had done anything different. Commuzzi knew exactly what he was doing. He wouldn't have done it if he hadn't known he'd be kicked out of caucus. He wasn't running again anyway, and he's clearly gunning for an appointment from the Tories after he retires.

 

[andreapalladio]

Re: You're opinions can differ, just not in the Lib. Party

They should have kicked the bigot out of the party after he voted in support of homophobia. No wonder Harper and his fellow travellers like him so much.

 

[Observer Walt]

Your opinions can differ, just not in the Liberal Party

^ Do Harper and "fellow travellers" (!) like him so much? Maybe they do, but I suspect he made this decision himself.

In any party you can get away with some things and not others. Dion is correct at least in saying this much, that if you can't be with your party on something as important as a budget vote, that's pretty much a deal-breaker in any party. A budget is always a matter "of confidence", that is, if the governing party is voted down on the budget, they have lost the confidence of the House of Commons and therefore lost the right to govern.

Some other questions are not matters of confidence and a lost vote would not bring down the government. A vote one way or the other on same-sex marriage would not have got you kicked out of the Conservative or Liberal caucuses, but apparently was a "career-limiting" move in the NDP. There is leeway for personal opinion on some issues, not on others, and I think that's reasonable.

 

[andreapalladio]

Re: Your opinions can differ, just not in the Liberal Party

So nice of you to tolerate bigotry.

 

[cacruden]

Re: Your opinions can differ, just not in the Liberal Party

There is quite a difference on being with the party for a budget (on matters of confidence) if you are the party in power, vs being an opposition party.

First, I do not believe in making votes matters of confidence (except as a seperate bill), but budgets in Canada are (I believe you cannot make it not a matter of confidence).

If you don't have confidence in the government that you sit in, then yes, you should not be part of that government (which means leaving the party).

BUT, being opposition, you are not voting as a matter of confidence in your party, you are voting on a budget bill (that's it). If it serves your constitutents, vote for it, if it does not vote against it.

 

[billonlogan]

Re: Your opinions can differ, just not in the Liberal Party

Well Dion can count on friends like Liberal MP Ray Simard (St. Boniface)

....is in hot water after voting in favour of a Bloc Quebecois motion in Parliament Tuesday that called on the federal government to give more aerospace contract work to Quebec at the expense of other provinces like Manitoba.

It’s a prickly issue in Winnipeg — indeed in Western Canada — after Bristol Aerospace in Winnipeg lost a bid in the 1980s to a Montreal firm for a lucrative CF-18 fighter jet contract, even though Bristol had a superior bid at a lower cost.

Despite that, Simard voted with his Liberal colleagues in favour of the Bloc motion, which criticized the government for not giving Quebec “its fair share†of a recent C-17 cargo plane contract and to urge government to give Quebec a greater share of work in the future.

“For Ray to put the political interests of the Liberal party in Quebec ahead of Manitoba jobs, I don’t know what he could be thinking,†said NDP MP Pat Martin (Winnipeg Centre). “That’s classic Liberal strategy — suckhole to Quebec at all costs, even if you abandon your friends and your constituents.â€

Go here for the full article

 

[andreapalladio]

Re: Your opinions can differ, just not in the Liberal Party

If it serves your constitutents, vote for it, if it does not vote against it.

Which is exactly what the bigot did. However, in our parliamentary system, you can't do that and expect to stay in your party.

 

[cacruden]

Re: Your opinions can differ, just not in the Liberal Party

I wonder if this is a polite way of saying, I have had it... the Liberal party has made it impossible for me to be part of it -- and still hold diverse views.....

Wappel; I guess he chooses his dissensions carefully...

Liberal MP Wappel to retire
Canadian Press

OTTAWA — Veteran Liberal MP Tom Wappel, whose outspoken form of social conservatism often collided with his party's policies, says he won't reoffer come next federal election.

A member of Parliament since 1988, the Toronto-area lawyer, now 57, has been known for his vocal stands against abortion and gay rights — and for refusing to help a veteran in his riding whom he suspected of supporting a rival candidate in the previous election.

Supported by members of the anti-abortion group Campaign Life, Mr. Wappel won the Scarborough West Liberal nomination in 1988 in an upset over Patrick Johnston, a star candidate personally recruited by party leader John Turner.

Mr. Wappel was the first declared candidate in the Liberals' 1990 leadership convention, finishing a distant fourth to Jean Chrétien after voicing his opposition to federal day-care programs and arguing Ottawa should promote stay-at-home parenting instead.
He also said he did not consider single-parent households or homosexual couples to be families, and once called for abortion to be made a criminal offence with a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.

He was eliminated on the first ballot in his 2001 bid to become Commons Speaker and in July 2002 he joined 15 other Liberal MPs in calling for Paul Martin to succeed Mr. Chrétien as Liberal leader; he never made cabinet after Mr. Martin succeeded Mr. Chrétien as prime minister 18 months later.

Last month, Mr. Wappel was the only Liberal MP to vote to extend two controversial anti-terrorism measures first passed by Mr. Chrétien's government following the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 — the measures were ultimately defeated.

 

[cacruden]

Re: Your opinions can differ, just not in the Liberal Party

Well, I think this latest move more or less makes it 100% sure I will vote for the Conservative party. Sure, I am a member of the Conservative party -- but that does not mean I am tied to voting Conservative. If McKenna were the Liberal leader, I would seriously consider voting for him. If Rae were the leader, I would consider voting for him (even though I think he is a little far left of me -- I believe he is fairly pragmatic).

I don't think Dion has the abililty to be pragmatic. He is bound and determined to move the Liberal's left, which will leave a wider area in the centre, centre-right, and right area of the spectrum open to the Conservative party. I really did not think that a majority would be in the cards for the Conservative party, but I think Dion is trying his hardest to give Harper a chance.

 

[andreapalladio]

Re: Your opinions can differ, just not in the Liberal Party

Well, I think this latest move more or less makes it 100% sure I will vote for the Conservative party.

there's never been any doubt of that - there's no other party that a person with your avatar could vote for - the party of making this country as much like Shrub's America as possible, bigotry and all.

 

[cacruden]

Re: Your opinions can differ, just not in the Liberal Party

Up until 1988, I voted Liberal.

That was when the NDP were against free-trade, Liberals were wishy-washy (pro free-trade, anti-that-agreement), Progressive Conservatives were for it. I have no tolerance for those that say we cannot compete, that somehow we are inferior to other countries. Funny, It use to be that the Liberals were for better trade agreements with the US, and the Conservatives against it. McKenna, is one that is not afraid of it, Paul Martin was originally that way -- but distanced himself for the sake of politics.

It use to be that both Americans and Canadians could easily move back and forth, then it became more restrictive in the last 50 years. Recently one of my cousins was inquiring about working in Quebec (currently he is working in Mexico), but NAFTA still makes it very difficult (except for a very few "professional categories"). It does not matter that his grandmother was Canadian, his mother had the choice of being Canadian... they are now excluded.

I want to get back to the point where travel across the border is easy, citizens within NAFTA can work anywhere easily (including opening up completely to Mexico).

 

[Antiloop33rpm]

Re: Your opinions can differ, just not in the Liberal Party

I want to get back to the point where travel across the border is easy, citizens within NAFTA can work anywhere easily (including opening up completely to Mexico).

That should be easy enough if Canada sacrifices its sovereignty to the United States. No big deal really.

Name me one country that has not had restrictions put on travel and immigration by the United States? It is harder for most every person in the world today to even just visit the United States. Working or even studying is the same way too.

There is not a single thing Canada can do to ease border and travel restrictions. The US is a superpower and an empire. What it wants, it gets. If it wants to build a wall and watch towers along the Canadian-American border do you think any Canadian politician can do anything about it?

America does not give a **** what Canada, or anyone else thinks. Get used to it.

 

[Observer Walt]

Re: Your opinions can differ, just not in the Liberal Party

So nice of you to tolerate bigotry.

... exactly what the bigot did.

... bigotry and all.

AP: What a varied vocabulary you have! More importantly, what a very limited tolerance for the ideas of others!

Your comment quoted firstly, above, was aimed at me. I have no idea how you draw, from what I said, that I support bigotry. I was making a comment on how our parliamentary system works, more specifically, the customs of party discipline.

I won't speak for another member but I do find that your comments aimed at him may have just a whiff of ... I don't know ... bigotry??