One man to make the decision for all Canadians

Initiate
User avatar
Posts: 540
Joined: Sun Aug 30, 2009 12:02 pm

PostWed Sep 29, 2010 5:09 am » by Sceptilief


If you are Canadian, you are solely responsible to read this and really think about what is happening with our freedoms and our right to vote, because this article represents a declaration of direct attack on that right. These quotes should sum it up:

Johnston could be the one man in Canada who ultimately decides who forms the government if the next election produces another minority Parliament.


"It leaves him having to make a decision that affects who governs Canada. Somebody has to make the decision."


That's right. One man can completely skirt all of our voices and put whomever he chooses into the drivers seat of our Country.

I never realized the Governor General had this kind of power until today, and it bothers me that it is coming out in the open on the eve of the NWO's bids to secure power over all Nations.

Again. I implore you, my fellow Canadians, to use your senses and your freedom to prevent this happening. We are the last bastion of a free world. You know it. I know it. The World knows it.

A constitutional crisis likely looms for Canada's next governor general
By Mark Kennedy, Postmedia News September 28, 2010

OTTAWA — He was chosen for his political neutrality, his academic prowess and his common sense.

But when David Johnston becomes governor general on Friday, Canadians will soon discover he might also need nerves of steel and a diplomat's touch as he guides this country through a political minefield and tries to avert a constitutional crisis.

Although much of his job will be ceremonial and symbolic, constitutional and parliamentary experts agree on one thing: Johnston could be the one man in Canada who ultimately decides who forms the government if the next election produces another minority Parliament.

Such power won't be exercised lightly or without political controversy, the experts predict. But they also say Johnston has what it takes to make the right call.

"He's an intelligent man and he doesn't get easily rattled," says Edward McWhinney, a constitutional law expert and author.

"He's had a lot of experience. He's a pleasant, personable man. As far as one can see, he has no nervous qualities that might undermine him during a crisis. In other words, I think he's got calmness and common sense."

Queen's University professor Ned Franks, one of Canada's foremost experts on Parliament, says Johnston could be at the centre of a political maelstrom after the next election if the new government is toppled in Parliament.

"It leaves him having to make a decision that affects who governs Canada. Somebody has to make the decision."

Franks says none of this would necessarily be easy for Johnston.

"It takes great courage, and the capacity to live with yourself. Because you're making one of those decision that we all make where you don't know the consequences but you make the best choice."

Johnston was chosen by Prime Minister Stephen Harper after a six-person advisory committee quietly held consultations earlier this year in which constitutional experts, past and present political leaders and others were canvassed for their views.

Harper's office says the committee members were guided by "one key question" as they delivered their recommendation to the prime minister: will the next governor general be able to serve without partisanship?

In that regard, Johnston was an inspired choice. He is a long-standing scholar with legal expertise who has served on corporate boards and has also provided advice to governments. The closest he has come to the political sphere was in defending federalism against Quebec separatists and in moderating televised leaders' debates in federal elections.

He'll need the reputation of neutrality.

Johnston becomes governor general at a particularly unusual time in Canadian politics. Minority governments have become the norm. The odds of either Harper's Conservatives or Michael Ignatieff's Liberals winning a majority in the next election are slim.

That political reality has given birth to the following scenario: Canadians go to the polls, possibly next spring, and Harper wins another minority government. His government is quickly defeated in the House of Commons on a vote of confidence. Harper goes to Johnston to seek the dissolution of Parliament and request another election.

But Ignatieff, after having had discussions with one or both of the other opposition parties, requests Johnson's permission to form a government with the formal or informal support of the NDP and/or the Bloc. Harper objects, citing catastrophic risks to the economy and national unity from what he calls a "coalition."

What should Johnston do?

Probably hand the keys to 24 Sussex Drive over to Ignatieff, say experts.

They note that Johnston would certainly not be bound by a request by Harper to call another snap election. They say he would more likely consider whether the Liberals could actually form a government that can survive in Parliament.

"Mr. Harper's view is that you can only change governments through an election," says University of Toronto professor Peter Russell.

"I think he's wrong on that."

Russell says the "right thing for parliamentary democracy" would be for Johnston to consider the Opposition's case for forming a government.

"But there's a whole bunch of Canadians out there, led by a huge political machine with tremendous access to the media, that's going to say that's dead wrong and is undemocratic. So he may have to weather a very difficult storm."

The key precedent for Johnston to consider happened in 1985, when the governing Conservatives in Ontario were re-elected with a minority government in the provincial election but were quickly defeated in the legislature in a confidence vote. Opposition Liberals led by David Peterson struck a written accord with the NDP led by Bob Rae. They promised to deliver on a range of policy initiatives which were spelled out in the document. In return, the NDP promised to prop up the Liberals for two years.

Lt.-Gov. John Aird was persuaded and gave Peterson a chance to take power over the objections of the outgoing Tories who complained that democracy was being trammelled. The deal worked: Peterson made good on the accord's promises and an election didn't occur until the two-year period was up.

University of Ottawa professor Errol Mendes says Harper's government is deliberately stoking public fear in recent weeks.

"They're trying to stir up the anti-coalition fear. But it won't be Harper who will be the final arbiter on that. It will be the governor general."

Moreover, if Harper continues to publicly deliver those warnings after an election, said Mendes, Johnston will have to deal with the issue "with great finesse and diplomacy."

"At a certain stage, he may have to debunk the standard rhetoric of the Harper government that all coalitions are evil."
© Copyright (c) Postmedia News


Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/consti ... z10spoznaH
23:59;01

Conspirator
User avatar
Posts: 3733
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 1:32 pm

PostWed Sep 29, 2010 10:06 am » by Illuminated


lovely......

at least in the u.s they had a panel of 'judges' to decide their election, who would run the worlds super power :roll:
Restoring Sanity and or Keeping Fear Alive! :wink:

Image



  • Related topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post
Visit Disclose.tv on Facebook