The fajrdrako summary of recent Canadian political events...

[fajrdrako]

nina_ds asked me what was going on in Canada and I answered her, then decided to repost it here in case anyone else is curious. After all, it's not every day something happens in Canadian politics that is actually interesting. Sit-up-and-take-notice interesting.

Here's my quick-simple version of events, and remember that (a) I ignore political news as much as I possibly can, so I'm hardly an expert on any of it, and (b) I am not unbiased. It is, after all, the unfolding history of my country that's going on here. Commentary and correction from my more politcally-astute friends is welcome.

1. We had a federal election in October, possibly the most boring election ever held anywhere. The Conservatives ended up with enough seats in Parliament to from the Government, with their leader, Steven Harper, as Prime Minister. Again.
   
   
2. Steven Harper announced the new Budget last week. It was so stupid and useless that it was about to trigger a non-confidence motion in Parliament. Significant details: it didn't address the Recession, which is on everyone's mind, and Harper tried to cut funding to political parties.
   
   
3. Here's where the tricky and unusual bit comes. Usually a vote of non-confidence means a new election. But we just had a big, expensive (and did I mention boring?) election in October. So instead of that, the Liberals and the New Democratic Party decided to join together in what they called the Coalition. There are more Conservative seats in Parliament than either NDP or Liberal, but put the Liberals and the NDP together and they have a party with enough seats to hold power. The Bloc Quebecois (which is most of the remainder of Parliament) agreed to support this amalgamation.
   
   This move would topple Harper as PM and make Liberal Leader Stephane Dion the new Prime Minister.
   
   With me so far?
   
   
4. On Wednesday, the evening before this was going to happen, Harper appeared on television to beg the people of Canada to keep him as PM because, well, anything else was unCanadian. (He used the word 'illegal' and hinted at the word 'treasonous'.)
   
   
5. The next morning, Harper went to Governor-General Michaelle Jean and asked her to suspend Parliament - because if Parliament can't sit, they can't form the Coalition government and can't boot him out of power.
   
   
6. The Governor-General agreed to this and Parliament is prorogued, which is the technical word for the suspension. Parliament can now not sit until the end of January. Till then, we technically have a government in power, the Conservatives, but nobody can do anything.
   
   
7. Harper is now writing another, better Budget speech to present at the end of January, hoping it won't get him ousted.

Comments

[teenygozer.livejournal.com]

Isn't the Governor-General basically the British crown's representative in Canada? Heh... how cool would it be if you guys threw some tea in a harbor and started carrying signs that said, "Taxation without Representation is Tyranny"?

[james-nicoll.livejournal.com]

Isn't the Governor-General basically the British crown's representative in Canada?

In the same sense that Barack Obama is in fact a 70-foot-tall radioactive Japanese lizard, which is to say not at all.

how cool would it be if you guys threw some tea in a harbor and started carrying signs that said, "Taxation without Representation is Tyranny"?

It would be enormously stupid, at least if aimed at Britain. We don't pay taxes to Britain.

Unlike our cousins to the south, we're moderately good about not stripping the vote from people (although at one time you could lose the vote for the more egregious affronts against polite society, like being a unrepentant native or flagrant Mennonitism). In fact, the courts decided that the criminally insane cannot be legally barred from voting, which raises some interesting logistical issues with polling stations. This decision came down shortly before the Conservatives made significant gains in the House.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

In the same sense that Barack Obama is in fact a 70-foot-tall radioactive Japanese lizard

LOL. Been watching too many Godzilla movies lately?

In fact, the courts decided that the criminally insane cannot be legally barred from voting, which raises some interesting logistical issues with polling stations. This decision came down shortly before the Conservatives made significant gains in the House.

Well said.

[teenygozer.livejournal.com]

I had asked someone else on my flist what role the Governer-General played in government and that was her (apparently too-short) answer. There were no lizards involved of any size, and even less radioactivity, in her quickie description of the workings of that particular job.

And, dude, I was just joking about the tea and signs! I'm sorry if you found it insulting, I did not mean it so. And, no, I also did not aim the joke at Britain, but at the people in the government who are using what seems like a shoddy political maneuver to circumvent the will of the people.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Not answering for james_nicoll, but I'd say that the role of the Governor General is vague to a lot of Canadians because it tends to disappear into the background until something like this crops up. She does the official stuff of dissolving and undissolving parliaments, but it's usually easy to see that as a sort of official rubber-stamping. It's only when something extraordinary crops up (like this event) that her role seems something other than window-dressing.

It isn't that your friend's quick summation was wrong or insulting, more that it was misleading - colonial implications are, at best, a rather embarrassing memory.

[teenygozer.livejournal.com]

I didn't think my friend's summation was at all insulting, it just seemed to me that james_nicholl had for some unknown reason taken it that way, given his or her unpleasant reply to what I felt was a light-hearted post. I have to say, I was taken aback.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Isn't the Governor-General basically the British crown's representative in Canada?

It's the Queen of Canada she represents, as I understand it. The fact that the Queen of Canada and the Queen of England is the same person is a sort of historical artifact or accident.

how cool would it be if you guys threw some tea in a harbor

We're more likely to drink it, instead. Canadians aren't into precipitous acts of defiance.

[james-nicoll.livejournal.com]

Canadians aren't into precipitous acts of defiance.

Or precipitous acts of anything, really. It took us 40 years to decide on a design for the new flag and over a century to select words for our national anthem.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Or precipitous acts of anything, really.

Hmm. Point. I'm trying to think of an exception, but... Hmm. No. Nothing comes to mind. Do you think we might be hockey-playing Ents in disguise?

[james-nicoll.livejournal.com]

Well, the Conservatives hanged Riel quick enough when they got their hands on him. See how well that worked out for them?

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Not the best precedent for future planning.

[dewline.livejournal.com]

And that "hands off the court system" decision was by one of the literal handful of Conservatives considered by almost everyone as being fit for public respect.

I've still got to read that Gwyn book.

[duncanmac.livejournal.com]

It took us ... over a century to select words for our national anthem.

Strictly speaking, no. The national anthem we use was originally in (Quebecois) French, and the (utterly pompous) French lyrics have not changed since the anthem was originally composed. It's the English lyrics that have been changed several times, before finally settling down in 1980.

The National Anthem...

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Do you think that's the end of it? I'm not entirely happy with the current state of the words, particularly the reference to God. But I can live with it.

Re: The National Anthem...

[james-nicoll.livejournal.com]

I replace "God" with "Gretzky".

Re: The National Anthem...

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Oh, good call!

Re: The National Anthem...

[duncanmac.livejournal.com]

I'm not entirely happy either. The reference to "God" does not bother me; I usually interpret that as "Higher Power" (something I *do* believe in), but YMMV. As for the other words, it's a tossup what would be better; I rather doubt a competition on replacing these would attract much interest at this point.

Sadly, national anthems are almost always pompous or swaggering. Americans, for example, would be offended if you reminded them that the melody for their anthem was originally a drinking song called "To Anacreon in Heaven" and made references to various classical (Greco-Roman) gods in possibly impolite ways. At least one god was "added" to the pantheon: "Momus ... with his risible phiz" [face].

Re: The National Anthem...

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

The reference to "God" does not bother me; I usually interpret that as "Higher Power" (something I *do* believe in),

Isn't that just two ways of saying the same thing? I'm not sure what distinction you're making. My problem with it is only partly the implications of Christianity; I am more concerned with the implication that religion should have a role in the secular state. That, I don't like. Any religion. Any state.

Sadly, national anthems are almost always pompous or swaggering.

Might be fun to see then adopt something like soccer songs. Or, as you point out, drinking songs. I think this is because more national anthems AFAIK date to the nineteenth century, and age of hymns, pomp and excess ceremony.

If we get to have personal anthems (why not?) I think mine is "Food, Glorious Food" from Oliver!. Or maybe "Just an Old-Fashioned Girl", as sung by Eartha Kitt. (No, no, just kidding...)

Re: The National Anthem...

[dewline.livejournal.com]

There was a reworking in the last decade or so proposed in the Citizen that I've been using. Mind you, amending "God" to small-g "gods"(including everyone's deities thereby) likely won't go well with certain Christian-supremacists.

Re: The National Anthem...

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

amending "God" to small-g "gods"(including everyone's deities thereby) likely won't go well with certain Christian-supremacists.

I think that would simply please no one, except maybe a few theists and pagans. It wouldn't please the devout Christians and it wouldn't please the atheists. For me the question is not "which gods to choose" but "let's just keep that god question outside matters of government and state".

Though I still cosndier myself a pantheist, I find I have more and more of the sensibilities and reactions of an atheist as time goes by.

[dewline.livejournal.com]

We might consider either appointing Mme. Jean as a more permanent sort of monarch, or importing one of the UK Royals as an alternative form of monarch in residence. If we decide in sufficient numbers to start asking for such things.

[james-nicoll.livejournal.com]

The way the position of Governor General works is not the problem. Replacing her is like buying new seat covers for a car after the driver ties one on.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I've certainly heard the proposal of making one of the younger Windsor princes our personal monarch. I don't see much need for it; I like our usage of the English royal family as it is, which has historical resonance and doesn't cause us much trouble.

Put another way: as I see it, the advantage of having a Queen - and I am a devout monarchist - is in its connection to our history as a nation, and to have an impartial, non-partisan figurehead.

Best to keep such a person, but to keep him or her at a distance.

[dewline.livejournal.com]

You have a point.