Are “Entitled” Liberal MPs considering non-confidence motion?

The Hill-Times is reporting that the federal Liberal caucus is considering a non-confidence motion on the basis of a lack of “Conservative government” transparency. Well, if that is true, it clearly shows Canadians why Liberals, under their lacklustre leader Michael Ignatieff,  are not yet fit to return to power. They are not, in my opinion, a “government in waiting,” whether alone or as part of an NDP and Bloc coalition. And, for all those who are ready to minimize or ridicule what I am writing because “she is a Conservative partisan,” know this:

I am a former Progressive Conservative and, as such, apart from voting twice for Brian Mulroney in the 1980’s, I voted Liberal for most of my adult life — until 2006. Yet, for me, as for a lot of former Liberal supporters, the Sponsorship Scandal was the last straw.

So, when today’s Liberals talk about transparency in government, we are reminded of that betrayal for which they were punished by the electorate in 2006. But, have they learned anything? It seems they have not because I have never heard them say what they would do differently if they were re-elected with enough seats to govern. Have they rehabilitated themselves? Not that I have seen. Rather, during the past two years, all I have seen and heard them do — along with a very anti-Conservative biased media — is scheme how they can form a coalition without a majority.

Is the Conservative government perfect? No, they are not. It is a human institution after all, affected by the work of thousands of public servants. But, somehow they have managed to accomplish a fair bit.

Which reminds me of what happened during last October’s municipal election in Toronto. The more Mayor Rob Ford was denounced, the higher his ratings went. Are we going to see the same phenomenon with Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his governing Tories? Given the latest polls, I think so. Look also at this Google page where there are over two million and a half entries on how Ford won, in spite of a very nasty anti-Ford media campaign.

Which means, that if the “entitled” Liberals go ahead with a vote of non-confidence in the next week or so, we will be having a federal election. I personally think that may be the best thing possible for this country — clear the air once and for all by giving the Conservatives a majority government. Because, clearly, until the federal Liberals experience a complete defeat, they will do nothing substantive about renewing themselves.

16 thoughts on “Are “Entitled” Liberal MPs considering non-confidence motion?

  1. A few pollster have stated if the opposition try to hammer the Federal government on the economy they are toast.

    Preventing the budget allows them to fear monger by invoking cuts and hidden agenda.

    If this budget does not have drastic cuts to the core programs than the opposition are left with character assassination and conspiracy theories or an evil right wing theocratic leader.

    Too many people outside the Ottawa bubble can’t swallow the negative politics from the MSM or connect Stalin to Harper. This dog won’t hunt.

    The opposition and the media enablers can’t win on the big issues.

    Like

  2. Desperate partisan grab by the liberals. Vote non-confidence while Layton is recovering from surgery. Playing political games with desperation shows how low iggy will go.

    Like

  3. Ok, libs, hit a man when he is down, and you might make a lot of ndp voters, who were thinking of switching, very mad at you and maybe even some lib voters. Defeating the govt on no confidence will tell me you are afraid that the AG report will exonerate the govt over spending and security costs.
    I would think that enough of us conservatives are opening our wallets to get the message out to ethnic media that we are their best option.

    Like

  4. Interesting comment that the Liberals are preparing to bring down the government ahead of the budget.

    To qoute from the Hill Times: “The Liberal Party is considering a snap confidence motion in the House of Commons that could plunge the country into an election over one of several recent Parliamentary confrontations and a series of affairs that go to the heart of Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s pledges for transparent and accountable government.

    The motion would be in response to a possible contempt of Parliament ruling from House Speaker Peter Milliken (Kingston and the Islands, Ont.) over the government’s refusal to disclose advice and information it has about the projected cost of a series of crime bills, and could also touch on other scandals, including the Conservative campaign expense scandal and allegations International Cooperation Minister Bev Oda (Durham, Ont.) misled Parliament.”

    If that is the Liberal strategy, then their handlers (or leaders) are clearly out of touch: the electorate would see this as an issue of “whom do you trust” in the face of what would appear to them as a procedural imbroglio. In other words, an election based upon nothing substantive; just fear mongering. Initiated by the Liberals.

    They would be decimated at the polls.

    The Liberals would loose seats; almost certainly their position of leaders of the Oppostion; and Harper would get his majority.

    And then they would find themselves in even worse shape when the government pulls the plug on electoral financing. The Liberals would be in the political wilderness for at least a decade until they can reorganize and regroup.

    If the Liberals value their continued existence, a lot of MPs had better be sick by mid-March.

    Like

  5. All of the points made are accurate and the one that resonates with me is that this is an attempt by the Liberals to fix the mess in their own party…..at a cost of hundreds of millions to Canadian Taxpayers. If they attack when Jack is laid up and before they have even seen the budget, I think they will get smashed beyond recognition.

    Like

  6. All the current nonsense is just pathetic. But, given the CBC’s over the topic praise for anything concerning coalition partners, you know what I am beginning to think? I think if if there is a vote of non-confidence, the PM will have to go quickly to the GG to drop the writ. Otherwise, I think these guys are going to try another coup d’etat and approach the GG with a coalition option, rather than an election.

    In other words, the Liberals are so desperate for a return to power, they are willing to risk the economic recovery. Perhaps, however, that would not be a bad thing in the long run because, given the reaction by the Canadian people in December 2008, they wouldn’t last long in power. Remember, their coalition agreement with the Bloc is until this June, 2011. Hmmmm.

    The very idea of Michael Ignatieff as PM with his unprofessional and unprime ministerial behaviour — e.g., referring to the current PM as “that guy” — and Jack Layton and Elizabeth May in the Cabinet, is enough to give me waking nightmares!

    Like

  7. I agree Wilson. That would be the steps in the various scenarios. But, the point is, something is fishy in all of this “fraud” talk.

    The CPC and PMO communications staffs should be out in front of this — the CPC with ads and the PMO with news conferences, with local media if necessary. Both are reacting too slowly. They have to get on the offensive, not be on the defensive saying like “we haven’t done anything fraudulent.” Wrong approach. Say what they have done right and why the Opps are wrong in their assessments.

    When I worked for the Harris gov’t, the Premier’s communications team were on top of things before a day was out. That wasn’t the case with Ernie Eves because most of the original Harris staff had moved on and the Eves people were mostly new and inexperienced (e.g., Ontarians will remember how slow the reaction was to the SARS crisis).

    So, if anyone is reading this from the PMO or a Cabinet Minister’s office, get on the offensive fast and hard, NOW! Up to now, the CPC has defined MI and the Liberals. Don’t let them define the Conservatives with false or incomplete information. Say, this is what has happened. This is what we have done. This is what the outcome will likely be. And, why the opposition are doing this — to negatively affect confidence in the Canadian government, which will affect our country in a profound way. Yet, do the opposition care? It seems not.

    Like

  8. ‘…these guys are going to try another coup d’etat and approach the GG with a coalition option, rather than an election…’

    They can’t do that Sandy,
    PMSH still has the confidence of the House, until a vote proves otherwise.

    The only time the coalition of losers would be approached by, or can approach the GG, is AFTER the government lost a confidence vote, proving the Govt has no mandate to govern.

    And even that moves comes with the caveat of IF the time between elections was short (Clarkson consulted ‘experts’ and decided 6 months minimum between elections or ask next largest party if they can comand confidence of the House).

    So first, the coalition of losers would have to vote non-confidence;
    then they could go to the GG,
    but PMSH would beat them to it.
    The GG would take the advice of the Queen’s First Minister to dissolve Parliament, and go into an election.

    Like

  9. Also remember too,
    all the coalition ranting is about a court case yet to be resolved, and Liberal Speaker Milliken’s decisions yet to be rendered.
    So on what grounds do the coalition of losers go to the GG on? Oda staffer put a NOT in a funding rejection memo,
    or Kenny staffer used the wrong letterhead when he sent out memo to other CPC MPs,
    CPC taking EC decision to the Supremes?

    Like

  10. Wilson — I just read your comment at BLY and am very happy to hear the CPC is pounding out the prewrit attack ads. That said, the PMO has the right to respond as well because there are allegations against the government in QP that are false as well. But, at least something is happening.

    Like

  11. If Peter Miliken brings in a verdict of sorts on Bev and Kenny staffers; I expect him to have a statement on Jennings and Holland who violated CPC sealed boxs-exposed the contents to the publics and kept some of the informations to themselves.

    So to Peter ” be prepared to deliver on Jennings and Holland or none at all.

    Like

  12. Pingback: “Are “Entitled” Liberal MPs considering non-confidence motion?” « Newsbeat1

  13. Sandy , the CPC seemd to be doing the ‘last word’ handling of the faux scandals.
    They let the opps rant, then PMSH takes questions and summarizes.

    Like

Comments are closed.