Belinda Stronach Crosses Over-Government Survives

[roke]

Looks like Conservative MP Belinda Stronach has gone over to the Liberals and will be the Minister of Human Resources and Skill Development. Her cross-over apparently leaves the Liberals-NDP with 151 seats not counting the speaker while the BQ-Conservatives have 152 votes. There are also 3 independant MP and according to this article one has already decided to side with the Liberals.

CBC Article

[Habs_fan_in_LA]

Canada's Jim Jeffords.

I have the greatest admiration for principled people like Belinda who shun personal gain for their beliefs and for the opportunists like the Liberals who welcome and reward her.

excuse me a second.............

What, she's not principled??

Never mind....

I hope the people who elected her as a Conservative remember her loyalty to them. She makes Yashin look good.

[BadCompany]

Depends on how you look at it. The Liberal budget her Conservative party was trying to kill, had lots of money ear-marked for here riding, for infrastructure upgrades and so on. If she had of stayed with the Conservatives, the budget would be killed, and the people who elected her would not get the upgrades they had coming to them. By switching to the Liberals, she ensures that her riding does get all that money.

If anything, she was more loyal to the people who elected her, than to her party (obviously).

[M. Beaux-Eaux]

badcompany said:

If anything, she was more loyal to the people who elected her, than to her party (obviously).

In that sense, a wise political move on her part.

[Habs_fan_in_LA]

mrbozo said:

badcompany said:

If anything, she was more loyal to the people who elected her, than to her party (obviously).

In that sense, a wise political move on her part.

All the loyalty of Shayne Corson with none of the principles.
I love Montreal.
Playing for the leafs is my dream come true.
I love Montreal again.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

[M. Beaux-Eaux]

habsfaninla said:

mrbozo said:

In that sense, a wise political move on her part.

All the loyalty of Shayne Corson with none of the principles.
I love Montreal.
Playing for the leafs is my dream come true.
I love Montreal again.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

Shayne, me lad, ye look t'have the makin's of a borough boss.

Seize the opportunity before it passes.

[roke]

And it looks like the Conservatives are going to support most of the Budget (C-43). Harper says they will not support an amendment to it however.

Another CBC Article

[HabbaDasher]

My first impression of Stronach's defection: Bribery, ambition, opportunism, hypocracy.
Sounds like she's a politician alright.

[HardCap]

habbadasher said:

My first impression of Stronach's defection: Bribery, ambition, opportunism, hypocracy.
Sounds like she's a politician alright.

perfect fit for the Liberals - but I wonder if she'll trust them with her money...lol

[Habs_fan_in_LA]

Just heard on Montreals Q92;

"Paul Martin is a magician who pulled a rat out of his hat!"

;D

[jkr]

I have a real problem with people that cross the floor in the middle of a term. Fulfill your commitment to the electorate and change parties at the time of the next election.

Stronach is too used to starting at the top. She was running her father's company, not just working there. And she enters politics by trying to win the leadership of the Conservative party. Once she realized Harper wasn't going anywhere she looked for a place to satisfy her ambition. Martin is about 20 years older than Harper and maybe on thin ice. She probably sees an opportunity there.

[jkr]

badcompany said:

Depends on how you look at it. The Liberal budget her Conservative party was trying to kill, had lots of money ear-marked for here riding, for infrastructure upgrades and so on. If she had of stayed with the Conservatives, the budget would be killed, and the people who elected her would not get the upgrades they had coming to them. By switching to the Liberals, she ensures that her riding does get all that money.

If anything, she was more loyal to the people who elected her, than to her party (obviously).

I don't know if the budget would have been defeated.

It will come down to the independents. Carolyn Parrish has said she will vote with the Liberals. I saw Chuck Cadman on TV tonight. A poll in his riding indicated that the people want to wait a while before pulling the plug on the government so he will probably vote for it. And Kilgour got some of the money he wanted for Darfur so he may vote for it too.

I don't think this had much to do with the riding. I think it was all about Stronach dealing with a desparate government.

[Cranky]

There is absolutely no way the Liberals will be defeated. After all, not only are they fleecing the sheep for whatever they want they have even taken to using a rusted chain saw to remove prime meat.

Does anyone else have a problem with what the freaken a$$holes will do to CLING to power or is it just me?

[M. Beaux-Eaux]

She has ensured her re-election. Clever girl, and good-looking and rich, too.

She has a long and viable future in politics, until, in anger at her duplicity and manipulation, the peasantry drag her out of office by her beautiful blonde hair, and string her up in the town square—ahem, sorry, wrong century and wrong culture; she'll retire with a healthy pension.

[Disgruntled70sHab]

habsaddict said:

There is absolutely no way the Liberals will be defeated. After all, not only are they fleecing the sheep for whatever they want they have even taken to using a rusted chain saw to remove prime meat.

Does anyone else have a problem with what the freaken a$$holes will do to CLING to power or is it just me?

You're not alone HA. While I'm willing to wait until the results are in from the ADSCAM enquiry, I don't think anyone will change my opinion that the Liberals time is up. They simply have to accept accountablity for this fiasco and I'm hoping it doesn't get swept up under the rug.

As far as Stronach crossing the floor, I read that it was largely due to Harper's perception of her in the Conservative party that led her to leave. If what was said is true, she had absolutely no future with the Torys and if the budget wasn't defeated, according to Harper the blame would have been laid squarely on her shoulders.

Why would Harper say these things? Knowing the differences in party ideology between the two, maybe he thought Stonach was going to vote in favour of the budget. If so, his reaction (if true) was predictable. If not a factor, then he outright forced her to make a decision.

And that doesn't mean a decision to cross the floor. Stronach could have done damage to the Torys if she had outright resigned from federal politics. However, she didn't. She crossed the floor not only with a crucial vote the Liberals so desparately need, but also armed with the knowledge of Tory party internal dynamics.

So, why would she do this and not resign? Me thinks the carrot, in the form of a cabinet position, Martin showed her, was just too good to pass up. That, and as BC posted, the money earmarked for her riding from the Liberal budget, sure didn't hurt matters at all.

BC ... Money for her constituency? Coincidence or a Liberal ploy based on inside info?

I honestly don't think the Grits lose the next election. However, Canadian federal politics is now a joke both with Canadians, and possibly with the international community as well. It's like a bad soap opera that has nothing but selfish bad guys.

Sigh!

[M. Beaux-Eaux]

disgruntled70shab said:

habsaddict said:

However, Canadian federal politics is now a joke both with Canadians, and possibly with the international community as well. It's like a bad soap opera that has nothing but selfish bad guys.

Sigh!

The Canadian awakening to the world of realpolitik is considerably gentler than 9/11 was for the USA. Just wait until Québec separates. Bimbo politics will pale (literally) by comparison then.

[Disgruntled70sHab]

And the plot thickens.

Tory MP says Liberals offered perks for budget support
Last Updated Wed, 18 May 2005 20:35:29 EDT
CBC News

OTTAWA - Conservative MP Gurmant Grewal alleges that the Liberals offered him plum posts if he helped their minority government survive.

Grewal said the Liberals promised him an ambassadorship or Senate seat for his wife Nina, also a Tory MP, if he didn't vote against their budget in a confidence vote on Thursday, the Canadian Press reported Wednesday.

Grewal alleges he made an audio recording of the offer, which he said came from Liberal cabinet minister Ujjal Dosanjh and Tim Murphy, Prime Minister Paul Martin's chief of staff.

"I was approached early this week by Ujjal Dosanjh and asked to abstain or vote with the government on the budget vote," said Grewal, an MP from Surrey, B.C.

"In exchange, I was given an understanding that I would be rewarded in some fashion."

The Liberals denied the allegation.

"This is not what happened," Scott Reid, Martin's director of communications, told the news agency.

"[Grewal] asked for a post and was told no."

Grewal came under fire a few days ago after news broke that the federal government had asked police to investigate the MP over allegations of impropriety in immigration cases.

Grewal denied the accusation, saying it was completely unfounded.
Grewal's allegation came a day after Belinda Stronach, who ran for the leadership of the Conservative party in early 2004, crossed the floor to the Liberal party and joined Martin's cabinet.

* FROM MAY 17, 2005: Conservative Stronach joins Liberals

Her defection from the Conservatives gives the Liberal-NDP coalition on the budget a total of 151 votes, not including Speaker Peter Milliken, a Liberal MP who votes only in the case of a tie.

The Conservatives and Bloc Québécois, who had threatened to oppose the budget, hold a combined total of 152 votes.

There are three Independent MPs, only one of whom has said she will vote with the Liberals.

[Cranky]

badcompany said:

Depends on how you look at it. The Liberal budget her Conservative party was trying to kill, had lots of money ear-marked for here riding, for infrastructure upgrades and so on. If she had of stayed with the Conservatives, the budget would be killed, and the people who elected her would not get the upgrades they had coming to them. By switching to the Liberals, she ensures that her riding does get all that money.

If anything, she was more loyal to the people who elected her, than to her party (obviously).

Of course she did this for her constituents. In fact, she loves her constituents so much that the FIRST thing she did in politics was try to go for the really big brass ring and that is to win the Conservative leadership. Even MORE proof that she did this for her constituents was the fact that she got a FAT portfolio and a chance to be something as important as her mind and arrogance envisions herself to be.

This has nothing to do with LEADERSHIP, VISION or CARING. It has ONLY to do with a party and it's leader on their death bed promising ANYTHING to anyone as long as they can cling to power. The only thing Blond Belinda can be credited for is having the tremendous vision to join in on the corruption for power.

One more thing you should know. I heard her father speak and I have never heard so much arrogance come from a mans mouth. We are talking slave owner, King's court arrogance. In fact, if we move him back 300 years, he would be right at home in a cotton plantation. The Blonde Belinda is a test tube clone of daddies arrogance and imperiousness.

And they have broken the convenent given to them. As night follows day, the day of reckoning WILL come. The little people will gather to take vangeance and wash away the infection of the wicked and greed of the corrupt.

(HA. 05:19:05)

[M. Beaux-Eaux]

habsaddict said:

badcompany said:

One more thing you should know. I heard her father speak and I have never heard so much arrogance come from a mans mouth. We are talking slave owner, King's court arrogance. In fact, if we move him back 300 years, he would be right at home in a cotton plantation.

Years ago, I worked for one of the old man's companies.

Keep your eyes upon the road
And your hand upon the wheel

I'll have to start copyrighting my posts, and start suing at every conceivable opportunity. Oh, sorry! Was I thinking too loud?

[M. Beaux-Eaux]

habsfaninla said:

Just heard on Montreals Q92;

"Paul Martin is a magician who pulled a rat out of his hat!"

;D

As the rabbi said:

Render unto Martin the things which are Martin’s, and unto the taxpayer the things that are taxable.

[BadCompany]

habsaddict said:

Of course she did this for her constituents. In fact, she loves her constituents so much that the FIRST thing she did in politics was try to go for the really big brass ring and that is to win the Conservative leadership. Even MORE proof that she did this for her constituents was the fact that she got a FAT portfolio and a chance to be something as important as her mind and arrogance envisions herself to be.

This has nothing to do with LEADERSHIP, VISION or CARING. It has ONLY to do with a party and it's leader on their death bed promising ANYTHING to anyone as long as they can cling to power. The only thing Blond Belinda can be credited for is having the tremendous vision to join in on the corruption for power.

One more thing you should know. I heard her father speak and I have never heard so much arrogance come from a mans mouth. We are talking slave owner, King's court arrogance. In fact, if we move him back 300 years, he would be right at home in a cotton plantation. The Blonde Belinda is a test tube clone of daddies arrogance and imperiousness.

And they have broken the convenent given to them. As night follows day, the day of reckoning WILL come. The little people will gather to take vangeance and wash away the infection of the wicked and greed of the corrupt.

(HA. 05:19:05)

Oh for sure, it was a grab at power. By both Stronach and the Liberals. As Mr. Beaux-eaux would say, same as it ever was. Why is Stephen Harper trying to force an early election now, when the majority of Canadians don’t want one, and at best, he would only form a minority government himself? Power, of course. He wants his War Amps return address labels to read 24 Sussex Drive, if only briefly. He’s just mad that Stronach is now closer to the top than he is.

As for Stronach herself, yes, she has all the trademarks of a power-hungry, glory-seeking, dirty, grubby politician. Oh well. That just puts her into the big leagues, with Martin, Harper, Duceppe and the grand master himself, Saint Jean de Shawinigan. Government, as they say, attracts the very people who shouldn’t be in it.

But Stronach also displays an independent streak. To be a rookie politician blatantly going against Party policy, as she did on same-sex marriage, and those anti-gay ads the Tories ran, took some guts. She very easily could have just toed the party line (in a softer, more feminine voice, of course), and suffered no slings and arrows because of it. She also spoke out against trying to bring down the government over this budget weeks ago, partly because it looks to be a futile venture, partly because it hurts her riding, partly because most Canadians don’t want this battle fought just right now. She stood to gain nothing from speaking out against this Tory policy, and indeed, I have an article in front of me from two weeks ago saying her stance may have hurt her position within the Tories caucus, but she did it anyways. Unless of course, you think she had planned this jump all along, and was paving the road for it with her comments. In which case, bravo! Machiavelli would be proud.

But I honestly think she just wasn’t comfortable within this Reform… sorry, PC party. As an aside, I don’t think Peter Mackay is all that comfortable either, but I digress. Stronach’s positions on same-sex, the youth wing, abortion, and now forcing an election have all run (publicly) counter-current to Harper’s, and she was often ostracized for it. When given the chance to leap ahead several rungs on the power ladder, AND take stances that happen to coincide with her own personal positions, why wouldn’t she take it? If Paul Martin offered Stephen Harper the Deputy Prime Minister position, with assurances he will be PM in four years, said the Liberal Party will outlaw abortion, ban homosexual marriages, and bring back capital punishment, Harper would jump too. Stronach’s price was just lower, that’s all.

I wouldn’t trust her as far as I could throw her, of course, and Martin should sleep with one firmly trained on his new bedfellow, but I don’t think she is quite the bimbo and traitor the Old Boys in the Reform Party are making her out to be.

[Disgruntled70sHab]

The scenario is too bad really. I mean we can banter back and forth the pros and cons to Stronach crossing the floor.

But, in short, the Liberals have hired and are now trusting a proven turncoat. Given recent events she should have no problem fitting in.

Cheers.

[franko]

badcompany said:

Oh for sure, it was a grab at power. By both Stronach and the Liberals. As Mr. Beaux-eaux would say, same as it ever was. Why is Stephen Harper trying to force an early election now, when the majority of Canadians don’t want one, and at best, he would only form a minority government himself? Power, of course. He wants his War Amps return address labels to read 24 Sussex Drive, if only briefly.

Of course it is about power. Does anyone go into politics with the idea of being the leader of the opposition?

As to the fact that the majority of Canadians don't want an election now . . . do they/we ever want one? No, we want hockey. So we're forced into something we don't want and forced to miss something we do want. But what about these timelines?

Timeline 1; no election after tonight's vote.

Mid-June -- parliament recesses for summer
Mid-September -- parliament is recalled
Mid-October -- election called
Mid-November -- election
Mid-January -- parliament is recalled, new government sworn in

Amount of time spent in "electioneering": six months plus what has already gone on in the past few, which equals a whole lot more time for the politicians to promise how they'll spend our money. Amount of time "doing anything positive in the House of Commons" (as if that ever happens) until the end of this year: a month or two at best.

Timeline 2; election after tonight's vote.

Mid-May -- parliament is dissolved
End-June -- Election of new government
Mid-September -- parliament is recalled

Amount of time spent in "electioneering": one month plus what has already gone on in the past few, which equals less time for the politicians to promise how they'll spend our money. Amount of time "doing anything positive in the House of Commons" (as if that ever happens) until the end of this year: four months at best.

So an early election (which is going to come eventually anyway) may be a good thing.

One other benefit to an early election: all the politicos will be gone from my town!

[franko]

badcompany said:

To be a rookie politician blatantly going against Party policy, as she did on same-sex marriage, and those anti-gay ads the Tories ran, took some guts. She very easily could have just toed the party line (in a softer, more feminine voice, of course), and suffered no slings and arrows because of it. She also spoke out against trying to bring down the government over this budget weeks ago

Does this not suggest that she was in the wrong party from the beginning?

If Paul Martin offered Stephen Harper the Deputy Prime Minister position, with assurances he will be PM in four years, said the Liberal Party will outlaw abortion, ban homosexual marriages, and bring back capital punishment, Harper would jump too.

The Martin would be the one in the wrong party!

However, you have have caught the public perception of the Conservative Party well, though the actual policy is different: there is to be no outright ban on abortions, just a limit (as there is no law now, so partial-birth abortions are legal. Manning wanted to limit abortion to first-trimester, but the "radicals" wouldn't go for it; there are less radicals and more moderates in the Conservative Party so such a position might work); the Conservatives do not want to ban homosexual marriages but want to retain the uniqueness of the term for heterosexual unions and find another term for gays and lesbian "unions" (playing with words, perhaps); and there aren't that many in the Conservative Party calling for a reinstatement of the death penalty. Just media scaremongering. But it works.

but I don’t think she is quite the bimbo and traitor the Old Boys in the Reform Party are making her out to be.

I don't think Belinda's move was a bright one. She may hate Harper (OK, she does -- or at least what he stands for), but she is not alone. In spite of the numbers, he barely held on at the last leadership review, and unless the Conservatives win a majority in the next election (which is not likely) the Torys will continue their policy of self-destruction, as seen in the past in the Progressive Conservative Party, the Reform Party, and the Canadian Alliance Party: win or we'll stab you in the back. Harper will be forced to call a leadership review. It will not go well. He will call a leadership convention. He will lose. Belinda would have had her chance as a moderate -- sure, the ultra-conservative westerners wouldn't have liked it, but they'd have been pacified with the "she'll do well in Ontario" promise and would have settled down (until they could stab her in the back -- same as it ever was . Now, MacKay will take the leadership (please -- not Ralph Klein or Mike Harris) and do well, as a moderate who can appeal to westerners (because he is not from Quebec or Ontario). After his broken heart mends, of course.

[Doc Holliday]

Rich self-centered bitch that followed the money path to insure that the most corrupted government ever elected stays on... She fits perfectly well in that party of crooks.

...pardon my french.

[Habs_fan_in_LA]

docholliday said:

Rich self-centered bitch that followed the money path to insure that the most corrupted government ever elected stays on... She fits perfectly well in that party of crooks.

...pardon my french.

Don't hold back just because you are a moderator. How do you really feel?

;D

[BadCompany]

franko said:

Timeline 2; election after tonight's vote.

Mid-May -- parliament is dissolved
End-June -- Election of new government
Mid-September -- parliament is recalled

...So an early election (which is going to come eventually anyway) may be a good thing.

But you would need to add to that time frame. You are assuming the new minority government won’t fall right away. Why would you assume that? We know the Liberals will do anything to get back into power, so they’ll topple the Conservatives the first chance they get, if the PC forms a minority. Which means our only hope of not having a THIRD election in the fall, would be if the Liberals win the summer election. And if we want them to win the summer election, why not just skip it all together, and leave them in power?

Mid-May -- parliament is dissolved
End-June -- Election of new government
July-August – no summer recess, or if there is one, it’ll be spent campaigning.
Mid-September -- parliament is recalled, and the mud flies.
Late-September, early October – new government falls
Mid-October -- election called
Mid-November -- election
Mid-January -- parliament is recalled, new government sworn in

Amount of time doing something for the country? Zero.

[BadCompany]

If the Conservatives form a minority government, I’d be almost certain of them falling within six months. Especially if their partners are the Bloc Quebecois. Frankly speaking, this is the best thing that can happen to the Bloc. What can the Tories offer the Bloc that would entice them to stay in the alliance? They differ on every single issue, be it social, economic, national or provincial. They’ll spend two months in this “alliance”, then claim they aren’t getting anything from it (“see Injustice #1, Quebec Insult #2, Red Neck Comment #3”), claim that they have been backstabbed by their partners (oh the knives! the oh-so very long knives!), and pull out of the alliance.

Then, it’s a free-for all (and you thought it was bad now!). The Liberals, sensing blood and power, push to topple the now defenseless PC minority government. The NDP, sensing money to be had from the power-starved Liberals, demand every freaking concession they have ever dreamed of, making Canada more socialist than Cuba. The Bloc, grinning from ear-to-ear, turn to Quebec and say “see? not only can we not work with English Canada – we tried, didn’t we? – but Canada itself isn’t working. When was the last time a government actually governed here? Quebec needs to separate.”

Bad times.

[franko]

badcompany said:

But you would need to add to that time frame. You are assuming the new minority government won’t fall right away. Why would you assume that? We know the Liberals will do anything to get back into power, so they’ll topple the Conservatives the first chance they get, if the PC forms a minority. Which means our only hope of not having a THIRD election in the fall, would be if the Liberals win the summer election. And if we want them to win the summer election, why not just skip it all together, and leave them in power?

Mid-May -- parliament is dissolved
End-June -- Election of new government
July-August – no summer recess, or if there is one, it’ll be spent campaigning.
Mid-September -- parliament is recalled, and the mud flies.
Late-September, early October – new government falls
Mid-October -- election called
Mid-November -- election
Mid-January -- parliament is recalled, new government sworn in

Amount of time doing something for the country? Zero.

I see it more like (should the Conservatives win):

Mid-May -- parliament is dissolved
End-June -- Election of new government
July-August – summer recess/campaigning.
Mid-September -- parliament is recalled, and the mud flies.

• Remember: the Liberals didn't rush to present a budget; neither will the Conservatives. It'll be business (nothing) as usual for 4-6 months . . . waiting for Gomery to report and then the real sniping begins.
  

December -- Christmas recess
February/March – new government falls
Mid-March-- election called
Mid-April-- election
Mid-June -- parliament is recalled, new government sworn in, summer recess.

If the Liberals win, same thing -- they won't get as many seats as they have now and will easily fall.

Layton remains in control of the crown.

[HabbaDasher]

Forget about a conservative minority government.
Let's skip that and go right to a Bloc minority federal government.
Prime Minister Gilles Duceppe.