lotusland - nervous politics from a laid-back city

budgetmania 2005!!!!!!!

why do people think this is so exciting? OMG THE LIBERALS/NDP/BLOC TOTALLY HAD THE VOTE WHEN THE CONSERVATIVES WERE SHORT. what did you think they were going to do, have it when they themselves were short? ha.

why do people think this is so sleazy? maybe the conservative party whip desk should brush up on their parliamentary procedure, because canada isnt actually a fascist state despite martins fanatical will to maintain power. its all there in montpetit & marleau. shame on the conservative whip desk staff, i guess.

the one thing that is semi-offensive here is that they had the vote very late on a friday evening. western/northern/nfld mp's tend to head home a bit earlier than the rest of them. the ontario/quebec folk can take the train, and maritimers benefit from all those direct ottawa-halifax flights. if the mp's who are far away from ottawa want to maintain anything close to a constituency presence, they have to duck out earlier.

but the conservatives havent brought that up yet. theyre too busy saying words like "separatist" and "socialist" to describe a watered-down nationalist protest party and a watered-down social democrat party. like its 1950 or something.

another thing thats annoying is calling this "the ndp budget" due to that ndp budget amendment.  thats like me letting my 5-year-old cousin tell everyone she cooked the pasta because i let her crush the garlic.

stephen harper sells out; tries to be mulroney all over again

have any lotusland politics fans been paying attention to the antics of the new minority parliament, or is our aversion to stress leading us to get our political fix from lighter fare, such as the us election circus and impending hans blix visit to ubc?

harper's behaviour this session has been grossly appalling. while rahim jaffer entertains us, harper is busy endorsing asymmetrical federalism in the form of increased constitutional power for the province of québec. for all the complaints the 'western alienation' faction makes about provinces getting equal rights (commonly manifested in the western pastime of making incoherent allegations that québec is taking all our money), this is a curious stance for harper to take. if he intends on extending all these rights to every province, will canada even be a federation anymore?

given the sheer irrationality of his stance, is there any ideological motivation, or is this just an attempt to pander to anyone who will listen?

maurizio bevilacqua, a casualty of martins george w. bush-like predilection to surround himself with yestards (like yes men, but dumber), is sorely missed in cabinet. kudos to him for the following letter which appeared on warren kinsella's blog .

October 19, 2004

RE: The new political realities of Canada

Dear Mr. Harper,

As a Member of Parliament I swore an oath, as did you, to uphold this great nation of ours. I recall nothing in the oath that would cause me to espouse schemes that are purposefully divisive in their design and dangerous in their deployment. Nor do I recall anything in the oath that would cause me to form alliances with those who actively seek to carve up this great nation. The oath that I took compels me to speak for Canada.

As Parliament opened the nation witnessed you making a deal with the Bloc. This week Canadians watch as you embrace elements of the ADQ's plan to rename Quebec and Parti Quebecois leader Bernard Landry's referendum strategy to unilaterally declare Quebec's independence and then attempt to negotiate terms with Ottawa.

Canadians are left wondering why you, who have spent the past decade fueling the fires of western alienation, are handing Separatists all they desire? Canadians are left wondering what is quid pro quo? What will the west demand from Quebec in return for a Quebec constitution? What is the real end game in this Harper-Landry alliance?

Mr. Harper you talk about the "new Canadian reality" but in truth if you and Mr. Landry continue down this road Canada simply wont be a reality.

Respectfully submitted,

Maurizio Bevilaqua M.P.

randy white loves democracy so much! watch him prove it!

randy white is running for speaker. this isn't motivated by his intimate knowledge and deep love for the rules of canadian debate as outlined by montpetit and marleau, nor is it provoked by a desire to receive dignitaries at kingsmere. it doesn't even have anything to do with a penchant for white gloves and tricorn hats.

randy white is putting his name on the ballot to avoid an acclamation. he fears the newly-implemented free vote selection of the speaker is jeopardized by the fact nobody else is running for the job. naturally, the state of democracy in canada will be bolstered and affirmed by his candidacy!

someone should tell mr white that while appointments are undemocratic, acclamations are not (well, barring conspiratorial behaviour). perhaps he can think of a less superficial way to save canadian democracy, since it means oh so much to him.