Brilliant, brilliant, brilliant!

[felis_ultharus]

Last night, Paul Martin put his talent for Machiavellian manoeuvring in the service of good. Around 9 o'clock last night, Liberals started to filter out of the House of Commons. It looked like they were closing up for the night. According to La Presse:

One can understand the anger of the Official Opposition [the Conservatives]: the Conservative members had begun to leave Parliament hill, around 9 pm, when a few noticed that none of the Liberals were following suit. As well, the ministers' limousines were still parked though, usually, they don't hang around parliament for a long time in the evening.

In fact, the Liberals were hidden in the antechamber of the Commons, ready to vote for the bill. (translation mine)

The Liberals waited until a few Conservatives had left, then ran back in and voted to hold the 3rd and final vote immediately. The Conservatives/Bloc coalition lost by five votes, and the final part of the budget got through. Now it just has to go through the Senate (purely procedural, but it can take awhile), and get signed by Adrienne Clarkson, and then it's law.

C-48 is the progressive part of the budget. It cancels corporate tax cuts in the first part of the budget, and provides money for affordable housing for the poor, public transit, universities, and foreign aid to fight poverty internationally.

Now the government won't fall anytime soon -- the confidence votes are over. But the Conservatives could try this same dirty trick to try to stop the same-sex marriage bill (which hasn't budged an inch in over a week).

Comments

[infinitecomplex.livejournal.com]

That is absolutely fucking hilarious. Good for Paul Martin. It's always good to see the ultimate Machiavellian villain actually being outmanoeuvred for once. Apparently they were able to use this particular legislation (ending debate and having the vote immediately) because all parties agreed that the Conservatives were being deliberately obstructionist, which I don't think anyone in their right minds would argue with. Have you read some of the Conservative responses? Jen and I have just been in hysterics over them; they're so angry they're barely even coherent...

[felis-ultharus.livejournal.com]

Heh. They're livid. But then they tend to be livid most of the time.

Some of last night's best speeches:

Larry Bagnell, Liberal: Here is what I would like to ask the hon. member about. If we lose this vote, which will of course cause us to go to an election, how does he think the Bloc and the Conservative candidates would feel going door to door telling people that they caused an election by voting against clean air, foreign aid for children overseas, housing for people who cannot afford it and lower tuition fees for our children going to universities?

....

Gary Goodyear, Conservative: Second, calculated invocation of closure tonight shut down the voices of my riding. My riding is not allowed to speak tonight in this supposedly democratic forum. How does he feel about that? That is what I would like to ask the hon. member.

Peter Julian, NDP: Mr. Speaker, the hon. member just gave his voice to the House of Commons. I think there is a bit of a contradiction there.

....

Jack Layton, NDP leader: When we look at the expenditure on housing, I certainly think back to Eugene Upper, who lost his life one block from my house when he froze to death. It was a statement of shame that Canada was not providing housing to its citizens. Since that time, groups across the country have formed and have urged all of us in all parties to take action and to get back to building affordable housing again.

It was a great tragedy when the best affordable housing program in the world, as recognized by the United Nations, was cancelled in the mid-1990s and we saw homelessness grow. Now we are seeing a turnaround. We are seeing an investment that brings federal dollars to the construction of affordable housing.

....

After a Conservative complained about wasting taxpayers money, Peter Julian, NDP: I think it is important to note the past irresponsibility of the Conservatives and the fiscal record we saw under Mulroney. We saw the social deficit under the Liberals and that is what the NDP is trying to correct, but under Mulroney we saw record financial deficits at the federal level.

Last year we saw the most expensive political platform in Canadian history at $86 billion. That was before the Conservatives threw in the aircraft carrier, the HMS Mulroney. They threw that in with no idea of how to pay for it. There were all those assorted promises.

Stockwell Day, Conservative and extreme fundamentalist: We have seen a democratic deficit. Democracy will survive in Canada because no regime lasts forever. The people of Canada will remember this. They will not be forgetful. They will be reminded of how this bill was rammed through and how the marriage bill was rammed through.They will be reminded. Democracy will reign in this country. This corrupt regime will be thrown out because the people will remember.

Jean-Claude D'Amours, Liberal (in French): Mr. Speaker, let us talk democracy. On June 28, 2004. the people of Canada voted for a minority government, for a Parliament that would operate in a minority context. That is exactly the democracy that the people of Canada asked for, not just of the present Liberal government, but of all of the members. They have asked us to work so as to make sure the country advanced. Democracy has spoken.

Some people think this country's sport is hockey. I disagree :)

Now I really have to get back to my essay 0_o

[seal7.livejournal.com]

That's hysterical XDD I wish things like that would happen here. Would make politics a lot more interesting.

[felis-ultharus.livejournal.com]

And people wonder why this is the only sport I follow ^_^

Interestingly, most of the English-language press is only telling half the story. It's the French press that has the whole waiting-in-the-back-room-thing-for-the-Conservatives-to-leave.

Now the Conservatives will try to retaliate by blocking same-sex marriage. They may even try the same tactic, so the Liberals have to be on their guard. The Liberals can't do the same thing because the whole reason for the bill (now the courts are gradually declaring same-sex marriage legal gradually) is to give the stamp of democracy to the idea, rather than make it look like the court is making decisions for us.

For that reason, they can't rush this next debate. They have to let everyone have their say, or it just won't have the same power :/

[seal7.livejournal.com]

Kind of unfortunate the bill to follow would be the same-sex marriage one :/
Well, I hope it'll go alright.

[felis-ultharus.livejournal.com]

I hope so, too. Part of the reason the Conservatives have been trying so hard to bring down the government is to prevent the same-sex marriage bill from going through.

Now at least they can't bring down the government for a long time. If worst comes to worst, the Liberals can re-introduce the bill, and don't have to worry about falling.

[jc2004.livejournal.com]

My two favorite conservative responses so far are Peter MacKay comparing Paul Martin to Hannibal Lector and one of the other guys (can't remember which now), saying: "We're a banana republic without a banana." These guys are seriously losing it.

[felis-ultharus.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I just heard about the Hannibal Lector one. But what does "banana republic without a banana" even mean?

(Scary. Search for Canadian stuff and "banana republic," and you get a lot of Canadians who support the Conservatives and want to merge with the US. Not surprising, but sad).

[jc2004.livejournal.com]

Found it again in the National Post:

Tory MP Jim Abbott said: "We're in a banana republic without a banana."

Don't know what he meant but I took it as a Freudian slip relating to the fact that the Conservatives just got emasculated.