Canada: Liberals Lose Parliament Control

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Canada: Liberals Lose Parliament Control
49
Tue, 06-29-2004 - 12:31am

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-4256685,00.html


The Liberal Party lost outright control of Parliament on Monday, ending an 11-year monopoly on power, but easily won the largest share of seats and will now try to lead Canada's first minority government since 1979.


Though dogged by scandal, and pressed hard by a newly unified Conservative Party, the Liberals of Prime Minister Paul Martin prevailed by largely holding their ground in Ontario, the most populous province and the pivotal battleground in the election.

Most minority governments in Canada's past have proven unstable and short-lived. The Liberals may try to govern in an informal coalition with the left-wing New Democratic Party, which favors higher taxes on the affluent.

The Liberals had won three straight landslide victories under Jean Chretien, starting in 1993, and there were signs during the campaign that many Canadians were disenchanted with the party and its recent entanglement in a financial scandal.

However, the results suggested a widespread reluctance to turn over power to the Conservatives' relatively untested leader, Stephen Harper, whose stances on tax cuts and social issues prompted concerns about unwelcome change.

Nearly complete returns showed the Liberals winning 134 seats overall, short of the 155 need to single-handedly control the House of Commons, but far more than 93 seats the Conservatives were projected to win.

In Quebec, the Bloc Quebecois, which advocates independence for the French-speaking province, did well at the Liberals' expense. The Bloc was on track to boost its share of Quebec's 75 seats from 33 to 56, a performance likely to fuel talk of another separatist attempt to hold a referendum on secession from Canada.

The New Democrats were winning 24 seats, which - added to the Liberals' share - would be just enough to forge a majority.

The final polls taken before the election suggested the Liberals and Conservatives were deadlocked, and many analysts had predicted the Conservatives would win the most seats.

Thus the results, giving the Liberals a comfortable plurality, were a relief to Martin, the 65-year-old Liberal leader who replaced Chretien as prime minister last year. He had called the election five weeks ago, hoping the results would provide a solid mandate for his administration.

The outcome was a deep disappointment for Harper and others who had worked relentlessly in recent years to merge rival right-of-center factions and the divisions that had enabled the Liberals to dominate recent elections. The merger took place last year, but the hoped-for breakthrough in Ontario - home to one-third of the population - failed to materialize.

Among the first-time Liberal winners in Ontario was hockey Hall of Famer Ken Dryden, former star goalie of the Montreal Canadiens.

Although the Liberals and Conservatives had much in common - including support for the national health insurance system and reluctance to deploy troops in Iraq - there were some key differences. Harper wanted to slash taxes for the middle-class, increase the military ranks from 60,000 to 80,000 and pull Canada out of the Kyoto Protocol, which commits industrialized nations to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases.

Harper, 45, started the campaign strongly, but was placed on the defensive by repeated Liberal claims that he would try to move Canada to the right on social policies. He denied that he would seek restrictions on abortion, but conveyed some doubts about Canada's steady move toward legalization of same-sex marriage, which already is legal in three provinces.

Roughly 22 million voters were eligible to cast ballots. In the last national election, in 2000, turnout was the lowest ever at 61 percent.

The new Parliament - with 308 seats - will have seven more members than the outgoing one, in which the Liberals hold 168 seats, the Conservatives 73, the Bloc Quebecois 33 and the New Democrats 14. There are nine independents and four vacant seats.

cl-Libraone~

 


Photobucket&nbs

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-24-2003
Tue, 06-29-2004 - 8:55am
Sigh. I hope they don't try to restrict lgbt rights... and here we go again with Party Quebecois. Have to contact my friend in Montreal today to get her take on this.
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Tue, 06-29-2004 - 9:34am

"don't try to restrict lgbt rights"


I wouldn't think so.


I'm waiting for our Canadian posters to comment on their election.

 


Photobucket&nbs

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-23-2003
Wed, 06-30-2004 - 11:13am

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/180105_canada30.html

Day care, health on Canadian premier's agenda


Citizens expect more, Martin says


Wednesday, June 30, 2004


By CLIFFORD KRAUSS
THE NEW YORK TIMES


TORONTO -- After squeaking out an election victory, a chastened Prime Minister Paul Martin promised yesterday to shake up his government to revamp the nation's health care system and promote a new day care program for children.


Martin implicitly recognized that his performance since Jean Chretien resigned as prime minister in December had been less than inspiring, and that voters expressed their anger at recent Liberal Party scandals by voting Monday to end the party's majority control of the House of Commons.


"The message was unmistakable," he told supporters as the final vote count came in. "Canadians expected and expect more from us. And as a party and as a government we must do better." (me:


iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Wed, 06-30-2004 - 12:50pm

Good article. Great goals!


If only.................

cl-Libraone~

 


Photobucket&nbs

iVillage Member
Registered: 06-16-2004
Wed, 06-30-2004 - 12:53pm
Sorry for my stupidity but was is "lgbt"???
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-24-2003
Wed, 06-30-2004 - 12:57pm
Isn't it amazing to see a government talking about day care and health care, instead of blowing someone else up?
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-24-2003
Wed, 06-30-2004 - 12:58pm
>>but was is "lgbt"???<<


lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-18-2000
Wed, 06-30-2004 - 1:17pm

I saw your question was answered but here is a great site.........


http://www.acronymfinder.com/


I can relate sometimes I feel as though I'm not speaking the same language with all the acronyms.


HAND

 


Photobucket&nbs

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-18-2004
Wed, 06-30-2004 - 1:21pm
“and pressed hard by a newly unified Conservative Party”

Hardly conservative. It is difficult to export the terms liberal and conservative to another country. A conservative in Canada is closer to a “moderate” here. A liberal in China could be compared to a conservative here.

“Harper wanted to slash taxes for the middle-class, increase the military ranks from 60,000 to 80,000 and pull Canada out of the Kyoto Protocol”

Slashing taxes – good idea

Increase military ranks – bad idea. They could disband their army we would protect them even though the talk poorly about us.

pull Canada out of the Kyoto Protocol – Very sound idea. Kyoto is a huge mess.

“but conveyed some doubts about Canada's steady move toward legalization of same-sex marriage”

Closed minded bigot.

“The message was unmistakable," he told supporters as the final vote count came in. "Canadians expected and expect more from us. And as a party and as a government we must do better."”

Typical politician. He has totally misread the results. I would think he would need to lean toward tax cuts. His plans would raise them. Sounds like the voters want an economic break but want to increase social programs at the same time. The voters need to realize they can’t have both. Thank God it’s in Canada.

“Martin told reporters yesterday that he had no intention of including members of other parties in his Cabinet.”

Why listen to others, including the voters.

“Both parties said they would try to increase federal spending on health care and housing and work to block any Canadian involvement in an American continental missile defense system.”

Blocking spending on a missle defense makes sense. Let us spend the money. When it becomes operational they will automatically be protected. Sound financial decision.



iVillage Member
Registered: 03-24-2003
Wed, 06-30-2004 - 1:29pm
I love the "cut taxes" philosophy. At some point the rate is so low it cannot be cut further. We've already passed that point, the last tax cut was assinine.

>>Typical politician. He has totally misread the results. I would think he would need to lean toward tax cuts. His plans would raise them. Sounds like the voters want an economic break but want to increase social programs at the same time. The voters need to realize they can’t have both. Thank God it’s in Canada.<<

Isn't it a real bummer we actually have to help out other citizens? What is a selfish individual supposed to do? It's mine! All mine! And you can't have it!

Pages