I like games, so let’s play one:
Let’s assume for the moment that Stephen Harper has his majority, and it is 6 months from today. Don’t panic! It’s just a game! Access to abortion, gay marriage are still around. But, that’s really the only conceit of this game. Everything else is as it is.
That means that the composition of the Senate is still largely the same. So, when Harper passes the exact (or perhaps more draconian tougher) crime legislation as is being proposed now, the Senate is in just as much position to delay, examine, filibuster, or reject it.
Which is why the latest gambit in the election calling process is as ridiculous as ever, and should be called for what it is: a desperate and transparent attempt to justify dropping the writ as soon as possible. Remember, the only way an election will make the Senate more likely to play nicer on this issue is if it produces a government that doesn’t have the same affinity for mandatory minimum sentences and other crime fighting legislation that don’t actually stop crime. It’s a real shame that the CBC doesn’t call them on this, choosing instead to give a precis of the press conference.
Incidentally, none of this artifice would be necessary if the tories didn’t stupidly commit themselves to a fixed election date.
Fellow Travellers 
February 7th, 2008 
3184 Comment from
12:27 pm 
Write a comment
The entire allegation that the Senate is holding up the bill is bogus. The Senate didn’t sit between Dec. 12 and January 28th, meaning that of the 71 days that the Senate has been “delaying”, two thirds of those were when the Senate was on break.
And before anyone alleges that the break was scheduled to prevent the bill from being passed, remember that the government sets the schedule.
The Tories have three “confidence” votes on the burners: this one in the Senate, the Afghanistan vote, and the budget.
They just want to call an election before the recession hits.
e