Talk:40th Canadian Parliament

Images for infobox

The images for the infobox need to be created. Image:Canada 2008 Federal Election seats.svg contains the current seat arrangement. Image:39th Can Senate.png would need its text updated but would otherwise serve. The House image should mirror the text of Image:39th Can Parl.png. I wonder, though, could these be done as SVGs this time? -Rrius (talk) 07:11, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Standings in the 40th Canadian Parliament

References in the board go up to 6, and footnotes go up to 5. As there is no #2 in the board, it seems that footnote #2 refers to the board's #3, footnote #3 refers to the board's #4, etc...

I don't know how to edit that, since all there is in the edit page of this section is "{{40th Canadian Parliament standings}}", which I don't know how to change.

24.200.55.162 (talk) 06:11, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

I fixed it, but for future reference, that was a template. Most big templates like that have "view", "discuss", and "edit" links (or just v, d, e links) to let you look at the page for the template itself. In this case, that template was located at Template:40th Canadian Parliament standings. Hope that helps. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 07:09, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

fall of the Tories?

Shouldn't this be expanded to include the latest, whereby the opposition defeats the government and forms the new government as a coalition, if they can work out the details and get the GG to accept? 76.66.195.63 (talk) 13:13, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

We don't need to include a lesson in constitutional law, just an explanation of what's been going on with links to articles about how the system works. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 17:20, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

It's not just a lesson in constitutional law. The opposition parties objected the lack of a stimulus package and the slashing of party funding, and promised to take down the government over its financial package on Monday. The Tories have now backed down on the party-funding issue, but the opposition say they are still willing to bring down the government over the stimulus issue. This should be in the article, the question is how much prominence it should have as the story develops. -Rrius (talk) 17:28, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

What you said is fine, Rrius, I was just discouraging having too much information about how the system works in general. While this article is still a stub, I say go nuts with the information-adding, as long as it's NPOV and cited. We'll clean it up once this event settles down. --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 17:58, 28 November 2008 (UTC)

The Harper Government has pushed back the confidence vote to December 8, 2008. GoodDay (talk) 00:03, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

I've removed the expand template, it's supposed to be used in articles, not talk pages, if you want more input, you can use the unresolved template or bring up the issue at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Governments of Canada or Wikipedia:Canadian Wikipedians' notice board#Requests for comment. -- Gordon Ecker (talk) 09:00, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

I just have an issue with the wording in the part of the page. It states that if the government falls, and the Liberals form a coalition government, then this would become the 41st Canadian Parliament. However, In the 15th Canadian Parliament, when Lord Byng refused to dissolve Parliament as per Mackenzie King's request, and instead appointed the weaker opposition party as the new government, it did not become the 16th Canadian Parliament, but rather remained the 15th. So, wouldn't that mean that this will technically remain the 40th Canadian Parliament? From what I can tell, you only become a new Parliament when the people vote in an election. (See King-Byng Affair for reference) Grizzwald (talk) 19:30, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

If a coalition government (Lib/NDP) is formed. It would be the 2nd government of the 40th Canadian Parliament. So yes; the 40th Parliament continues. GoodDay (talk) 20:08, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

There, I've fixed it up. Whatcha'll think? GoodDay (talk) 20:13, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

NDP-BQ deals

Can somebody (with the CTV sources) mention this? GoodDay (talk) 20:38, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

I'd wait, this seems to be heresay by a Conservative member. --Natural R_X 23:04, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

I've added a link to the transcript of the parts of the conference that they've released so far. The Bloc stuff is rather ambiguous, and seems to hinge on the following statement by Layton: "this whole thing would not have happened if the moves hadn’t have been made with the Bloc to lock them in early, because you couldn’t put three people together in one, in three hours. The first part was done a long time ago, I won’t go into details". It's also worth noting that the covert taping and releasing of the conference call is likely to become controversial, maybe even more so than its contents. Esn (talk) 02:10, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

linkages?

Things possibly to compare/link to

• King-Byng Affair
• 1975 Australian constitutional crisis

76.66.200.131 (talk) 13:24, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

Shortest session?

Was the first session of the 40th Parliament the shortest ever? If so, it should be in the article. -Rrius (talk) 04:28, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

"Canada's shortest-lived parliamentary sessions". Times Colonist. 2008-12-04. DoubleBlue (talk) 04:32, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

No, see the 18th Canadian Parliament article. GoodDay (talk) 00:45, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Prime Minister Stephen Harper's image

We should have an image of the Prime Minister, at this article. We have PM images on all the articles (except the 38th Parliament) from the 1st to 39th Parliament articles. GoodDay (talk) 19:32, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

End of this Parliament

While the government has been found in contempt and has no confidence in the house, it must be dissolved byt the Governor General before it officially ends. --Natural R_X 18:26, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Exacty, only the Governor General (representing the Canadian monarch) may dissolve the 40th Parliament. GoodDay (talk) 19:46, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Infobox content of this & the other Canadian Parliament articles from the 28th to 39th

In the Parliaments where the prime minister, opposition leader, speaker of the house & other officials serve in their offices the entire Parliament? we shouldn't be using 'dates' under them. Where's there's a change of officials during the same parliament? we should just use the departer's date & the incomer's date. GoodDay (talk) 20:48, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Archive of the Proroguation link

I removed the archive link because the page had moved, and the archive link was for the old page, not the one now being used as a source. I just wanted to make sure it was clear that they are technically not pointing at the same place, and it might be better to find an archive of the current page instead of the old one. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 17:11, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

You could create a new one if you want. In the meantime, it is an archive of the same material, and thus would continue to support the proposition asserted in the text in the event the new link dies, would it not? -Rrius (talk) 01:31, 6 July 2012 (UTC)