39th Canadian Parliament was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Current status: Delisted good article |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Sorry, I should wait until I have more time to comment on this properly but if someone has the time then some discussion of Bill C-30, the Clean Air and Climate Change Act, really should be included on this page. I just came across this seeming oversight now, while seeking information on how the controversial Bill C-30 died. http://www.parl.gc.ca/About/Parliament/LegislativeSummaries/bills_ls.asp?source=library_prb&ls=C30&Parl=39&Ses=1&Language=E&Mode=1; http://www.pembina.org/reports/CAA-analysis_oct2006_MW.pdf; Hollo et al. (Springer: 2012) Climate Change and the Law, p. 501 thereabouts.
Someone should do a breif introduction on what an MP is cause man im at skool and i dunno wut on earth it is man!!!! (and what is their role)
Could use some checking of names....I updated Kelowna-Lake Country's winner to Ron Cannan, new candidate this year, any other visible faults?
There were four names in the chart which were emboldened or italicised. Two of them make sense: Stephen Harper (Prime Minister), and Paul Martin (Leader of Opposition). The others I've removed; I can't see why Ralph Goodale or Joe McGuire warrant special notice. -- Llewdor 20:53, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
In the process of bolding and italicizing based on CBC's latest on cabinet ministers, it looks like I buggered the page. Give me a few minutes to fix things... -- coldacid 16:30, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
Why is Michael Fortier on this page? None of the other parliament pages list senators (AFAIK), and last I checked, the Cabinet is not an organ of Commons (or the Parliament at all, it's simply a committee of the Privy Council that happens to be staffed primarily or exclusively by MPs). I guess what I'm getting at is that when we say "nth Canadian parliament" here, we're really speaking of Commons rather than all of Parliament (which does happen to include the Senate) and as Fortier doesn't sit in Commons, his being on this page seems a mistake. -- coldacid 17:24, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
Do we really want the Officeholders section? The previous parliament pages don't have it, and I believe it's because these roles, like those of cabinet ministers, may fluctuate during this parliament. That would mean more work having to keep the pages of not just the various members up to date but also this one; however if it's a short-lived parliament the point may be moot (especially if Harper pulls a Joe Clark when his budget arrives). I'm asking that HOTR explain this slightly anomalous edit, so that other interested parties can decide more fairly than if just hearing my wee rant. -- coldacid 22:59, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
It would be good to have a place where people can look up all the House leaders and Whips from the various parties - there isn't one at present and this page seemed like the most logical location as they are officers of the House. Homey 23:57, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
"Some political observers believe that Martin's chief motivation for remaining on as the official leader of the party is the hope of making a comeback as Prime Minister in the event of a quick defeat of the government. "
I'd like to know who these people are. I've never heard this before. Are these "some political observers" actually a single anonymous Wikipedian speculating at his/her keyboard? It's an interesting theory, but unless there is some verfiable evidence that this is more than just speculation, I think it doesn't belong here. Ground Zero | t 12:02, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
I changed this from the previous "many political observers" which was unsupportable. I believe a few have speculated Martin would possibly return if the government collapsed - after all he was asked that by reporters once the Graham arrangemenet was announced - but I agree someone should add an actual citation to a "political observer" speculating on Martin's possible return.
I've balanced out the Trudeau parallel and fixed some glaring errors (it would have been absurd to resign on the eve of the election - ie the day before the vote). BTW another difference (aside from the lack of an interim leader) is that Trudeau was still very popular within the Liberal Party thus there was a strong constituency supporting his continued leadership - that is not my perception with Martin. Homey 12:07, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
The official website of Canadian Parliament ( here) always capitalizes 'Parliament' when used in the context of "39th Canadian". Should the page title here be changed? - Joshuapaquin 03:09, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
It looks like [1] we're pretty much guaranteed a Liberal as speaker by this afternoon. If someone has a seat layout image ready, we can get that up as soon as we hear... Radagast 17:10, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
Doesn't seem to belong to me in an article about the current Parliment at all. (At least at this time.) Joncnunn 18:25, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
Add fr:39e législature du Canada. Thanks.
Staatenloser 18:52, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
Someone added some party identifiers in the Speakers section that, in my opinion, look extremely awkward — such as Peter Milliken ( LIB- Ontario). Could we please remove these crude identifiers and replace them with something a bit more presentable? Does anyone else have any thoughts on this? FiveParadox 05:14, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
It's not customary to identify MPs by province. Riding, yes; province, no. Homey 06:37, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
I have again edited the party standings to reflect the pre-by-election numbers. While the by-elections have occurred, and it is clear who won both of them, neither of those people are yet MPs, they are not able to take their seat or vote, and they should not be indicated in the party standings until they are able to do so.
The results of the by-elections are preliminary. The results must be validated, the writ of election returned to the Chief Electoral Officer, and a certificate filed with the Clerk of the House of Commons. After that, the Member must swear the Oath of Allegiance and sign the roll before they can take their seat. You will note that the official standings on the Parliamentary Website continue to reflect the pre-by-election numbers. Please wait until that list has been updated before again raising the party standings.
To make it clear that things are in motion, I have added a note about the by-elections, and marked the two soon-to-be MPs as "member-elect." PoliSciMaster 20:19, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
In this article and the articles of the 1st through 38th Canadian Parliaments, there's no mention of the Canadian Senate. The Canadian Parliament is bi-cameral (made up of the House of Commons & the Senate). Has the Senate been abolished? without my knowledge?. GoodDay 19:54, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Since the Jan 23, 2006 Election: the Conservative have lost an MP (kicked out) and gained an MP (crossed floor, from Liberals). Wouldn't the Conservative seat count be 124? GoodDay 20:04, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
39th Canadian Parliament#===Leader=
The text of this section is:
== ===Leader===
*[[Sharona Clair - MP ]]* ==
This seems to have come about from this anonymous edit. Can somebody knowledgable in this subject check and fix this? Thanks. -- Merovingian ※ Talk 03:57, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
This page is getting a bit long. I think we should split the list of house members into a separate List of House members of the 39th Parliament of Canada. I figured that I should ask here first since this would be different than how we do it on the other articles about Canadian Parliaments. -- Arctic Gnome ( talk • contribs) 22:19, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Is Jean Lapierre's resignation really worthy of being labelled a "major event"? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by CaptainCanada ( talk • contribs) 10:03, June 6, 2007 (UCT).
I agree with Arctic Gnome, that it should be moved to the sidde page. Sethpt 19:11, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Sorry about declaring his seat vacant to early. They did a tribute to him on in the House but he has not officially retired. I will let you know when he has. Sethpt 19:11, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
This article is on its way, but it has a few problems at the moment:
It shouldn't take much effort to get it the rest of the way. -- HughCharlesParker ( talk - contribs) 22:52, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
I noted that folks were quick to update the party standings in the House after yesterday's by-elections. While certainly it is clear who won these three by-elections, the fact of the matter is that they have not yet taken their seats. Until such time as the Chief Electoral Officer certifies their writs of election, they take their oath, and sign the roll, they are NOT Members of Parliament, and as such those seats remain vacant (as can clearly be seen in the official standings on the Parliament of Canada website).
Before getting into reverting everything, I wanted to start a discussion here and see how others felt. I know an argument will be made that given the election results, it is inevitable so we might as well include them. However, any number of things could happen between now and then that could prevent them from actually taking their seat. My personal preference would be to keep the standings at the official numbers, with a footnote referring to the members-elect until such time as they actually do take their seats. PoliSciMaster 18:04, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Done
Done
Done
Anybody got the know how & citations to update this article? The 39th Canadian Parliament was dissolved on September 7th, 2008. GoodDay ( talk) 15:23, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
The article says that Harper's was the longest minority government excepting King's "de facto majority government". The article on the 16th government does not make clear why it is a de facto majority. Can someone explain (possibly with sources)? This issue affects this article, the 2008 election article, and other article related to the government. - Rrius ( talk) 21:44, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 07:06, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on 39th Canadian Parliament. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070626/Joe_Comuzzi_07626/20070626?hub=CanadaWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:27, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on 39th Canadian Parliament. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:19, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on 39th Canadian Parliament. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://davidakin.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2007/6/19/3033513.htmlWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:20, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
A GA from 2007. Quite a lot of problems with this. First, uncited statements such as
Along with many other uncited statements. Along with that, the prose is just poorly written. The article is written so weirdly with so many 1 sentence paragraphs such as
And even then, i'm not sure if the article is broad enough as it feels like there's so much that could be talked about that isn't Onegreatjoke ( talk) 14:38, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
39th Canadian Parliament was one of the Social sciences and society good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Current status: Delisted good article |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Sorry, I should wait until I have more time to comment on this properly but if someone has the time then some discussion of Bill C-30, the Clean Air and Climate Change Act, really should be included on this page. I just came across this seeming oversight now, while seeking information on how the controversial Bill C-30 died. http://www.parl.gc.ca/About/Parliament/LegislativeSummaries/bills_ls.asp?source=library_prb&ls=C30&Parl=39&Ses=1&Language=E&Mode=1; http://www.pembina.org/reports/CAA-analysis_oct2006_MW.pdf; Hollo et al. (Springer: 2012) Climate Change and the Law, p. 501 thereabouts.
Someone should do a breif introduction on what an MP is cause man im at skool and i dunno wut on earth it is man!!!! (and what is their role)
Could use some checking of names....I updated Kelowna-Lake Country's winner to Ron Cannan, new candidate this year, any other visible faults?
There were four names in the chart which were emboldened or italicised. Two of them make sense: Stephen Harper (Prime Minister), and Paul Martin (Leader of Opposition). The others I've removed; I can't see why Ralph Goodale or Joe McGuire warrant special notice. -- Llewdor 20:53, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
In the process of bolding and italicizing based on CBC's latest on cabinet ministers, it looks like I buggered the page. Give me a few minutes to fix things... -- coldacid 16:30, 6 February 2006 (UTC)
Why is Michael Fortier on this page? None of the other parliament pages list senators (AFAIK), and last I checked, the Cabinet is not an organ of Commons (or the Parliament at all, it's simply a committee of the Privy Council that happens to be staffed primarily or exclusively by MPs). I guess what I'm getting at is that when we say "nth Canadian parliament" here, we're really speaking of Commons rather than all of Parliament (which does happen to include the Senate) and as Fortier doesn't sit in Commons, his being on this page seems a mistake. -- coldacid 17:24, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
Do we really want the Officeholders section? The previous parliament pages don't have it, and I believe it's because these roles, like those of cabinet ministers, may fluctuate during this parliament. That would mean more work having to keep the pages of not just the various members up to date but also this one; however if it's a short-lived parliament the point may be moot (especially if Harper pulls a Joe Clark when his budget arrives). I'm asking that HOTR explain this slightly anomalous edit, so that other interested parties can decide more fairly than if just hearing my wee rant. -- coldacid 22:59, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
It would be good to have a place where people can look up all the House leaders and Whips from the various parties - there isn't one at present and this page seemed like the most logical location as they are officers of the House. Homey 23:57, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
"Some political observers believe that Martin's chief motivation for remaining on as the official leader of the party is the hope of making a comeback as Prime Minister in the event of a quick defeat of the government. "
I'd like to know who these people are. I've never heard this before. Are these "some political observers" actually a single anonymous Wikipedian speculating at his/her keyboard? It's an interesting theory, but unless there is some verfiable evidence that this is more than just speculation, I think it doesn't belong here. Ground Zero | t 12:02, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
I changed this from the previous "many political observers" which was unsupportable. I believe a few have speculated Martin would possibly return if the government collapsed - after all he was asked that by reporters once the Graham arrangemenet was announced - but I agree someone should add an actual citation to a "political observer" speculating on Martin's possible return.
I've balanced out the Trudeau parallel and fixed some glaring errors (it would have been absurd to resign on the eve of the election - ie the day before the vote). BTW another difference (aside from the lack of an interim leader) is that Trudeau was still very popular within the Liberal Party thus there was a strong constituency supporting his continued leadership - that is not my perception with Martin. Homey 12:07, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
The official website of Canadian Parliament ( here) always capitalizes 'Parliament' when used in the context of "39th Canadian". Should the page title here be changed? - Joshuapaquin 03:09, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
It looks like [1] we're pretty much guaranteed a Liberal as speaker by this afternoon. If someone has a seat layout image ready, we can get that up as soon as we hear... Radagast 17:10, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
Doesn't seem to belong to me in an article about the current Parliment at all. (At least at this time.) Joncnunn 18:25, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
Add fr:39e législature du Canada. Thanks.
Staatenloser 18:52, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
Someone added some party identifiers in the Speakers section that, in my opinion, look extremely awkward — such as Peter Milliken ( LIB- Ontario). Could we please remove these crude identifiers and replace them with something a bit more presentable? Does anyone else have any thoughts on this? FiveParadox 05:14, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
It's not customary to identify MPs by province. Riding, yes; province, no. Homey 06:37, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
I have again edited the party standings to reflect the pre-by-election numbers. While the by-elections have occurred, and it is clear who won both of them, neither of those people are yet MPs, they are not able to take their seat or vote, and they should not be indicated in the party standings until they are able to do so.
The results of the by-elections are preliminary. The results must be validated, the writ of election returned to the Chief Electoral Officer, and a certificate filed with the Clerk of the House of Commons. After that, the Member must swear the Oath of Allegiance and sign the roll before they can take their seat. You will note that the official standings on the Parliamentary Website continue to reflect the pre-by-election numbers. Please wait until that list has been updated before again raising the party standings.
To make it clear that things are in motion, I have added a note about the by-elections, and marked the two soon-to-be MPs as "member-elect." PoliSciMaster 20:19, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
In this article and the articles of the 1st through 38th Canadian Parliaments, there's no mention of the Canadian Senate. The Canadian Parliament is bi-cameral (made up of the House of Commons & the Senate). Has the Senate been abolished? without my knowledge?. GoodDay 19:54, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
Since the Jan 23, 2006 Election: the Conservative have lost an MP (kicked out) and gained an MP (crossed floor, from Liberals). Wouldn't the Conservative seat count be 124? GoodDay 20:04, 6 January 2007 (UTC)
39th Canadian Parliament#===Leader=
The text of this section is:
== ===Leader===
*[[Sharona Clair - MP ]]* ==
This seems to have come about from this anonymous edit. Can somebody knowledgable in this subject check and fix this? Thanks. -- Merovingian ※ Talk 03:57, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
This page is getting a bit long. I think we should split the list of house members into a separate List of House members of the 39th Parliament of Canada. I figured that I should ask here first since this would be different than how we do it on the other articles about Canadian Parliaments. -- Arctic Gnome ( talk • contribs) 22:19, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
Is Jean Lapierre's resignation really worthy of being labelled a "major event"? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by CaptainCanada ( talk • contribs) 10:03, June 6, 2007 (UCT).
I agree with Arctic Gnome, that it should be moved to the sidde page. Sethpt 19:11, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Sorry about declaring his seat vacant to early. They did a tribute to him on in the House but he has not officially retired. I will let you know when he has. Sethpt 19:11, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
This article is on its way, but it has a few problems at the moment:
It shouldn't take much effort to get it the rest of the way. -- HughCharlesParker ( talk - contribs) 22:52, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
I noted that folks were quick to update the party standings in the House after yesterday's by-elections. While certainly it is clear who won these three by-elections, the fact of the matter is that they have not yet taken their seats. Until such time as the Chief Electoral Officer certifies their writs of election, they take their oath, and sign the roll, they are NOT Members of Parliament, and as such those seats remain vacant (as can clearly be seen in the official standings on the Parliament of Canada website).
Before getting into reverting everything, I wanted to start a discussion here and see how others felt. I know an argument will be made that given the election results, it is inevitable so we might as well include them. However, any number of things could happen between now and then that could prevent them from actually taking their seat. My personal preference would be to keep the standings at the official numbers, with a footnote referring to the members-elect until such time as they actually do take their seats. PoliSciMaster 18:04, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Done
Done
Done
Anybody got the know how & citations to update this article? The 39th Canadian Parliament was dissolved on September 7th, 2008. GoodDay ( talk) 15:23, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
The article says that Harper's was the longest minority government excepting King's "de facto majority government". The article on the 16th government does not make clear why it is a de facto majority. Can someone explain (possibly with sources)? This issue affects this article, the 2008 election article, and other article related to the government. - Rrius ( talk) 21:44, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 07:06, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on 39th Canadian Parliament. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070626/Joe_Comuzzi_07626/20070626?hub=CanadaWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 23:27, 11 November 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on 39th Canadian Parliament. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:19, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on 39th Canadian Parliament. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
{{
dead link}}
tag to
http://davidakin.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2007/6/19/3033513.htmlWhen you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 11:20, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
A GA from 2007. Quite a lot of problems with this. First, uncited statements such as
Along with many other uncited statements. Along with that, the prose is just poorly written. The article is written so weirdly with so many 1 sentence paragraphs such as
And even then, i'm not sure if the article is broad enough as it feels like there's so much that could be talked about that isn't Onegreatjoke ( talk) 14:38, 26 January 2023 (UTC)