Coalition: breaking news
December 4, 2008 - 9:09am
Well, here's one:
OTTAWA — Frank Valeriote does not favour a coalition government and instead hopes Prime Minister Stephen Harper can work toward rescuing the Canadian economy.
“I believe in working toward a solution, not working toward a coalition,” Guelph’s Liberal MP said Wednesday.
Valeriote added he does not believe a Liberal-NDP coalition, with support from the Bloc Quebecois, will unseat the Tories.
“I have given no thought to that,” Valeriote said when asked whether he saw himself in a cabinet role under such an arrangement. “I am not, frankly, anticipating moving into government.”
Read the full story in tomorrow’s Mercury. http://news.guelphmercury.com/News/BreakingNews/article/411713
If you followed the Guelph Campaign, it was apparent and heir Emerson in the making. Should anyone be surprised. ????
And a Cons MP is publicaly saying that Harper made a serious mistake. Isolated cases of both are guaranteed to happen- cracks or no cracks.
And I think this is exactly the kind of new thread for which there is no excuse. Why didn't you put this in the existing thread? Its not a distinct topic- just another facet of what goes on with and viz the coalition.
A close friend of mine bumped into former Lib MP Dennis Mills (Jack's predecessor) at a restaurant in Toronto... asked him what he thought of the coalition and he said it was a "big mistake."
Well that proves it - it is a good idea
Northumberland - Quinte West, a semi-rural riding, is a more likely place than Guelph for Liberal cracks. At our three-party pro-coalition press conference this afternoon in Cobourg (with Greens, no Bloc here), Paul Macklin our former Liberal MP and recent candidate, and his supporters, were there in good numbers; a standing-room only event. And his riding president is helping organize a regional rally for Saturday.
Well that proves it - it is a good idea
The major crack to appear in the coalition will be triggered by a leak about the payola to Quebec that the Liberals agreed to.
Iggy is already jumping ship. With Jacques Parizeau's hearty agreement to the coalition, many Liberals will be searching for the handgrenade in their underwear.
If the coalition falls apart because the Liberals lose their nerve - at least it will give the NDP a great sledgehammer to beat them with for the next year when people look for who to blame for all the awful stuff Harper is bound to try to do.
Frank Valeriote is a conservative formner chair of the Catholic School Board, prperty lawyer and real estate developer with strong Conservative connections, including his brother who is a mover in the local CPC riding.
He defeated a progressive candidate (Marva Wisdom) in a thoroughly dirty nomination battle thqat was fixed in his favour by the local machine. He hates the NDP.
If you were listing likely weak links, he would be near the top of the page.
And I agree with KenS about this thread. i just can't help myself.
[quote]
Dion's amateur hour
Adam Radwanski, today at 7:50 PM EST
Jack Layton is speaking now in front of Parliament. He looks like a national party leader.
Stephane Dion, to put it charitably, did not. And that's a significant problem when you're attempting to make the leap to prime minister. [/quote] Valeriote is an Emerson Liberal. Ironically the Guelph Progressive vote went with Frank to prevent the CPC candidate from winning. Heard that one before? Vote Frank to stop Harper :) How'd that get said, Fool me once shame on me, PAUSE LOOK STUPID, can't get fooled again. :)
Tonights Harpers speech was a complete Dud.
We are not a well lead country.
They've past the point of no return. As Benjamin Franklin said on the onset of the Revolution, "We must all hang together or surely will we hang separately."
In any case, the Liberals' stupidity, i.e., not replacing Dion as leader of the coalition, far outstrips and crowds out their timidity. So, I guess that's a blessing.
I was thinking about this last night.
It seems to me that the Liberals have placed themselves in an interesting position. If this succeeds they may lose their right wing supporters in some areas and gain some back in Quebec at least in the short term.
However, if they back out, or the Liberals are seen to cause a splintering of the coalition they will be doomed for a generation with progressive voters. A much, much more damaging outcome for them. If Harper continues in power BECAUSE the Liberals can't bring themselves to actually replace him then they will lose the support of many of those who voted Liberal to stop the Conservatives who will feel deeply betrayed and disillusioned. Walking out, or getting cold feet on a coalition at this point will be big trouble for the long term for them.
My sense is that the country breaks down a bit like this
1/3 outraged at the thought of a coalition
1/3 supports getting rid of Harper no matter the mechanism
1/3 don't give a shit
Walking out risks losing a significant portion of voters within the Liberal vote universe. They would have to be idiots to walk out. But then I thought they would have to be idiots to elect Dion leader in the first place and they went and did that too.
Taking Left Turn's advice, I decided to make this thread about breaking news about the coalition. I changed the title to reflect that.
So, please post any new developments or news stories (not opinion pieces - you can post those in the "debate continues" thread) about the coalition in this thread.
Ratbert:
Iggy is already jumping ship. With Jacques Parizeau's hearty agreement to the coalition, many Liberals will be searching for the handgrenade in their underwear.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The placement a result of a vain search for gonads?
No, keep the faith Bert. Even Iggy knows that leaving the ship would mean certain death.
By the way, rabble has consolidated all its coalition government content into one page, which includes news, columns, podcasts, pictures, and babble threads! :)
http://rabble.ca/coalitionPoor quality tape of Stephan Dion's rebuttal is late and poor quality.
http://www.citynews.ca/news/news_29782.aspxPushing this three wheeled jalopy out onto the political racetrack increasingly appears to be their most idiotic move, but the best is yet to come, when Rae or Ignatieff makes their debut on a unicycle.
i thought that the coalition had a chance when I saw Harpers speech. I then saw Jack's speech and thought it was good to go.
Then Dion's tape arrived. I can not support that imbecile as PM. Jack is the true leader of the coalition not that idiot Dion.
Because of Dion and only because of Dion Harper will survive.
We put our hopes on an idiot who has terrible staff and used a 3 year old to film a video.
They had all freakin day to produce a video and get it to the networks on time and in good quality.
according to ctv.ca here is what happened to the tape:
The timeline (all times ET):
"We missed our deadline," Moreau said. "The shot was not all that professional. It was soft-focused."
If Dion were to be the head of the majority coalition for its duration, it would be a big problem. But since he has only five months left, it's a manageable problem.
Still, someone else should have been chosen to be the temporary head. But it appears that Iggy, at least, could not live with that. Maybe it was his way of undermining the coalition, which he was never wild about to start.
Its funny all this squawking about Parizeau supporting the coalition. I remember back in 1988 when Parizeau came out strongly in favour of free trade with the US on the grounds that it would help weaken Canada and pave the road to independence for Quebec. The Tories were happy to welcome his backing at the time.
If Dion were to be the head of the majority coalition for its duration, it would be a big problem. But since he has only five months left, it's a manageable problem.
He isn't going to have five months... I have seen people swear on babble even to other babblers using the above term. I am normally offended by such terms and references. I could use a few terms for Dion.
There isn't time for a Dion Apologist.
'I think everyone needs to take a step back and calm down. I think the government needs to tone down their rhetoric.'— Nathan Cullen, NDP MP in B.C.
From http://www.cbc.ca/canada/british-columbia/story/2008/12/03/bc-mp-sign-burned.html?ref=rss
As someone who worked for an NDP MLA during the late '90s when anti-NDP sentiment was high, my experience leads me to worry about the vicious fervour that is being whipped up by our PM. Those who are active in the coalition movement will need to be vigilant in terms of their personal safety.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper has asked the Governor General to shut down Parliament until January.
It's a bid to avoid Monday's non-confidence vote that would bring down his minority Conservative government.
Harper - his job on the line - spent more than 45 minutes at Rideau Hall talking with Michaelle Jean.
The Governor General has already been consulting with constitutional experts about her options, but it's unclear when she will announce her decision.
http://tinyurl.com/6d25fu
Jacks TV speech was the best. Global/National Pest has the video, ironically full of "technical difficulties"
Text of the address:
An economic storm unlike anything seen in a generation is upon us.
And Canada must have a strong and effective government that holds the confidence of Parliament.
Tonight, we do not.
Tonight, far too many Canadians will lie awake not knowing how they'll put food on the table tomorrow, or pay the bills this month.
Seniors will check their pensions and savings and see the true cost of collapsing markets.
And in Canada, this recession has only just begun.
Tonight, only one party stands in the way of government that works for Canadians.
When people look to their federal government, they want to see a sense of leadership.
Mr. Harper has not shown this leadership.
Families about to receive their last paycheque needed hope.
World leaders have acted rapidly and boldly to stimulate their economies.
Economists and business leaders have asked for strong and targeted measures.
In Canada, New Democrats offered constructive input and good ideas.
On election night, I committed to working collaboratively with Mr. Harper in the new minority Parliament.
In the days and weeks following that election, I laid out our effective ideas to stimulate the economy.
I described them in great detail in speeches across the nation.
In the House of Commons.
And in a face to face meeting - at my invitation - with Mr. Harper on November the 12th.
I focused on the needs of working families, of those being thrown out of work or whose pensions were at risk.
Of those working in our key industrial sectors.
And the need for a new energy economy to create new jobs for the 21st century.
Instead of acting on those ideas, or presenting any plan to stimulate the economy, he delivered a partisan plan to sell off public buildings, kill off opposition parties and roll back workers' and women's rights – none of which would create one job or protect one pension.
Stephen Harper refused to act. Now he is trying to turn an economic crisis into a political one.
But Stephen Harper has broken trust with the Canadian people.
And because of that, he has lost the confidence of Parliament.
He's more interested in his job than you and your families' jobs.
That's wrong.
It was Stephen Harper's job to make Parliament work.
But he has refused.
By putting an end to Parliament, buy putting locks on the doors, he is rejecting the democratic choice of 62 per cent of the people.
And every MP will see their democratic right to vote confidence in the government.
Every member of Parliament will be denied their vote.
Every Canadian will be silenced in the people's House.
We will have a Conservative government without legitimacy.
That doesn't have to happen, because this is a remarkable moment in Canadian history.
The opposition parties have acted together with a common goal: to return hope to people and help them go through these very difficult economic times.
For the first time, the majority of parities chosen by the people have put aside their differences. For the good of the people.
For the first time in memory, the majority of the people's representatives set aside their differences for the good of Canada.
This is a time of hope.
Tonight, only one party stands against the welfare of the Canadian people.
On Monday, the two leaders of the proposed coalition sent Her Excellency the Governor General a letter making it clear that the majority of members of Parliament no longer have confidence in this Conservative government.
Nothing we have heard tonight changes that fact.
And tonight, we are announcing that if it pleases Her Excellency, every New Democrat member of Parliament is prepared to individually express their lack of confidence in this government.
A new kind of government, with a new kind of politics, is ready to serve, one that will put the economy and working families first.
Thank you, and good night.
The link thingy doesn't work, and the url is too long but i'm sure babblers are savvy enough to find the video.
can we have a link please to the national post please?
______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!
If the discussion that's going to be had about last night's videos is about who looks more professional, we have some serious problems as a country. And this is pretty much exactly how Harper has done it so far; he has a well-oiled PR machine to make his blathering look like substance. The truth of the matter is that last night Harper gave a weak and unconvincing speech that had a glossy sheen on it, while Dion gave what I thought was a pretty good speech that didn't look as nice. But of course, why would we talk about politics when we can talk about fashion? Thank you, Canadian media.
Harper's speech was completely lame and dleiberately misinformative. And what was with the Grecian formula ? Trying to make him look like Kennedy or something? We've seen pictures of him in the paper for the last 3 days. We're not going to notice that his hair is suddenly dark instead of grey? I actually felt sorry for him after.
The Dion tape could only have been made by a Conservative infiltrator. For some reason they couldn't quite get a proper angle on his body. He looked like a child, looking up in to the camera from his little chair and pleading his case. Dion is not very convincing speaking in English. I wish I could have seen the French. And the tape being late was inexcusable. Were they waiting to hear what Harper said? I think Dion is an intelligent man, he just doesn't have the kind of public charisma that you need for this game. Nor does Harper, though. I'm not convinced any of the other Liberal leaders do either.
Did anyone see Duceppe's speech?
House prorogued until January 26. What a disaster.
Stephen Harper went to Rideau Hall and saw his shadow. That means six more weeks of Conservative government.
Prorogue THIS Harper!
That is so much bullshit.
Dictator Harper
Question.
This is a long time bfore parliament convenes again. Is it likely, or desirable, for the coalition to create a 3 party vetted website for getting Information out during that time?
Tom Flanagan of U of Calgary fame has just said that the GG will have another kick at the can at end of January when the house reconvenes.
Sounds like we have our work cut out for us in overcoming the media's spin on the budget that Flaherty will have to present then.
How many variations are possible on the word "liar"?
I'm going to start with the CBC and work out from there.
This is a six week window for social movements to address the issues of economic and political democracy in Canada, to push the coalition idea, and to fight Harper with a campaign of public education, and mobilization.
One of the great tasks will be to reveal the deceits, lies, and betrayals of the Conservative propaganda machine and babble will be one of the most important places for this to happen.
I'm not convinced that the Liberal and NDP leaders should just wimp out and not impress upon the GG the violation of democratic tradition and the sinister precedent that this decision of hers leads to. A government afraid of the House and of being defeated by a vote in the House is a govenment alien to democracy. Any future government can pull the same shit. Stephen Harper, with the complicity of the GG, has just done permanent harm to Canadian democracy.
Of course, we don't just depend on the GG to defend democracy. Good thing.
unfortunately for you very few people other than those on the radical left will ever read your "revelations".
I can't believe she did that. She doesn't even like him, and she broke
precedent for him. Which in turn will give an easy out for any future
weakling governments. Now she's got coalitionists against her.
What would have compelled her to make that decision??
I agree. This was a complete violation of Canadian parliamentary democracy now and into the future. The precedent set here will cause untold headaches in years and decades to come. Shame on Madame Jean.
Oh, look, one of the cowards is here.
Fuck off. Crawl back into your jackboot lined hole.
Perhaps if we pretend he does not exist? Or failing that, ask for a 7-week cooling off (banning) period for the bastard?
The G.G. gave Harper the rope he wanted. Let us see how long Harper can keep up the pretence he was elected pm, that the House of Common does not need to meet, and that the Bloc is an illegitimate political presence.
Bob Rae is giving a fantastic off-the-cuff speech to Don Newman on the CBC right now. He's completely unequivocal about the fact that Harper is making an attack on democracy, that he wants to divide the country, and that he can not be trusted no matter what he says during the budget speech. Really good job, especially since it seems like it's not a prepared speech.
Keith V, said on CBC this this morning, that both Duceppe and Layton were seriously pissed at Dion over the tape. Apparently Duceppe was heard to have torn a strip off of Dion in the elevator.
If one sets aside the quality, and the ability of the speaker to speak, what was said, was good. However, I am not sure non-political wonks, would be able to listen, considering Dion's tongue darting about outside of his mouth and the poor optics.Though he did get that under control later in the speech.
Out here in BC, there was no lag between Harper's words and Dion's, on the main network news, so I do not think people would know it was late here and in AB. Having said that, Dion needs to not be the front face of the coalition for the next six weeks.
There is no way the Liberals can back off on the coalition, without a backlash, unless a whack of them walk across the floor to the Cons. And even that would produce a backlash amongst the swing voters wanting Harper out at all costs.
Apparently Canadians are going to have to get as sick of Harper as the Americans were of the Rethugs. Well, actually we are in the majority, but we still can't seem to get rid of him.
Interesting to note here Heather Reisman was on Canada AM, doing her Christmas book review and one of the books she chose to review was a book about the hate filled left in Canada.
___________________________________________________________ "watching the tide roll away"
Krago: :D I read that out to the editorial team on our conference call today and they thought it was funny. :)
With an election to follow in March, given this GG's apparent disdain for parliamentary democracy. Which will create quite a dilemma for the Liberals.
The freeloader-general should step down immediately for being completely useless.
With apologies to GNR, but are we seeing a real "Chinese Democracy" -- when the opposition doesn't cower and kowtow to the Imperial Leader, dissolve Parliament and run roughshod over Parliamentary Democracy.
Anyone else find is hilarious that the opposition didn't grow a backbone until the Imperial Leader threatened to take away their public money.
Has the GG not set the stage for a Banana Republic. By shutting down parliment, any government who doesn't wish to face the opposition can now choose to ProRogue, and continue with business as usual without the opposition. Is this the first step towards a Banana Republic?
fleabitten:
Anyone else find is hilarious that the opposition didn't grow a backbone until the Imperial Leader threatened to take away their public money.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The "public money" began to be meted out (as in other democracies) when Chretien engineered an end to "private money" from corporations and unions. No doubt many of his followers now rue that day.
But if we are to defeat the enemy of democracy , we are going to need more intelligent observations than that, oh one short hair.(An old Chinese observation on deficiencies ...including intellectual).
Message
I
don't know what the plans will be for round 2--
However, I think it would be dramatic if the coalition
got together outside the house - perhaps outside on the lawn of the H of C and
1)
discussed what they would do- perhaps even had a public session towards putting
a plan together- even with debate
2)
heard from ordinary Canadians- invited some to speak- even including some who
oppose the coalition - and then answer them
3)
showed they are still together in a manner that can be
photographed
I
think the coalition will need to
1)
emphasize what has just happened and what that means -- meeting outside
parliament does that
2)
show that they are still ready to govern
3)
show that their plans for governing are advancing
4)
show exactly what the government has done and not done that has lead us to this-
more than just the economic stimulus as the Cons will likely address that at
least in name if not function by January.
All
this would be one step more than Libby's proposal that the NDP show its
collective non-confidence
Mr divisive strikes again.....I'm kinda shocked also that she would give in to a coward that is bent on dividing the country. He has said when he gets finished with Canada we won't recognize it. Just like a taliban running from cave to cave the conservative like their right wing buddies aren't no differant. She promotes that?and worse makes it easier for future cowards to run and hide.
Ther have been hints of what these conservatives are all about...like wiretapping and eavesdropping. I wouldn't put it past the neocon coward to bug the GG's mansion and collect dirt to use at their discretion it's what they are all about. Harper probably told her...you see my power and how I control the CTV media and the people and how when I pull a short hair they JUMP..just imagine when I release these tapes.
The GG probably caved in...I wouldn't be surprised and again there has got to be a point where Canadians start thinking and saying to themselves"Are we really as dumb as sticks?"
Spying is one of the dirtiest tricks in the book..so dirty the penalty used to be death by firing squad..that conservatives have proved or are in the process of being indicted for that kind of behaviour makes it likely that they would stoop to anything to hold power-ANYTHING- being a slithering coward is in the right wing dna..talibans,republicans,conservatives all the same.
If they can spy on caucus offices and members they can spy on the gg office. I urge the coalition to invest in anti surveillance equipment...anyways that's what I figure went down.
The coalition needs a spokesperson capacity. The parties also need a ground game, given as this issue will be fought out during the media lull of the winter holidays. The Liberals need to figure out if they are serious about this. There are enough wafflers in that caucus to give Harper just the opportunity he needs to deliver the party's coup de grace. I could see the Liberals making use of the break to sue for peace.
Too many tone deaf people in this forum defended the undefendable. Dion as Leader of the Coalition. Had he any leadership capacity, Harper would have been skewered. Apparently a very well prepared and ready Jack Layton was not allowed Prime Time Air, because all the time was allocated to Dion who failed to appear, and later, failed to appear clearly and most unprofessionally.
People didn't shout out that Dion would be a problem. That he couldn't communicate. That if he was incapable of running a fully funded campaign, it would be reasonable to assume he would be worse now. Apparently much worse based on the quality of the video, the script and the waste of national air time.
The Liberals choose Dion in a caucus meeting. What on earth where they thinking. The basics would be to make it 5 months. Did they forget there is a watching public who already heavily dislike Dion. People on these forums are pretty silent, about DIons failure last night.
Harper scored an E and Dion got an F/incomplete on their National assignments.
The coalition better get their shit together or call it a day.
A lot of people on here, including myself, said Dion was a mistake and that he should be replaced, on an interim basis, by someone like Goodale. But the Liberals in Parliament, most of whom back Iggy, didn't want to jeopardize Iggy's ascenscion in May. So they kept Dion on.
Too bad nobody listened to you. Could be looking at an entirely different mindset within the LPC, even with Harper getting the GGs ear.
Actually I was kind of impressed by Dion's speeches over the last few days. The Harpers need yelling at a lot more often until they are made even more powerless than they pretend to be now.
The Economist wrote a short, and very balanced, article on this:
http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/displayStory.cfm?story_id=12...
I think I mentioned this before but on radio Dion actually didn't come off too bad. I am not saying anything positive about that fiasco, just saying that if you were just listening it was actually okay. Obviously though the medium is the message.
I think it probably comes down to the presumption that the Prime Minister has the confidence of the House until it's actually proven otherwise in a vote.
Yep, Dion saying he would accept the Throne Speech gave Harper the room.
___________________________________________________________ "watching the tide roll away"
I think it probably comes down to the presumption that the Prime Minister has the confidence of the House until it's actually proven otherwise in a vote.
proven otherwise ?? What more does she need if she had to cut short her trip because the opposition was planning a non-confidence vote? Don't tell me she hadn't received the Coalition Agreement sent to her because it's still in the mail.
The breaking news is the coaltion is breaking up.
CP: Liberal resolve to defeat Harper starting to crumble
Within an hour of Prime Minister Stephen Harper winning a two-month reprieve, some Grit MPs were pulling back from the idea of trying to replace the Tory regime with a Liberal-NDP coalition propped up by the Bloc Quebecois.
Toronto MP Jim Karygiannis says the coalition idea is finished and is calling on Stephane Dion to resign the Liberal leadership sooner rather than later.
Dion is scheduled to step aside as Liberal leader once a successor is chosen May 2 but many Liberals remain uneasy about the prospect of ensconcing him in the prime minister's office even temporarily.
Newfoundland MP Scott Simms says all MPs need to give their heads' a collective shake and get back in touch with what their constituents want them to do: fix the faltering economy.
Victoria MP Keith Martin says the two-month suspension of Parliament gives opposition parties a chance to open lines of communication with the government and work out a way to avert another crisis in the new year.
CBC: Support for Harper up
Prime Minister Stephen Harper's Conservatives received 44 per cent of respondents' support, up from the 37.6 per cent support the Tories received in the federal election that returned them to Ottawa with another minority government just seven weeks ago.
The results suggest support for Stéphane Dion's Liberals was down two percentage points from the election, with 24 per cent of respondents' support, while the New Democrats were down almost four percentage points at 14.5 per cent support.
Meanwhile, the Bloc Québécois was at nine per cent and the Greens at eight per cent.
Thats WAY overstated that the coalition is breaking up.
In the first place we're only talking about the Liberals- whether the Liberals crumble.
As I've said before, out in the open cracks from the Liberals were always inevitable. They are too used to airing their dirty laundry.
But the Liberals aren't crumbling until we see Dion, Rae or Iggy waffling. Saying you will listen to Harper is pro forma, not waffling.
And it has no effect beyond political junkies someone like Karagyanis spouting off.
While the coalition isn't breaking up, just staying together is not remotely sufficient. They need to be going on the offensive. And it remains to be seen that this new beast can pull that off.
Ok, the other coalition threads are closed so I am picking this one to continue here. In the other, some voiced real concerns because of the recent polling and said it's time to get out why the gettings good. Well I'm stickin with the coalition notion. So since some think that we should be directed by polling, how about this at Toronto Sun:
Canadians who vote Liberal strongly support the idea of a coalition between the Grits and the New Democratic Party, even when the separatist Bloc Quebecois is thrown into the mix.
An exclusive poll for Sun Media by Leger Marketing shows 78% of identified Liberal voters would have preferred a three-way coalition rather than an election had the Tories been defeated in the House of Commons. Only 13% favoured an election.
....
POWER HUNGRY
The numbers supporting the coalition show Liberal backers are more interested in regaining power than in worrying about who they must ally with to achieve that goal.
....
Fifty-seven percent of NDP supporters also liked the coalition, but one-quarter did not. That suggests, said Scholz, that many would rather have held another election than simply transfer power from one group to another.
Bloc Quebecois backers were happiest with the idea of a coalition: 79% favoured it over an election, whereas only 8% disagreed.
Anyway, it looks like a majority of our coalition supporters and voters like the coalition idea - who would have thought that.
The assumption about an election re: ndp, well that is an assumption and cannot be mistaken for "fact" unless asked directly. They might have other reasons, and I am sure we could come for with a list.
Also, take note that Rae has now taken on the lead for the coalition on the liberal end. We all know that he is a 150% better than Dion. And yes, there is caution here but at least I know that Rae is a fighter, is a good messanger in both languages, and as long as he is willing to share better (and remember that NDP concept) well this coalition might have a fighting chance.
I will be at the rally tomorrow in Toronto as an NDPer and part of the 62% majority
.
______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!
Re Rae:
"Mr. Dion appeared to be open to changing his mind about defeating Mr. Harper's government, saying that a “monumental change” on Mr. Harper's part would alter that.
That phrase angered some Liberals, who began shouting at Mr. Dion, accusing him of not going far enough, according to a caucus insider. That is when Mr. Rae approached the microphone, telling Mr. Dion that even “monumental change” was not acceptable.
Mr. Dion appeared shocked, the insider said."
http://tinyurl.com/5z2tfz
Thats WAY overstated that the coalition is breaking up.
In the first place we're only talking about the Liberals- whether the Liberals crumble.
As I've said before, out in the open cracks from the Liberals were always inevitable. They are too used to airing their dirty laundry.
But the Liberals aren't crumbling until we see Dion, Rae or Iggy waffling. Saying you will listen to Harper is pro forma, not waffling.
And it has no effect beyond political junkies someone like Karagyanis spouting off.
While the coalition isn't breaking up, just staying together is not remotely sufficient. They need to be going on the offensive. And it remains to be seen that this new beast can pull that off.
All that needs to happen for the coalition to collapse is for the Liberals to crumble - if 7 or 8 Liberals vote with the government they'll win the no confidence vote - same thing if 15 Liberals don't show up for the vote.
Iggy hasn't publicly come out against the coalition but he has been relatively quiet in his public support and there are numerous reports that he is cool to the idea. Even if he can't afford to publicly nix it all he needs to do is give his supporters the ok not to vote for it. Lastly, a number of Liberal MPs are talking compromise. If the polls continue to show public hostility to the coalition there's no way the Liberals won't back down. Much of that hostility, I belive, is tied up with Dion's ineptitute so this may change if the Libs dump Dion now.
The Liberal Party is splitting into two sections. The Rae-Chretien-Trudeau section is fully behind the coalition, and the Ignatieff-Martin-Turner section will be against it.
Jim Karygiannis was on TV last night saying that the reason his concerns were not being heard was because his french wasn't good enough. An asshat like that would be much better in the Conservatives anyway - let him go. And where was it Kieth Martin came from again?
Thats WAY overstated that the coalition is breaking up.
In the first place we're only talking about the Liberals- whether the Liberals crumble.
As I've said before, out in the open cracks from the Liberals were always inevitable. They are too used to airing their dirty laundry.
But the Liberals aren't crumbling until we see Dion, Rae or Iggy waffling. Saying you will listen to Harper is pro forma, not waffling.
And it has no effect beyond political junkies someone like Karagyanis spouting off.
While the coalition isn't breaking up, just staying together is not remotely sufficient. They need to be going on the offensive. And it remains to be seen that this new beast can pull that off.
All that needs to happen for the coalition to collapse is for the Liberals to crumble - if 7 or 8 Liberals vote with the government they'll win the no confidence vote - same thing if 15 Liberals don't show up for the vote.
Iggy hasn't publicly come out for the coalition but he has been relatively quiet in his public support and there are numerous reports that he is cool to the idea. Even if he can't afford to publicly nix it all he needs to do is give his supporters the ok not to vote for it. Lastly, a number of Liberal MPs are talking compromise. If the polls continue to show public hostility to the coalition there's no way the Liberals won't back down. Much of that hostility, I belive, is tied up with Dion's ineptitute so this may change if the Libs dump Dion now.
Which won't happen because both Iggy and Rae seemed determined to prop up the feckless Dion. It's almost like Weekend at Bernie's, and probably will be until Dion finally leaves.
You're probably right at this point that there are enough Iggy Liberals who will cave at the end of January.
I think I mentioned this before but on radio Dion actually didn't come off too bad. I am not saying anything positive about that fiasco, just saying that if you were just listening it was actually okay. Obviously though the medium is the message.
Nixon sounded better then Kennedy on radio. Dion asked for the Televised Network Prime Time and failed to deliver.
What do you expect. Dion brought the LPC to their lowest electorate defeat in the history of Canada. The LPC decided they needed to feel the pain again, and see how much farther that incompetent doofus bring them down. The NDP should have pulled out at the thought of Dion leading the coalition. The NDP are paying the price, for joining up with a loser.
interesting, double post deleted with two different words... never seen that before.
Re Rae:
"Mr. Dion appeared to be open to changing his mind about defeating Mr. Harper's government, saying that a “monumental change” on Mr. Harper's part would alter that.
That phrase angered some Liberals, who began shouting at Mr. Dion, accusing him of not going far enough, according to a caucus insider. That is when Mr. Rae approached the microphone, telling Mr. Dion that even “monumental change” was not acceptable.
Mr. Dion appeared shocked, the insider said."
http://tinyurl.com/5z2tfz
The guy is a f432wit.. How on earth did he ever become the leader of a party. He is Frankensteins Monster.
Has any information come out about WHO was responsible for producing the tape of Dion's address, or who was responsible for getting it to the media? Under the circumstances, it it possible he was deliberately sabotaged? Or are the Liberals really that incompetent/disorganized that they can't produce and deliver a video of at least high-school film class calibre?
I guess the problem is Gzowski's more of a radio guy:)
"The grainy video was taped by one of Dion's closest aides, Mick Gzowski, son of late CBC icon Peter Gzowski, The Canadian Press reports. Insiders say it was recorded with a digital camera and an auto-focus button on the camera was broken, stuck in the locked position. As a result, the focus was on a bookcase behind Dion, rather than on the Liberal leader himself, leaving his face slightly fuzzy."
http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/548865
I'm guessing, then, that the delay in delivering the tape to the networks may have been because the Liberals discovered the cock-up, and were trying to figure out what to do. I realize they were under time-pressure, but really that sort of mistake is embarassing and inexcusable. Dion blew his best chance to frame the debate before the GG's decision, obscuring his quite important, powerful, well-developed message with a ridiculously bad delivery.
I suppose this could be overcome if Dion was in a stronger leadership position. But he's not, and now it all comes crumbling down around him. What a shame.
Canadians who vote Liberal strongly support the idea of a coalition between the Grits and the New Democratic Party, even when the separatist Bloc Quebecois is thrown into the mix.
An exclusive poll for Sun Media by Leger Marketing shows 78% of identified Liberal voters would have preferred a three-way coalition rather than an election had the Tories been defeated in the House of Commons. Only 13% favoured an election.
Fifty-seven percent of NDP supporters also liked the coalition, but one-quarter did not. That suggests, said Scholz, that many would rather have held another election than simply transfer power from one group to another.....
Bloc Quebecois backers were happiest with the idea of a coalition: 79% favoured it over an election, whereas only 8% disagreed.
Anyway, it looks like a majority of our coalition supporters and voters like the coalition idea - who would have thought that.
I will be at the rally tomorrow in Toronto as an NDPer and part of the 62% majority.
Exactly, my point in another thread, I do not believe the polls indicating otherwise. I think their selection process wad deliberately skewed. I know I wasn't contacted and I usually am, as one who is consistently willing to participate is hard to find.
We will know more with the turnouts tomorrow eh?!
Please hold up a sign from me jan, stating rural BC is up for a coalition too!
Going to go to the rememberance anniverary tea tomorrow and talk up the coalition amongst the women there.
___________________________________________________________ "watching the tide roll away"
Someone asked about a website. It isn't three-party, but the Orangeroom is still open and could be a useful resource for tech-savvy types to share tools in this situation.
http://orangeroom.ca/
"The Conservative Party is significantly up from the election in the party standings, but at a cost of real increased tensions between Quebec and the rest of the country," he said.
Over all, the Conservative Party remains at the top of the standings with 45-per-cent support if an election were held today. The Liberals come far behind in second place at 24 per cent, with the NDP at 14 per cent.
The Conservatives are even stronger outside of Quebec, getting the support of 53 per cent of respondents in the nine primarily English-speaking provinces.
In Quebec, however, the Conservative Party garners only 18-per-cent support, which is four points lower than its disappointing Oct. 14 election result. The Liberals are holding relatively steady at 23 per cent, while the Bloc is up three points at 41 per cent.
The poll nonetheless shows that the Harper Conservatives chose the most popular course to navigate through the crisis that followed the release of a divisive fiscal update a week ago.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081204.wPOLpoll1205/BNStory/politics/home
I can't believe that the Liberals having technical difficulties is somehow indicative of anything,. In Vancouver this morning the CBC was supposed to broadcast for am remote location for their Annual Food Bank Drive. The feed from the location didn't work so they had to move dozens of people and the whole event back to the studio.
I don't hear the CBC reporters spinning it as positive proof that they are incompetent and can't be trusted?
___________________________________________________________________________________________ A Dark Cloud Hangs Over Our Democracy
Technical problems happen often enough. However here Dion and the Liberals had the misfortune of experiencing them at a very pivotal time, seriously undercutting their (and the Coalition's) message at the precise moment when Canadians were most tuned in and willing to hear it.
I think maybe the bigger problem is that Dion was starting out so far behind that he almost had to hit every pitch out of the park last week to overcome his "loser" image. But on the video, at least, he struck out.
"I can't believe that the Liberals having technical difficulties is somehow indicative of anything"
It just confirms the impression of Dion as totally hapless. And it's not good PR for the leader of the coalition, even on a temporary basis, to be perceived as totally hapless.
Toronto Star: Sources predict early Dion departure
In that case, there is still hope for the Coalition.
I think I mentioned this before but on radio Dion actually didn't come off too bad. I am not saying anything positive about that fiasco, just saying that if you were just listening it was actually okay. Obviously though the medium is the message.
Nixon sounded better then Kennedy on radio. Dion asked for the Televised Network Prime Time and failed to deliver.
I'm not sure I entirely buy that theory. Remember that people in rural areas in 1960 were far less likely than people in urban areas to have televisions. California (barely, despite being Nixon's home state) and Ohio were the only large states to go for Nixon. So Nixon supporters were more likely to listen to the debate on the radio, Kennedy supporters more likely to watch the debate on tv.
I think I mentioned this before but on radio Dion actually didn't come off too bad. I am not saying anything positive about that fiasco, just saying that if you were just listening it was actually okay. Obviously though the medium is the message.
Nixon sounded better then Kennedy on radio. Dion asked for the Televised Network Prime Time and failed to deliver.
I'm not sure I entirely buy that theory. Remember that people in rural areas in 1960 were far less likely than people in urban areas to have televisions. California (barely, despite being Nixon's home state) and Ohio were the only large states to go for Nixon. So Nixon supporters were more likely to listen to the debate on the radio, Kennedy supporters more likely to watch the debate on tv.
---
But people may have read newpaper articles and editorials about their tv presence.
In that case, there is still hope for the Coalition.
Some, but not much. The polls may tell us how much of the problem was Dion and how much fear of the unknown, and outrage/skepticism about the idea of the coalition requiring the support of the Bloc (the Conservatives requiring the support of one opposition party but not necessarily the Bloc). More importantly if Ignatieff was lukewarm to the idea in the first place, as Leader he might disavow himself of the idea entirely.
I don't see him being picked for leader at this point. Rae wouldn't go along with it. I think an interim leader, such as Goodale, is far more likely.
"Over all, the Conservative Party remains at the top of the standings with 45-per-cent support if an election were held today. The Liberals come far behind in second place at 24 per cent, with the NDP at 14 per cent."
I tend to think that whatever gains the Conservatives have enjoyed this week, might peter out over the next few weeks. Much of that support is due to fear mongering and taking advantage of many peoples general ignorance of the nuances of Parliamentary Democracy. (such as it is)
One would think this to have a limited shelf life.
I don't see him being picked for leader at this point. Rae wouldn't go along with it. I think an interim leader, such as Goodale, is far more likely.
Unless they can hold a Leadership convention in mid-January. It's probably too late for them to do that.
I've changed my mind on Goodale. He would be a good alternative given the Western alienation bent the Conservatives are taking on this and how tough he is in front of the camera. It's significant and telling that very few of the really conservative Liberals are cutting a high profile in support of this whole coalition rigamarole.
The Conservatives aren't united either you know. Ten members did not rise to give the PM a unanimous standing ovation, including Stockwell Day.
The Conservatives aren't united either you know. Ten members did not rise to give the PM a unanimous standing ovation, including Stockwell Day.
"Over all, the Conservative Party remains at the top of the standings with 45-per-cent support if an election were held today. The Liberals come far behind in second place at 24 per cent, with the NDP at 14 per cent."
I tend to think that whatever gains the Conservatives have enjoyed this week, might peter out over the next few weeks. Much of that support is due to fear mongering and taking advantage of many peoples general ignorance of the nuances of Parliamentary Democracy. (such as it is)
One would think this to have a limited shelf life.
We'll see.
I don't see him being picked for leader at this point. Rae wouldn't go along with it. I think an interim leader, such as Goodale, is far more likely.
Unless they can hold a Leadership convention in mid-January. It's probably too late for them to do that.
I don't think they need to have a fullblown convention in order to pick an interim leader.
From the Globe
Dion must go in 10 minutes
Most other politicians seem to get this about him now. I don't think I've ever said a kind word for Jack Layton but, this week, he looked statesmanlike and genuinely furious over abandoning desperate people to take a "timeout." Gilles Duceppe, who knows the legal risks for calling someone a liar outside the House, did it anyway. Only Stéphane Dion, who said the PM might undergo a "monumental change," didn't get it. But he gets nothing. "In that format," said a filmmaker about his Wednesday night video, "the only thing you could really do is take off your clothes." If the Liberal Party doesn't find a way to ditch him in the next 10 minutes, it should lose its public funding.
And regarding the coalition
Yesterday morning, a nation stared in the face of political chaos for two hours and saw - a double glass door in Ottawa. No terrorists, no anthrax. But would we be saved from the dreaded coalition?
Yes! By a timeout, the Harper government's term for salvation. And what did it need a timeout from? The possibility of a change of government that is negotiated, constitutional and peaceful.
"We'll see."
Well, it's also possible that as more economic shit hits the fan, as it has today, people will wonder where the hell parliament is. Now, I expect Harper's core supporters will still blame that on Taliban Jack, the FLQ and Dion, but the swing support that doesn't pay a whole lot of attention might not think more than it was Harper who porogued parliament in time of crisis, and left us all in the lurch.
It also gives the Conservative caucus, and back room boys to drift their minds over the fact that it was Harper who snatched a minority government from the jaws of a majority just a few weeks ago, and that he has also put them at the precipice of opposition.
Yeah, we'll see. I do tend to think it more likely that the coalition will fall apart first, due to Liberal Perfidiousness-- Occam's razor cuts to that side in my mind.
But one never knows....
The Liberals can pick anyone they want to be the lead spokesperson - and it may well be Rae. I know that the sense is that he is trying to create a boost to his leadership chances with this but he is probably destined to be clearly an also-ran by Feb 2nd when the memberships are all in. With that in mind, he may be setting the table for Iggy. This is actually smart for them. If the whole enterprise collapses now - it's Dion's fault. If it shows some life but collapses early - it's Rae's fault. If it works out and the Coalition takes over, its PM Iggy.
CTV reported that John Manley has joined the chours urging Dion to step down- as well CTV reported a pofessional moderator will facilitate the Wednesdy Liberal caucus meeting where they wll discuss replacing Dion, and if so, by whom.
Someone should flush Manley and the rest of his fellow reliberals down the Mississippi where they belong
Ratbert:
The poll nonetheless shows that the Harper Conservatives chose the most popular course to navigate through the crisis that followed the release of a divisive fiscal update a week ago.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
And why did it become the most popular course?
Because of the mind-numbing ignorance of a public that has not been confronted with all the facts. Unbalanced war chests. (And, boy, didn't Harper want to make the advertising bedgets REALLY unbalanced, in his "democratic" fashion?
The editorial board of the Globe you quote from don't like what he has done, bert.
But you are on the side of the great unread, eh? Figures .
Ratbert:
The poll nonetheless shows that the Harper Conservatives chose the most popular course to navigate through the crisis that followed the release of a divisive fiscal update a week ago.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
And why did it become the most popular course?
Because of the mind-numbing ignorance of a public that has not been confronted with all the facts. Unbalanced war chests. (And, boy, didn't Harper want to make the advertising bedgets REALLY unbalanced, in his "democratic" fashion?
The editorial board of the Globe you quote from don't like what he has done, bert.
But you are on the side of the great unread, eh? Figures .
Yes, George, me Duncan Cameron, Rick Salutin, Jeffrey Simpson, all the "great unread" that advise caution.
Perhaps an erudite individual such as yourself will have some tolerance for the words of Alexander Pope who cautioned that: "fools rush in where angels fear to tread".
http://www.thespec.com/News/article/477649
[Close]
Ignatieff: Dion could step down by Wednesday
TheSpec.com - News - Ignatieff: Dion could step down by Wednesday
TimeSincePublished("2008-12-05-21:20:43","2008-12-06","Dec. 05, 2008");-->
Les Whittington, Joanna Smith and Richard J. Brennan
OTTAWA
— Liberal MP Michael Ignatieff, a candidate to replace Stéphane Dion,
says the party may decide to select a new leader much sooner than the
scheduled May convention.
"I have been informed that discussions
are ongoing," he told the Toronto Star when asked about expectations
that Dion — the interim leader — might step down imminently.
The
possibility of moving up the leadership contest was raised in
Thursday's closed-door caucus meeting but went unresolved, a source
said. Dion, who became caretaker leader after his party lost the
October election, is under mounting pressure to step down shortly to
strengthen his party in its continuing showdown with Prime Minister
Stephen Harper's Conservatives.
Later, in an interview with
CBC-TV, Ignatieff said Liberals are concerned that the party is in the
middle of a leadership contest at a time of political crisis.
"What
the party is discussing is whether there are ways in which the
leadership race can be accelerated in such a way that we can present
clear alternatives to the country because Mr. Dion, as everybody knows,
has already announced his resignation," Ignatieff said.
But he added that he is not involved in these discussions.
Also running for the leadership are MPs Bob Rae and Dominic LeBlanc.
Today,
a depressed Dion was reportedly hunkered down with his inner circle
pondering his options, but some Liberals expect him to announce his
departure soon, possibly at a Liberal caucus meeting next Wednesday....
=0)document.write(unescape('%3C')+'\!-'+'-')
//-->
Ratbert:
Yes, George, me Duncan Cameron, Rick Salutin, Jeffrey Simpson, all the "great unread" that advise caution.
Perhaps an erudite individual such as yourself will have some tolerance for the words of Alexander Pope who cautioned that: "fools rush in where angels fear to tread".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Put it in context, bert:
"The Conservative Party is significantly up from the election in the party standings, but at a cost of real increased tensions between Quebec and the rest of the country," he said.
Over all, the Conservative Party remains at the top of the standings with 45-per-cent support if an election were held today. The Liberals come far behind in second place at 24 per cent, with the NDP at 14 per cent.
The Conservatives are even stronger outside of Quebec, getting the support of 53 per cent of respondents in the nine primarily English-speaking provinces.
In Quebec, however, the Conservative Party garners only 18-per-cent support, which is four points lower than its disappointing Oct. 14 election result. The Liberals are holding relatively steady at 23 per cent, while the Bloc is up three points at 41 per cent.
The poll nonetheless shows that the Harper Conservatives chose the most popular course to navigate through the crisis that followed the release of a divisive fiscal update a week ago.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Theirs was placed to "advise caution".
Yours was to gloat, making you look just like the great unread in the nation's other dailies. Or are you saying that The Globe and Mail expressed something other than concern at the outcome?
Putting yourself in the category of Simpson, Salutin and Cameron, is playing the political chameleon, bert. Of course, as Shelley observed, "Chameleons feed on light and air."
More air than light in your case, bert.
Sunday Hat:
George Victor wrote:
Because of the mind-numbing ignorance of a public that has not been confronted with all the facts. Unbalanced war chests. (And, boy, didn't Harper want to make the advertising bedgets REALLY unbalanced, in his "democratic" fashion? But you are on the side of the great unread, eh? Figures .
Sunday:
Wow. You know what's ugly? When nominal "progressives" start shitting on the working class for not backing their ideas.I know everyone resents it but Harper has exploited some legitimate concerns. People don't want Stephane Dion to be Prime Minister. People don't want a governing coalition in which a party that wants to end Canadian federation has a de facto veto. Calling people ignorant isn't going to address those concerns. If anything, a snobbish attitude confirms people's worst fears: that this is a takeover by a bunch of elitist assholes who hold most Canadians in contempt.
-----------------------------------------------------------Hold on to your hat, Sunday. You clearly missed "a public that has not been confronted with all the facts."
That's what the neo-con does. Makes use of a conservative media in a dumbing-down of the electorate.
Fortunately, we have not reached the condition of the U.S. electorate as described by Susan Jacoby and Al Gore, and a redneck product, seen in Deer Hunting with Jesus.
But it's all explained by Chomsky on political advertising, where he talks about the war chest of Barack Obama, the biggest ever:
Chomsky:
And notice incidentally on the side that the institutions that run the elections, public relations industry, advertisers, they have a role—their major role is commercial advertising. I mean, selling a candidate is kind of a side rule. In commercial advertising as everybody knows, everybody who has ever looked at a television program, the advertising is not intended to provide information about the product, all right? I don’t have to go on about that. It’s obvious. The point of the advertising is to delude people with the imagery and, you know, tales of a football player, sexy actress, who you know, drives to the moon in a car or something like that. But, that’s certainly not to inform people. In fact, it’s to keep people uninformed.
The goal of advertising is to create uninformed consumers who will make irrational choices. Those of you who suffered through an economics course know that markets are supposed to be based on informed consumers making rational choices. But industry spends hundreds of millions of dollars a year to undermine markets and to ensure, you know, to get uninformed consumers making irrational choices.
And when they turn to selling a candidate they do the same thing. They want uninformed consumers, you know, uninformed voters to make irrational choices based on the success of illusion, slander, and effective body language or whatever else is supposed to be significant. So you undermine democracy pretty much the same way you undermine markets. Well, that’s the nature of an election when it’s run by the business world, and you’d expect it to be like that. There should be no surprise there. And it should also turn out the elected candidate didn’t have any debts. So you can follow Brand Obama can be whatever they decide it to be, not what the population decides that it should be, as in the south, let’s say. I’m going to say on the side, this may be an actual instance of a familiar and unusually vacuous slogan about the clash of civilization. Maybe there really is one, but not the kind that’s usually touted.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------The conservative propagandist, trying to cover his ass. accuses the Chomskys of this world of ELITISM.
And the folks up in the hills, who really aren't into nuanced political language go "yeah, elitist liberals."
Don't you find youself caught up in it, Sunday?
You are doing exactly what the neo-con manuals on mind manipulation aim for. Read Shadia Drury on their thinking. Try not to get suckered.
And Manley, probably with the support of other Bay Street Liberals, dumps on the coalition:
"Mr. Manley dumps cold water on the idea of a coalition with the NDP, arguing the Liberals must instead offer to co-operate with Prime Minister Stephen Harper to cope with the economic crisis, and prepare for an election in case he doesn't.
"Confronted by a political crisis that was not of his making, Mr. Dion became an obstacle to his party, and to the opposition, in dealing with it. His weakness probably fuelled the Conservative hubris that led to this fiasco in the first place,” Mr. Manley writes.
Mr. Manley argues it was “delusional at best” to believe that the public would want the recently defeated Mr. Dion as coalition prime minister.
That coalition is now shaky at best, as Liberals differ over whether to stay in, and if they do, whether to defeat Mr. Harper's government on a January budget, or use the coalition as a deterrent to prevent the Conservatives from going too far."
http://tinyurl.com/6g5m42
Maybe this crisis presents an opportunity for the NDP and the Liberal left, such as it is, to form a new party and leave the establishment Liberals to fend for themselves.
From the Globe
Dion must go in 10 minutes
Most other politicians seem to get this about him now. I don't think I've ever said a kind word for Jack Layton but, this week, he looked statesmanlike and genuinely furious over abandoning desperate people to take a "timeout." Gilles Duceppe, who knows the legal risks for calling someone a liar outside the House, did it anyway. Only Stéphane Dion, who said the PM might undergo a "monumental change," didn't get it. But he gets nothing. "In that format," said a filmmaker about his Wednesday night video, "the only thing you could really do is take off your clothes." If the Liberal Party doesn't find a way to ditch him in the next 10 minutes, it should lose its public funding.
And regarding the coalition
Yesterday morning, a nation stared in the face of political chaos for two hours and saw - a double glass door in Ottawa. No terrorists, no anthrax. But would we be saved from the dreaded coalition?
Yes! By a timeout, the Harper government's term for salvation. And what did it need a timeout from? The possibility of a change of government that is negotiated, constitutional and peaceful.
To be fair, Rick Salutin is almost always at odds with the rest of the columnists from the Globe and Mail, and is far left of almost anyone else writing for mainstream Canadian media. I don't think he's at all indicative of the general feeling amongst the Globe editorial staff.
The question of polling accuracy is interesting. I was quite surprised to find that a majority supported the conservatives. I could only chalk it up to monumental ignorance on the part of the polled. It is distressing to still find "coup d'etat" comments a week into this; seems it's too valuable as a propaganda point to abandon.
As for the prorogue, while I think Jean would have been quite justified in refusing to grant it, her decision was probably a good one. The most important reason for this is because the coalition (grandiose letters not withstanding) has not demonstrated it is a stable one. If she had refused the PMs request and a Dion-led coalition taken power only to disintegrate a few weeks or months later, she would have been in a very difficult position. I think it is valid to see if the coalition can hold it together for six weeks. If not, why would they be able to function as a government?
Less importantly, it also provides some opportunity for the Canadian populace to be educated that there is nothing illegitimate about this. Granted, given my first paragraph, this is a tall order. But hope springs eternal I suppose.
Finally, there are unity concerns to think of here. The rhetoric-- both towards the Quebecois and towards "the West" (as if it were a monolithic block) has been appalling. It's unfortunate that after so long, we still haven't got this part of it figured out. It's one thing to read about attacks on Quebec from 90 years ago (i.e. Conscription, to pick one example), but to see a sitting PM indulge is something else again. One would hope the GG saw that a time out on all sides (especially given Conservative rhetoric) might cool tempers, and defuse the attacks by one part of the country on another.
It is not the unelected G-G's right to decide if a given coaltion or party or group can mantain a stable government. Only our elected representatives can decide that. If a majority of them say that they want to give it a try, it is not for the G-G nor the ex-PM to overrule them.
That majority should now be creating written law that explicitly gives the power to prorogue or disolve parliament to a simple majority vote in the House of Commons. Likewise, they should seriously consider having the House directly elect a PM from their own members, rather then falling back on unwritten tradition.
Having a minority government replaced with another even smaller minority government, that has 29 fewer seats, makes no sense what-so-ever. It is a NDP/Liberal minority coalition. Layton, Dion and Duceppe have said it repeatedly, that the Bloc will not be part of this goverment. So no matter how you want to argue it, without the Bloc in the this coalition government, it is another, but smaller, minority government than we have now.
Manley and Ignatieff are on track to save and rebuild the party. Hopefully Rae does not succeed in taking the party down the path of self-destruction. Like all rushed and not thought out ideas, they tend to fail. The only losers in this coalition is the Liberals.
Why Rae and Dion, don't want to rebuild and wait until next summer or fall for an election makes no sense. The party is broke and in disarray. Being married to the NDP for 30 months makes absolutely no sense at all. By embrassing the left, the liberals would only open the centre, traditionally held by them, for the conservatives to fill.
Nothing about this NDP lead plan makes sense from a Liberal Party stand point.
Having a minority government replaced with another even smaller minority government, that has 29 fewer seats, makes no sense what-so-ever. It is a NDP/Liberal minority coalition. Layton, Dion and Duceppe have said it repeatedly, that the Bloc will not be part of this goverment. So no matter how you want to argue it, without the Bloc in the this coalition government, it is another, but smaller, minority government than we have now.
So, you have replaced your asinine political commentary by insipid arithmetic. Your posts are becoming more comical. I laughed out loud at this paragraph. Thanks - it's a chilly winter evening - I needed that.
Would that be the Conservative Party?
Why are the media not fixing their beady eyes on the dissention in the Conservative party. They never criticise them for their bizzare behaviour. Only the opposition paprties get the treatment.
Manley, Ignatieff, and Rae for that matter, are on track to run their party into oblivion, and the sooner the better.
The mainstream media is owned by listed stock market corporations that donate large of money to the conservative cause. Editorial policy is directed by the owners, not by the people you see reporting the 'news' on television.
Manley, Ignatieff, and Rae for that matter, are on track to run their party into oblivion, and the sooner the better.
I agree Rae is, I only hope that more like Manley and Ignatieff can save it, for the sake of the country.
jack:
The mainstream media is owned by listed stock market corporations that donate large of money to the conservative cause. Editorial policy is directed by the owners, not by the people you see reporting the 'news' on television.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
They donate a vast amount of lineage to the conservative cause, but the law now says they can't donate money.
But that is the CPC secret. Like the conservatives in the U.S., these people have been able to bring the IT world to bear on membership and fundraising and have beaten all others (lib and NDP) in raising millions at an average of $97 per head. This is why Harper tried to eliminate public financing ($1.75 per head of votes cast) because he knew he could kick ass. (The Green Party is no slouch in this dept. either).
WE have to become as committed and as good at incorporating information technology.
Can the party of Joe Volpe and Alphonse Gagliano rebrand itself? If hopes are pinned on the technically Canadian Iggy Thumbscrews, Benedict Rae or a rabid Tory like John Manley, I do not think so.
One of the few silver linings in all of this.
I fear the future of the Liberal party is out of focus.
"Editorial policy is directed by the owners" I have noticed this in the local times colonist. columinists write about the jackboot in the crotch for the ladys (equal pay) while the editor argues from the pulpit for harper suspending parliament. I see editoral comment across the country as the big corperations giving back to harper. (It is like money under the table in other places). Instead of money, they give harper free advertizing on their editorial pages as their thankyou to him for their tax breaks.
jack:
The mainstream media is owned by listed stock market corporations that donate large of money to the conservative cause. Editorial policy is directed by the owners, not by the people you see reporting the 'news' on television.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
They donate a vast amount of lineage to the conservative cause, but the law now says they can't donate money.
But that is the CPC secret. Like the conservatives in the U.S., these people have been able to bring the IT world to bear on membership and fundraising and have beaten all others (lib and NDP) in raising millions at an average of $97 per head. This is why Harper tried to eliminate public financing ($1.75 per head of votes cast) because he knew he could kick ass. (The Green Party is no slouch in this dept. either).
WE have to become as committed and as good at incorporating information technology.
@ Unionist,
Conservatives have 143 seats
Liberals 77 and NDP 37 for a total of 114. That is 29 fewer seats. The Bloc has agreed not vote against the NDP/Liberal coalition for 18 months. The "Bloc will not be part of the coalition government" as quoted by Chris Charlton, NDP and all the coalition leaders. Without the Bloc we have a NDP/Liberal government with 29 fewer seats, seems
simple to me.
I vote either Liberal or Conservative, because country comes before party. Like most voters, I have a few questions.
-First, why the need for this coalition prior to the budget being released?
-Why would Dion suddenly become PM? Did he not lose the last election? Did polls not show him as being the least likely person able to lead the country by about 80% of those polled?
-Why should the NDP/Liberal coalition with fewer elected seats than the current elected government, now govern?
-Also, because I live in Windsor, this economic slow down and crisis with the auto manufacturers, my neighbours, co-workers and schools in this area are being directly effected. We need help as soon as possible. So I have to question;
-Why does Jack Layton want to take down the government on the Speech from the Throne, Jan 26th, prior to the budget? Why does he want to deny Canadians a chance to hear the budget, only to further delay the help we need here in Windsor for at least another 3-4 months after January 26th?
-How can we have a stable coalition government that is held together on the whim of the sovereigntist? It seems too fragile and unstable for a time when we desperately need stability.
-How can we have stability, if the leading party in this coalition will be going through a leadership race?
-Now that it appears that Dion will no longer lead the party as of Wednesday, who will be the interim leader? Again a question of stability.
-The Liberals and NDP have an agreement for 30 months, what does this mean for the Liberals? What do they stand for now? Moving to the left they are leaving the centre open for the Conservatives to take. What is the Liberal direction now? Can they break from the 30 month commitment? The Liberals only had to wait until next summer/fall for an election and they could have had a real opportunity to be elected as the new government. It does not matter who the government is, what will happen will. Rae proved this in Ontario. They can only soften the blow, but no matter what they do, it will always never have been enough, again Rae proved this as well. There has always been a new government elected after an economic downturn, so why the rush?
For this undecided voter to decide, it will take more than just ridicule to help me decide. Lots of questions, few answers. I am not one to jump on any bandwagon without seeing where it is headed and why and it looks like the majority of voters feel the same way and are willing to let this wagon roll on by.
I think one has to make some connections here. We've seen how one ultra right wing paper out west shut down, the National Vanity Press Post is shrinking, CTV is laying off, and Quebecor, owners of the Sun and other quasi newspapers are constantly "restructuring".
Never before have these sphincters been so vulnerable to boycotts of those that advertise in them.
It is not the unelected G-G's right to decide if a given coaltion or party or group can mantain a stable government. Only our elected representatives can decide that. If a majority of them say that they want to give it a try, it is not for the G-G nor the ex-PM to overrule them.
That majority should now be creating written law that explicitly gives the power to prorogue or disolve parliament to a simple majority vote in the House of Commons. Likewise, they should seriously consider having the House directly elect a PM from their own members, rather then falling back on unwritten tradition.
Actually it is her right, but except in rare circumstances (and we can argue over whether or not this qualifies), she is unlikely to exercise that right by not following the advice of the Prime Minister. Electing a Prime Minister the same way the Speaker is elected would be interesting, but I'm not sure how many laws and constitutional amendments would have to be passed to get there. Incidentally that's how they elect the Government Leader in Nunavut and the Northwest Territories, but they don't have party politics.
As you said elsewhere though, this is a loophole. I agree, 100% it should be closed though.
Actually, I think it is.
Having a minority government replaced with another even smaller minority government, that has 29 fewer seats, makes no sense what-so-ever.
It has happened before provincially, and a federal government has also retained power with fewer seats than the largest opposition party. It makes sense if the smaller party or coalition has the confidence of the House and the larger party doesn't.
"The Liberals only had to wait until next summer/fall for an election and they could have had a real opportunity to be elected as the new government. "
Thing is, you are ignoring the fact that a convention costs money, and so does an election. Even without the elimination of the subsidy to political parties, the Liberal party is close to financial oblivion.
And, fundraising for the Liberals is no longer as easy as taking money from a baby, as Joe Volpe might say.
I think the Liberals know they have a tiger by the tail, now. If they crumple and let Harper have his way, he'll be back with a vengence-- meaning goodbye Liberal Party.
Which is why I was against the coalition in the first place. Every cloud has a silver lining.
Ok that was strange, the site was going through an update, and my latest post ended up above #124.
@Policywonk, I would feel better if
1. the voters asked for a coalition
2. the confidence was not as fragile and fickle as it is with the Bloc.
@ Tommy_Pane, I don't think the liberals have the tiger by the tail. They have lost a lot more ground. It will be very hard for them to do any fund raising now, as we no longer know what they stand for. If anybody has anybody by the tail, it is the NDP who has the Liberals by the tail. In my opinion, the greatest threat to the Liberal Party is the NDP, not the conservatives.
Again thanks for your input.
Harper is hated because of his neoliberal policies. But the bitter truth is, there is nothing to choose between the Liberals and the Tories in terms of neoliberalism. One way of measuring this is in the support given by the federal government to the provinces. In the Canadian system, it is the provinces that deliver the bulk of Health, Education and Welfare. But given the much greater taxation powers of the central state, they are very dependent on transfer payments from the central state to finance these “social wage” activities. One of the key aspects of neoliberalism is launching an assault on this social wage. The chart on this page shows the record here for both the Liberals and the Tories [chart omitted from this excerpt] ....
This division of labour between the Tories and the Liberals has long defined Canadian politics. Their policies are virtually indistinguishable – Liberals playing the soft cop as a counterpoint to the Tories’ hard cop....
Under Liberal Paul Martin’s watch between 2003 and 2006, military spending increased more than $1 billion, in real terms, every year. Under Harper, those increases actually slowed for two years, before returning to Martin era levels in 2007-08. There is nothing to choose between the Tories and the Liberals in terms of Canadian militarism.
The “Canada First” increase in Canada’s militarism, builds upon a generation of moves by both Tories and Liberals to move away from the peacekeeping moment. In 1991 under the Tories, Canada was a full participant in the first Gulf War. Canada’s 1993 intervention in Somalia looked to the Somalis more like occupation than peacekeeping.[7] In 1999, under the Liberals, Canada was one of the principal contributors to NATO’s bombing campaign against Yugoslavia. And from 2001 to the present, it has been a central component of the war in Afghanistan. It was not the Tories who sent Canada into this overseas adventure – it was Jean Chrétien, and John Manley, and Paul Martin, and John McCallum, and Stéphane Dion – the very Liberals we are now told are an alternative to the Tories.
The Harper Tories are a threat to peace, a threat to social programs, a threat to the interests of working people in Canada. But the record of the Liberal Party over a generation should make us soberly assess the chances of a coalition – a coalition they dominate – being any better.
Source
If you are reading this, you have just proved once again how annoying signatures/tag lines are. Support their abolition.
[Source
Paul Martin is nowhere near this coalition as far as I can tell. And yes the Liberals are just as much the fiscal Frankensteins that Tories are. And if I can be fair to either of the old line Bay Street parties, they were both taken in by the second-hand neoliberal ideology emanating from the U.S. The Russians were taken in by it, and so were the Slavs and Mexicans and Nicaraguans and South Africans etc. General Pinochet was the first to be handed neoliberal poison. And he turned his back on neoliberal ideology in 1985 and actually used New Deal socialist methods to jumpstart a near death Chilean economy.
TINA advocates: Maggie and Major and Reagan and Mulroney-Chretien to Harper are out of the picture today. And it is a new day. The future is not written in stone by Bay Street bond salesman. Or at least, not if the 62% majority has anything to say about it.
Personlly I am getting sick and tired of the 'but people didn't vote for the coalition' bullshit. It is utter nonsense.
We do not elect governments in Canada. We elect representatives. They decide who our governments are. If the majority of them decide, for whatever reason, that they do not have confidence in the current governent, they can decide to place that confidence in another government. There is absolutely nothing undemocratic about kicking out a government that has shown itself to be fiscally irresponsible, deaf to the market signals of trouble, unconcerned about the massive job losses in Canada's manufacturing and resource sectors and just plain divisive and nasty. There is no need to wait for more lies from them. Their record speaks for itself.
There are lots of good reasons to support and oppose a coalition. But it would be nice if some of the arguments but forward were actually fact-based rather than the clap trap of posters like Tommy Canuck and his ilk.
Bookish Agrarian, I agree, all this talk about coalition this and that is nonsense. The problem is Harper, not the coalition.
He suspended parliament to avoid a non convidence vote, that is about as low as one can get as an elected official. He is toast as far as leading the government is concerned in my opinion. If he wants to come back he has to either form a better coalition or wait and win the next election, which in my opinion is for the majority of our elected officials to decide as to when that will be. How else can one be democratic about this.
As noted by others above - the Liberals are broke. The were able to fill their coffers because of their connection to power - without it they have no "draw" to the $. The funding thing in the economic statement spooked them but only because they know that their say in the wilderness could be for a very long time. The last time they were defeated, 1984, it took them a decade to get back into power and they were only able to do it because the Conservative coalition under Mulroney exploded into three parts. That isn't happening this time.
If you think Iggy is truly and fundamentally opposed to the coalition, Tommy, you are on glue. He's not going to lead the push because any Liberal leader has too much going against him already to start off with a failed gambit hanging around his neck but make no mistake he has the most to gain from the coalition succeeding so he will not sabotage it - and will keep his supporters in line.
Think about it for a second from his perspective. On Feb 2nd the Liberals have thier cut-off on membership sales. Effectively the game is over at that point. He's the presumptive front-runner so on Feb 2nd he could be the defacto leader of the party. Would he rather be the Leader of the Opposition, heading a broke party with a flush Tory Government ready to do the full-throated swift-boat treatment on him. The job they did on Dion has convinced them that the strategy can work (even in civil Canada) and while Iggy's English is better than Dion's, he is just as professorial. They will have him carved up into little pieces before you can say Dukakis. They will call an election at a time of their choosing - say the week after the Liberals select him as leader. They will claim that the chaos of this Parliament and the economic crisis demands that Canadians choose who to give a full majority mandate to. Don't think they'll do it that fast - watch them. Chretien did it to Day and Harper is far more ruthless than Chretien.
Conversely, Rae does his sales pitch over the next few weeks under the cover of being the "coalition" Liberal. The team holds together if for no other reason than the alternative - being Harper's dog's chew toy until he can justify pulling the ripcord on this Parliament and getting what he clearly wants - an clear majority. If the coalition holds together on January 26th and votes down the budget then the other shoe drops in the Liberal caucus. Rae and Leblanc rally around their champion Ignatieff and state that they and the Liberal caucus are convinced that Canadians were more opposed to Dion as PM than the idea of working with the NDP, providing a solid stimulus package and Parliamentary peace until 2011. Claim that Canadians want their Parliament to get to work not to waste $300 million on the third election in as many years when that money should be going to protect devestated seniors pensions not polling stations. Rae will have served up the PMO for his former friend and will have the pick of any job he wants. Leblanc will be the govenment's Atlantic rep - more than he would have gotten had the full race run its course and come May PM Iggy will be at a Vancouver Liberal love-in instead of getting to the wake before the patient has died.
Manley is the one most afraid of the coalition because his plan for power involved Iggy getting creamed in a summer election with such a pasting that would have the Liberals longing for Dion's "successful" results from October. Iggy resigns in due course or is pushed and then Manley gets the actual time as leader, facing a Harper majority (thus no need to call another election for years) to truly rebuild a party that hasn't really rebuilt since Chretien (or perhaps Trudeau). Politics in the Liberal Party is simple - win or you are out. Liberal leaders don't get a second chance unless nobody is convinced that there is a hope of regaining power. The reason that nobody is stepping up for the job now other than Rae, Leblanc and Iggy is that it is seen as a poisoned chalice.
The money may be the least of their problems but its big enough. Tories are funded by the rich and true believers - in power or out, they have cash but in power they get a bonus. NDPers are also funded by true believers - union networks help but mostly its you, me and what's her name who's always knitting something for the silent auction. Liberals don't have true believers like the Tories and the NDP. Liberals truly believe they should be in government and when they aren't they are like vampires out in the sun - no, Twilight fans they do not glisten like diamonds - they burn to a crisp because there is nothing to protect or sustain them (gratuitous Twilight reference for my wife's benefit who must throw up her hands at the amount of time I am spending on rabble right now).
Here is what I predict is going to happen.
In a funny way, I think that the fact that the instant polls show people rallying to the Conservatives will actually be the source of their own undoing. We know that Harper and his crowd are intensely partisan and never like to apologize or give up even a milimeter. If they think they can get away with playing hardball - they will.
I predict that now the Tories are going to start to think that between the polls and the reports of Liberal dissension - they have put the genie back in the bottle. Instead of giving the Liberals a face saving way to break up the coalition by making significant concessions in the budget - I think they will go back to trying to humiliate them. The Tories will make no real concessions at all and dare the Liberals to vote them down.
I think that it will be like a replay of what happened last week and the Tories will once again force the opposition to unite against them and the coalition will take power.
Here is what I predict is going to happen.
In a funny way, I think that the fact that the instant polls show people rallying to the Conservatives will actually be the source of their own undoing. We know that Harper and his crowd are intensely partisan and never like to apologize or give up even a milimeter. If they think they can get away with playing hardball - they will.
I predict that now the Tories are going to start to think that between the polls and the reports of Liberal dissension - they have put the genie back in the bottle. Instead of giving the Liberals a face saving way to break up the coalition by making significant concessions in the budget - I think they will go back to trying to humiliate them. The Tories will make no real concessions at all and dare the Liberals to vote them down.
I think that it will be like a replay of what happened last week and the Tories will once again force the opposition to unite against them and the coalition will take power.
If so, they may be in for a rude awakening on two fronts. They may still face a vote of non-confidence and, as I suggest on the GG thread, they may not get the election they think should be theirs.
The play for time by Harper has two aspects - see if you can get the coalition to crack and, barring that, take them to the polls and get the majority you want anyway. The problem is that I am increasingly convinced that the GG only gave him exactly what he wanted for exactly the reason he said he wanted it. He said he wanted a time-out, a cooling-off period to let passions to settle and reasonable minds think the consequences of this through. I disagree with the decision but I have (in my legal carear) learned to respect that there may be more to a decision that I dislike than first meets the eye.
A time-out is just that, we have moved "out" of the flow of time. The clock is stopped and when we last left our heroes (que Batman TV music) the House was poised to vote non-confidence against the Tories only 16 days into the 40th Parliament. On Jan 27th, we will still be only 16 days into the 40th Parliament. Why should the GG treat a vote of non-confidence in this government on Jan 27th any differently that she would have on Dec 8th? Let's say that she does agree that while the Parliamentary calendar was frozen the real world has moved on. We went from a potential non-confidence vote 2 months after an election to one 3 & 1/2 months after one. This changes things how? If the coalition continues to exist and says that it is still prepared to make this Parliament work and is confident that it can meet the House - how can she refuse? She has Parliamentary precident, the King-Byng example, to guide her (something that, save for Charles I's example) was lacking when Harper came to her asking to prorogue to avoid a confidence vote. We look at the King-Byng affair as a "bad" precident because the politics of it resulting in King getting more than he would have gotten had his original request been granted but had the Meghan Government held, it might have given Harper pause to play the bully he has over these last few years and Martin before him.
a double post from the department of repetition department.
oops multiple post.
And if I can be fair to either of the old line Bay Street parties, they were both taken in by the second-hand neoliberal ideology emanating from the U.S. The Russians were taken in by it, and so were the Slavs and Mexicans and Nicaraguans and South Africans etc.
I wouldn't say that Nicaraguans were "taken in" by neoliberal ideology so much as it was forced on them by the World Bank.
CTV reported that LeBlanc has droped out of the Liberal Leaership rce and the Liberals will pick have a new leader by the end of Janaury.
"Liberals don't have true believers like the Tories and the NDP. "
I more or less subscribe to this view point, although it could be said that Liberal "true believers" were those that expected the Liberal party to advance the cause of their personal bank accounts, courtesy of the taxpayer.
All that hinges on the Liberals having access to the treasury, which they haven't had for a while now. Which is why I expect most of the Liberal "true believers" if you will, to migrate to the Conservatives over time.
Hi I am Stephen Harper you might remember me from such papers I wrote for the N.C.C. such as " Our Benign Dictatorship"
Where I advocated for a coalition government between the Reform party and Progressive Conservative and the Bloc Quebecois back in 1997 . In that same paper I pointed out that Canada was ruled by coalition governments up until the first world war. I also pointed out that coalition governments are a healthy part of any democracy, heck Israel has a had many coalition governmnets and I would never say that their government was illegitimate would I ?
So I Stephen Harper say coalition government are completely legal they are legitamate and have a long tradition in Parlimentery traditions around the world and the are good for Canada in that it saves the country from a single party state.
Personlly I am getting sick and tired of the 'but people didn't vote for the coalition' bullshit. It is utter nonsense.
We do not elect governments in Canada. We elect representatives. They decide who our governments are. If the majority of them decide, for whatever reason, that they do not have confidence in the current governent, they can decide to place that confidence in another government. There is absolutely nothing undemocratic about kicking out a government that has shown itself to be fiscally irresponsible, deaf to the market signals of trouble, unconcerned about the massive job losses in Canada's manufacturing and resource sectors and just plain divisive and nasty. There is no need to wait for more lies from them. Their record speaks for itself.
There are lots of good reasons to support and oppose a coalition. But it would be nice if some of the arguments but forward were actually fact-based rather than the clap trap of posters like Tommy Canuck and his ilk.
We did not vote for a coalition, but there is no way we can vote for a coalition, even in a PR system necessarily. To the extent that people vote for parties rather than for individual candidates, we do vote for governments. But the parliament we select, and the GG, have a constitutional role in determining who forms a government.
I believe that Dion did say during the election campaign that he would not form a coalition with the NDP. As events seem to be playing out, that will not have been a lie, and he will just have tried. Of course at one point in the campaign, a Liberal minority was almost within the realm of possibility. What Dion's replacement will do is anyone's guess.
Canadians may not have specifically voted for the coalition - but the vast majority of us also did not vote to have a Stephen Harper absolute dictatorship for four years!!!
62% worth. And 78 percent of registered voters did not vote for the Harpers.
If the coalition of Reform Party retreads, rightleaning Liberals and Mike Harris castaways can't find a coalition to a coalesce with, then it's high noon time in Dodge for those guys
"The Liberal party has come up with a proposal to speed up its leadership contest and find a replacement for Stephane Dion next month - in time for a crucial budget vote that could plunge the country into an election or see the Harper Conservatives replaced by a coalition government.
The proposal, which the Liberal party executive was poised to consider by conference call late Sunday, would give every party member a vote by a combination of phone and online ballots. The idea was being vigorously promoted by leadership contender Bob Rae.
However, frontrunner Michael Ignatieff's camp was arguing that the proposal would violate the party's constitution and that the May 2 vote to choose Dion's successor should go ahead as planned.
Liberals close to Dion expect him to resign at a Liberal caucus meeting scheduled for Wednesday.
If he does so, Steven MacKinnon, Ignatieff's national campaign director, said the party constitution provides only one method for choosing an interim leader - a decision by the national executive, in consultation with the Liberal parliamentary caucus.
"The party's process for selecting a leader is prescribed by the constitution and, while we are interested in any suggestions the party may have for how to shorten that process, it is clear the constitution must be respected," MacKinnon said in an interview.
. . . .
Insiders in rival camps said Ignatieff and his supporters were lobbying hard to have Ignatieff chosen as interim leader by a vote of Liberal MPs and senators at the caucus meeting Wednesday - with the decision to be ratified formally at the May convention.
MacKinnon denied that but other sources said Ignatieff was personally calling MPs to urge that caucus settle the matter."
http://tinyurl.com/652lab
"New Brunswick MP Dominic LeBlanc is expected to announce Monday that he will drop out of the Liberal leadership race to replace Stéphane Dion, leaving only two contenders, CBC News has learned.
LeBlanc is expected to throw his support behind front-runner Michael Ignatieff, the CBC's Susan Bonner reported, citing sources."
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/12/07/liberals-leblanc.html
If Iggy gets his way, and takes over now, the coalition is probably dead.
I think that much better than the economist article is the comment on their story by canuck86 below. As far as I am concerned this guy really knows his stuff. Brian
The Economist wrote a short, and very balanced, article on this:
http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/displayStory.cfm?story_id=12...
canuck86 wrote:
December 07, 2008 03:49
Let me explain how the Canadian political system works. The coalition is not a political 'coup' and the Canadian public did NOT elect PM Stephen Harper and the Conservative Federal Government. In Canada WE ELECT MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT. Each MP represents a constituency in Canada, in total there are 308, and the MPs (all 308) then decide whoforms the Government. We certainly do NOT elect Prime Ministers and Governments.
The PM has traditionally been the leader of the party with the most MPs in Parliament after an election, usually they receive the majority of seats. The Governor General (Michaelle Jean) then asks that the leader of this majority forms the Government.
In cases where no majority is won, traditionally the GG will askthe leader of the party with the most seats to form the Government (termed 'minority governments').
Legally and constitutionally, the leader that SHOULD form government is one who has the the confidence of the MAJORITY of thehouse, REGARDLESS OF PARTY AFFILIATIONS. What we saw in October 2008 was the election of aminority government. This government has now lost the confidence of the majority of the House of Commons. Therefore the current government no longer hasthe mandate to govern.
In Canada, certain legislation passed through the House of Commons are measures of confidence. Confidence in the House of Commons means that the majority the MPs (over 154, that is more than 50%) believe that the current government (Stephen Harper and the Conservatives) can form a functional executive branch of the Canadian political system. The Budget is one such piece of legislation, and the Opposition and their allies (more than 50% of the House of Commons) have decided that they will vote it down. The Government of Canada therefore does NOT have the confidence of the House of Commons.
This is a very democratic principle. If the government in questioncannot convince the majority of the House of Commons that it can function as Government of Canada, it therefore has to ask the GG todissolve parliament and either 1) call an election, or 2) ask the leaderwhich commands the confidence of the majority (regardless of party affiliations) to form the government.
There is no 'political crisis', there is no 'constitutional back-doorpolitics'. This is simply an exercise of a very basic democratic principleas outlined in the Constitution of Canada. HE/SHE WHO DOES NOT COMMAND THE CONFIDENCE OF THE MAJORITY OF MPs IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS, AND THEREFORE THE MAJORITY OF CANADIANS, SHALL NOT FORM THE GOVERNMENT OF CANADA.
Stephen Harper's contention that the coalition does not have the right to form the Government is not only wrong, but shows a deep misunderstanding of his own political system. MPs affiliated with ANY party elected to the House have equal voting power. These MPs have been duly elected by the Canadian public as Harper himself has. His rhetoric against the views of the these MPs shows a totally lack of respect for those who have been DEMOCRATICALLY mandated by the public, just as Harper himself and every other Member of Parliament, to represent them in the House of Commons. His campaign of misinformation about the very democratic process that exists in Canada is alarming to me. And on this alone he should be condemned from being the leader of the Canadian government. He either does not understand how the political system works or simply does not care he perpuates a common misconception. I do not know which is worse.
ANY VIEWS OTHERWISE SHOWS A DEEP LACK OF UNDERSTANDING OF THE CANADIAN POLITICAL SYSTEM.
CTV.ca News Staff
Liberal Leader Stephane Dion is expected to resign this week and Liberal MP Dominic LeBlanc has dropped out of the leadership race and will support rival Michael Ignatieff, CTV News has learned.
"Michael Ignatieff pretty much has this leadership race wrapped up," CTV's Chief Parliamentary Correspondent Craig Oliver told CTV Newsnet Sunday evening.Closing for length