"The opposition has rediscovered that it has the majority"

104 posts / 0 new
Last post
robbie_dee
"The opposition has rediscovered that it has the majority"

Brian Topp: [url=http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081130.WTopp30/BNSt... opposition has rediscovered that it has the majority."[/url]

 

Because the [url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/canadian-politics/viable-alternative-governm... thread[/url] has grown too long and will likely be closed soon.

Unionist

This just in:

Layton, Duceppe, and Dion had a vote on a coalition agreement.

 

 

 

Dion abstained.

 

 

 

Just kidding.

 

 

I think.

 

robbie_dee

Hah!

Unionist

How about Mulcair for Prime Minister? Seriously. I'd even give him back to the Liberal Party if that's what it took to get a coalition going. Well, maybe not, but anyway.

bush is gone ha...

yep, some one out there is printing up coalition trading cards. 

 

Quote:
I'm not suggesting it is worth anything, just that CTV was reporting it.  In other words Harper Co. is starting to shit bricks.

Well I hope that they all end up with the Don Valley Brick Works in each pantleg. 

 

---------------------------------------------------------

why is it that polling booths look like cattle chutes?

madmax

Unionist wrote:

This just in:

Layton, Duceppe, and Dion had a vote on a coalition agreement.

 

 

 

Dion abstained.

 

 

 

Just kidding.

 

 

I think.

 

Pulling the fishhook out of my mouth. Thanks, that's how much confidence I have in Dion.. I Believed you.

Unionist

BA, I agree that backing off on the right to strike is another indication of craven desperation on Harper's part. However, it's not clear from the media reports whether he is backing down on the more important part - namely, legislating 2.3/1.5/1.5/1.5 as a compensation ceiling. If not, then the right to strike becomes little more than symbolic.

Bookish Agrarian

It appears though that discriminating agaisnt women is still an important Conservative 'value'

ocsi

Unionist wrote:
How about Mulcair for Prime Minister? Seriously. I'd even give him back to the Liberal Party if that's what it took to get a coalition going. Well, maybe not, but anyway.

I think Mulcair could be a great Prime Minister.  But for now, it's important that he be given as high a profile as possible. 

 

Unionist

Remind (or anyone), can you explain to me what exactly Flaherty proposed on pay equity? I could probably look it up, but babble is as good as resource as any...

The reason I'm asking (besides the fact that I don't know) is that the PSAC tentative agreement includes a one-time payment for everyone of $4000 under the heading of "pay equity", which I don't understand either.

NorthReport

A massive rally is being planned at the Orpheum Theatre on Thursday to support the coalition, however that very same nite there is a Labour Appreciation Nite Dinner scheduled for the Hilton in Metrotown.  Perhaps the rally could be moved over to Burnaby so that we are all on the same page.

Loretta

Jim Flaherty's quote on pay equity:

"Another issue we intend to address is the litigious, adversarial, and complaints-based approach to pay equity. Since the mid-1980s, Canadian taxpayers have paid out over $4 billion in pay equity settlements.

 

"These settlements were the result of pay equity complaints to the Canadian Human Rights Commission. These complaints were filed after agreements on public sector wages had already been reached through collective bargaining.

 

"New complaints continue to be filed, sometimes for the same groups that have already received past pay equity settlements. These represent large potential future costs to taxpayers.

 

"This costly and litigious regime of "double pay equity" has been in place for too long. We are introducing legislation to make pay equity an integral part of collective bargaining."

 

From: http://www.globaltv.com/globaltv/national/story.html?id=1001234

Interested Observer Interested Observer's picture

Quoting from the previous thread due to it being closed:

KenS wrote:

It occurs to me that in all these threads over the last few days, I
can't remember seeing a comment from any of the long time Green
partisans. [With the possible exception of WCG, whose comments do not
always have something to do with the GP].

It also occurs to this might be because the coalition
being considered will shrink the political space for the Green Party. 
Especially for May, considering all her proclivities and past
pronouncements?

??

All the greens that I know have already started facebook groups and such urging people to show support for this potential coalition because they fully understand the importance of this move. This opportunity is absolutely the best thing ever to happen to Canada. I don't know if you've noticed but greens naturally love coalitions.Wink

 

I think its quite the opposite actually, this move will open the space for other parties, including the Green Party. Especially with the potential for PR to be implemented. Seriously, almost all greens are absolutely ecstatic about this, including May!

 

Stockholm wrote:

I suspect that we hear nothing from the so-called Greens because they
are 100% irrelevant to what is going on. In order to have any role
whatsoever to play in this drama - you have to have representation in
parliament - and the Greens don't - so who cares?

on top of that it must be driving EMay nuts to see the NDP - the
party she hates with all her heart - playing such a major role in
dumping the Tories. She is like a child with her nose pressed against
the glass window of a candy shop watching all the other parties having
fun - while all she can do is watch. In this case "green" means green
with ENVY.

They are irrelevant to the politicking going on but not for their support of this move. The greens represent over 1 million Canadians who support this move regardless of what crap the conservatives fling at it!

Emay loves what is happenning right now, as she understands how important it is to remove harper. She does not care that she is not directly involved whatsoever. She will support this move with all the political and media connections she has. Her main goal might be achieved, regardless of her direct involvement! She will remain as leader to fight another day.

Your nonsense about her hating the ndp is just that, nonsense!

Disclosure: I am a supporter of the Greens. Some may consider me to be partisan, some don't.

V. Jara

Comments on things that already seem like old news by now:

1) I don't like Scott Reid's article. It shows why he was such a liability. Anyone that writes "kill him dead" about another human being in a political column destined to a wide readership has a screw loose. This is not "Lord of the Flies," this is a democratic society. That being said, what I took from Reid's article is that the Liberals are still cowards and need moronic chanting to convince them to get on side and take the risk of a coalition. As for his general point that Harper is mean and dangerous, well duh! It's about time the Liberals bought their own spin.

2) I disagree with the mostly Liberal pundits that say the NDP has the most to lose from quitting the coalition. The NDP has done most of what I wanted them to do this far. They have: a) tried to stop the fiscal update b) considered even taking extreme measures like forming a coalition to ensure it c) understood what's at stake and pressed hard on the issues. That being said, I nor any of the NDP membership I assume, wants the party to sell out or even sell itself cheap. For me there are no absolutes regarding success. The party needs to try it's hardest to achieve ideal results, and falling short, make sure there is a better-than-the-starting-point alternative.

3) The NDP is behind the ball right now, both in terms of communicating with the public (they better come out with a bang on Monday) and fundraising. The party should not forget that there is still the risk of an election- whether real or not- floating in the air. The party needs to fundraise and step up communications in readiness for that potential threat. This should not just be a moment for mobilizing support for the coalition, but also support for the party. The Conservatives get this, why can't the NDP?

Loretta

From the CTV website:

"The New Democrats and Bloc Quebecois had a secret plan to form a coalition party well before the opposition's uproar over the government's fiscal update, CTV News has learned.

"NDP Leader Jack Layton was in talks with Bloc Leader Gilles Duceppe for a "considerable period of time," according to CTV's Ottawa Bureau Chief Robert Fife.

"Layton held a telephone-conference meeting with his caucus Saturday morning that was recorded by a Conservative member. According to the audio tape, Layton appears to take credit for the possibility of a coalition." (emphasis mine)

 

Full article at http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20081130/conservative_budget_081130/20081130?hub=TopStories

bush is gone ha...

Why do I feel a hockey riot coming on? 

Nothing wrong with the green's support we need it all.

[Edit] maybe I'll add to that, if the Liberals need the NDP, and the Bloc and vice versa.  Well remember that outside battles are being waged for the popular support, enter the green reserves. 

Stockholm

so what?

Loretta

The Layton Bloc thing is indeed "so what". The Conservative member recording a conference call isn't, in my opinion.

Stockholm

I mean to me it isn't exactly "news" that the NDP and BQ might be meeting behind the scenes and trying to cooperate etc... it would be bigger news if this was NOT the case. Harper certainly went through plenty of bottles of wine with Duceppe in 2005 when they plotting to bring down Paul Martin together!

I'd like to know more about Conservative members bugging NDP conference calls etc...

V. Jara

The Greens should have 1 strategic objective: keep the public financing. After that, the other issues do not really affect them. In fact, staying quiet on topics other than the environment or democratic reform- as they crop up in this process- is probably a good move, because nobody knows how this process will turn out. The coalition building effort could turn out to be an unmitigated failure or a brilliant success. The Greens would look foolish have opined the wrong way, too early. That being said, some press coverage is better than no press coverage.

 

As for why Harper did this to himself. I think it's quite simple. I think he thought there were enough thorns in the fiscal update to tangle up the opposition parties. He never thought that they could or would coordinate. The Liberals have no leader, no spine or cares, and don't want an election. The NDP doesn't really mind if the Liberals and BQ get screwed over out of a lack of public financing. The BQ doesn't care if the federal government gets hacked back and there are tax cuts. In short, not enough incentive to stand up and oppose him. In the end, Harper was probably counting on enough Liberals to fold for the Liberal party just to choose to abstain- as they did for exiting Kyoto, giving the CIC minister dictatorial powers, the last budget, etc. etc. etc. No one ever bought the talk about the Liberals planning to "stand up" to Harper this time. Especially after Dion said he would let the Throne Speech pass. In fact, I bet it was after the throne speech collapse of any Liberal "resistance" that Harper decided to throw in the political financing poison pill.

Loretta

Stockholm wrote:

I mean to me it isn't exactly "news" that the NDP and BQ might be meeting behind the scenes and trying to cooperate etc... it would be bigger news if this was NOT the case. Harper certainly went through plenty of bottles of wine with Duceppe in 2005 when they plotting to bring down Paul Martin together!

I'd like to know more about Conservative members bugging NDP conference calls etc...

 

I agree completely.

bush is gone ha...

Quote:
I'd like to know more about Conservative members bugging NDP conference calls etc...
 

now we know where the increase in the CSIS budget went lol. 

---------------------------------------------------------

why is it that polling booths look like cattle chutes?

Bookish Agrarian

Stockholm wrote:

I mean to me it isn't exactly "news" that the NDP and BQ might be meeting behind the scenes and trying to cooperate etc... it would be bigger news if this was NOT the case. Harper certainly went through plenty of bottles of wine with Duceppe in 2005 when they plotting to bring down Paul Martin together!

I'd like to know more about Conservative members bugging NDP conference calls etc...

 

Some questions

Just exactly how did the Conservatives find out about a private phone conferenece?

How did the Conservatives get into the call?

How did they have the technology set up to record the call and where is the recording to verify this claim?

Did the Conservatives use the offices of government to intervene themselves into this call?

I hate to get all tinfoil hat but there is something very, very fishy about this.

V. Jara

Stockholm wrote:

I mean to me it isn't exactly "news" that the NDP and BQ might be meeting behind the scenes and trying to cooperate etc

It'd be funny if when the media ask Layton what he meant by that on the phone conference he days, "If you really want to know, the first time this came up was in 2005, when the Conservatives were considering replacing the Liberals over the sponsorship scandal."

 

Stockholm wrote:

I'd like to know more about Conservative members bugging NDP conference calls etc...

Has Gurmant Grewal returned Smile oh please make it so!

Webgear

I think the so-what it is important becuase did party members agree to thier leaders forming a three way coalition? I did not recall a vote/motion at the last party convention about forming a coalition?

What is a Conservative member doing in a room full of oposition members during a conference call between the NDP and Bloc? Talk about a lack of security and situational awareness, and we want these any people in charge of the country (I am including all parties).

 

What a disgrace.

 

 

 

Unionist

Loretta wrote:

"This costly and litigious regime of "double pay equity" has been in place for too long. We are introducing legislation to make pay equity an integral part of collective bargaining."

 

Thanks, Loretta. Still confusing. Pay equity is definitely negotiable right now, although classification issues are not negotiable in the federal public service. The only thing I can understand is that perhaps he intends to remove pay equity issues from the jurisdiction of the CHRC, and I can't see him doing that without doing major violence to its power to deal with gender-based discrimination in general. That would be a major attack indeed against women's rights.

Anyway, I'd rather not wait to find out the details. Throw the bastards out!

Interested Observer Interested Observer's picture

Good on Layton to have already layed the groundwork for this deal. It probably wouldn't have moved so quickly without it.

That a conservative member taped it does not surprise me as that is how politics really happens behind the scenes. Quite dirty really.

Bookish Agrarian

Webgear wrote:

I think the so-what it is important becuase did party members agree to thier leaders forming a three way coalition? I did not recall a vote/motion at the last party convention about forming a coalition?

What is a Conservative member doing in a room full of oposition members during a conference call between the NDP and Bloc? Talk about a lack of security and situational awareness, and we want these any people in charge of the country (I am including all parties).

 

What a disgrace.

 

 

 

 

I think you are confusing a few things.  This was not a Bloc-NDP meeting, but an NDP caucus call according to CTV.  It also appears that the Conservatives broke in somehow, not that no one noticed a Conservative sitting amongst them.

On the larger issue.  In a minority parliament I expect leaders to work in the best interests of my nation.  Harper has shown that is not his goal, so if others are willing to do so - then go to'er I say.

janfromthebruce

The conservatives appear deviant at bugging phone calls - as I remember Steven Taylor of conblogs having recorded the lib platform call before the platform was released.

Anyway, I'm glad Jack and Gilles are talking and working at coalition politics. Good for them.

______________________________________________________________________________________
Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

Interested Observer Interested Observer's picture

V. Jara wrote:

The Greens should have 1 strategic objective: keep the public financing. After that, the other issues do not really affect them. In fact, staying quiet on topics other than the environment or democratic reform- as they crop up in this process- is probably a good move, because nobody knows how this process will turn out. The coalition building effort could turn out to be an unmitigated failure or a brilliant success. The Greens would look foolish have opined the wrong way, too early. That being said, some press coverage is better than no press coverage.

 

Greens want a progressive coalition just as much as the rest of us, if not more so. Strategically this is incredibly important for their continued existance and prosperity, possibly more so than the financing issue, although that is now basically dealt with anyway.

janfromthebruce

I also wanted to say that Topp did well in the interview with Rad.... of the
Globe. Way to go Brian.

______________________________________________________________________________________
Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

kylebailey260

In previous thread, Frustrated Mess wrote: 

 

*************************************** 

Stockholm wrote:

it must be driving EMay nuts to see the NDP - the party she hates
with all her heart - playing such a major role in dumping the Tories.
She is like a child with her nose pressed against the glass window of a
candy shop watching all the other parties having fun - while all she
can do is watch. In this case "green" means green with ENVY.

 

You don't read anything you haven't wrote yourself, do you? No
wonder political discourse in this country borders on the infantile.

*****************************************************

(random rumbling....I hate that the thread quoting gets disjointed)

 

Frustrated Mess, Stockholm actually has lots of interesting good stuff to say, and knows quite a bit of political history, that I, as a youngster appreciate.

 

Of course, everything he says about the Green Party is hate-erific, but once you get used to it, it can actually become a resource for anybody who is interested in Canada's Greens and social democrats get togther. Just look at how ridiculous the things Stockholm says are...and you'll easily see the opposite pat-way, where hate and vitriol have no place.

 

For example, in the above quote, Stockholm claims EMAY hates the NDP, which is certianly not the case. The fact is that Elizabeth May got pissed at Jack for not returning calls re: jury-rigging FPTP to give both the NDP and Greens better chances of picking off con seats.

 

Yeah sure, they have both acted childish about it...but it certainly doesn't mean that EMAY hates the NDP any more than Jack hates the Greens.

 

In fact,  Stockholm has, as he often does, provided the seed of his own rebuttal, by referencing "the party she hates
with all her heart." Of course, that party is in fact the Cons, not the NDP, and is why I see my progressive friends from both the Greens and the NDP hoping madly for a coalition gov't.

 

You see...Stockhom is one stop shopping- take what he says about the Greens/NDP, realize how it is ovbiously false, and you start walking down the path of NDP/Green cooperation. :) :) :)

Webgear

Bookish Agrarian 

I could be confusing a few things. This is only an initial news release, I should have waited for more detailed facts.

 

I will re-read the original article again however there is nothing to indicate the conservative member broken into the meeting. I hope this detail gets investigated by the media in greater detail however since the media in this country is about as professional as a bunch of nursery school kids at playtime, I am not hoping for much.

 

However the focus of my recent posts still stands, all our elected members are not doing a very good job at running this country.

Stockholm

I shouldn't have mentioned the so-called greens at all. This whole story is limited to parties with parliamentary representation - so they are completely irrelavent - unless a PM Dion plans to fill one of the vacant senate seats with Elizabeth May and give her the one and only thing she has always wanted.

Cueball Cueball's picture

A coalition will almost certainly be the first step on the road for an amalgamation of the NDP and Liberals. This is probably a good thing, since they are ideologically so similar.

Some people have been suggesting that the opposition should just collapse the government, and not form a coalition to replace it. This is a position put forward by some Marxists. This is not right, imo: the correct response is who cares? Really, the Liberal/NDP axis is very unlikely to be able to achieve much other than preventing these regressive measures. What they will do as a coalition is hard to discern. Probably not much of anything.

I really don't have a position on it.

With a partner like the Bloc, the hold on power of the coalition, and its ability to do anything serious is greatly in doubt, and we will be looking at a caretaker government for the next little while. Any serious moves to centralize or strengthen the Federal government will meet with stiff opposition from the Bloc, and so its hard to say what kind of effective restructuring the government will be able to do.

Collapse within a year or two is very likely, therefore.

I would question, from an electoral standpoint, if being in government at this point in time is even worthwhile. The NDP and the Liberals as a coalition are going to take it on the chin for what is coming down the pipe, and in the long run it might be best just to let the Tories take the blows coming from the upcoming recession.

An early collapse, combined with a serious economic decline, could spell a Tory majority in a short period of time. This threat, combined with ideological compatability of the NDP and Liberals, in the context of a working coalition, suggests that a future amalgamation of Canada's two centerist parties is almost a dead certainty, either that or political oblivion for one or the other.

If Jack Layton is ever going to be Prime Minister, it will be at the head of such unified political organization.

Tommy_Paine

 

If I could put my tin foil hat on for a moment, I find it odd that the government would have included such "hot button" issues-- the right to strike,  attack on pay equity,  and the unabashed attempt to economically ruin the Liberal party ( see, there's always a silver lining)  and not expect a backlash of tremendous proportions. 

Now, I am in the habit of giving opponents too much credit, but is Harper and co setting us up?  Do they want the Liberals and NDP to carry the ball into this economic disaster?

The panic in the Conservative Party at the notion of losing power seems to indicate they aren't that savy, that is is more in fact due to an underestimation of opposition-- read Liberal-- resolve.   Most likely, because of Liberal dissaray, and the Fabian tactics employed by Dion in the last Parliament,  they felt they could govern as if they had a majority, and we saw the true face of the Conservatives revealed.

Further, we know that while Harper has been a master at controlling the party loonies over the years, he himself is prone to errors, as witnessed by the way he lost the chance of a majority in the recent election.

So, I think Harper and Jimmy "I only kick beggars when they're down" Flaherty miscalculated.

But it may turn out to be a fortuitous miscalculation, for them.

 

Interested Observer Interested Observer's picture

Nicely put kylebailey260!

Stockholm does have a lot of good commentary on politics that I find myself often agreeing with also, greens excluded though. Wink

Cueball Cueball's picture

Tommy_Paine wrote:

Now, I am in the habit of giving opponents too much credit, but is Harper and co setting us up?  Do they want the Liberals and NDP to carry the ball into this economic disaster?

Exactly. Or perhaps, they don't care one way or the other. "We will rule ideologically, as if we have a majority" or you can carry the can, and then we can "rule ideologically, with a majority."

Then the decision for the NDP/Liberal coalition is simple. Unification, or seriously putting PR into place. Would the Bloc go for the latter? If they do not, then unification of the two Anglo-centerist parties is almost a certainty.

Interested Observer Interested Observer's picture

Cueball wrote:

Then the decision for the NDP/Liberal coalition is simple. Unification, or seriously putting PR into place. Would the Bloc go for the latter? If they do not, then unification of the two Anglo-centerist parties is almost a certainty.

I am almost certain they will. Although it will deminish their caucus somewhat their potential influence on government will remain.

kylebailey260

Interested Observer wrote:

All the greens that I know have already started facebook groups and such urging people to show support for this potential coalition because they fully understand the importance of this move. This opportunity is absolutely the best thing ever to happen to Canada. I don't know if you've noticed but greens naturally love coalitions.Wink

 

I second Interested Observer on this one. All my friends who are interested in the NDP doing well, the Green Party doing well, PR reform, and changing our governance system to one of coalitions are estatic- and what is really significant- the above four groups share way more intersecting space than mutually exclusive space.

 As someone pointed out about popular vote and 'green reserves' - EMAY's blog entry makes clear that the Green Party will try and spin the fact that their vote total is a little less than the Bloq's (an accord partner), and about one fifth of the current governing screwups as evidence that Canadians who voted for the Green Party should be considered too (as evidence that Canadians didn't vote for a con government)

From Emay's blog: 

Quote:

Add the Liberal vote (3,629,990) to the NDP vote (2,517,075) and our
Green vote (940,747) you get 7,077,812 votes. That is over 7 million
votes for parties other than Conservatives without even counting the
Bloc Quebecois vote of over one million. So all in all, over 8.4
million Canadians did not vote for the Conservatives. In percentages
it's 37.6% versus 61.2%. Clearly the democratic choice is for a
coalition government representing the vast majority of Canadians.

 (compared to the 5 million who voted for Harper)

 

Obviously, the Greens have no role to play in the HoC "who can win a confidence motion" game - but I think they could certainly help win the battle for popular support. 

 

As others have pointed out, the Greens certainly do have a vested interest in helping show Canadians that coalitions are viable. If the Green party is able to go to potential green supporters  in the next election in a situation where a governing coalition is dissolved and likely to be replaced by another governing coalition- I think voters will be much more likely to vote green. Something along the lines of "Add some real green to a red-orange coalition- because although they've been stealing our platform, they haven't been doing it well enough" goes over a lot better when you don't have progressives running scared of SH forming a minority or majority gov.

kylebailey260

Tommy_Paine wrote:

 

If I could put my tin foil hat on for a moment, I find it odd that the government would have included such "hot button" issues-- the right to strike, attack on pay equity, and the unabashed attempt to economically ruin the Liberal party ( see, there's always a silver lining) and not expect a backlash of tremendous proportions.

 I think SH mistook Canada 2008 for Ontario circa late 90s.

bush is gone ha...

I am just wondering about what is going on with after ctv was spoon fed that scoop about a "backroom deal"  I can hear the spin now "socialists are plotting a coup it's a crisis". this parliament is so going to be hating each other.  

Many twists and turns, I'd laugh if Harper pulls out an "enabling act"

 

I hope the coalition holds, I can see Liberals getting cold feet.  Or more determined after the spy incident. 

a bizarre day.Surprised 

---------------------------------------------------------

why is it that polling booths look like cattle chutes?

The Bish

Cueball wrote:

Really, the Liberal/NDP axis is very unlikely to be able to achieve much other than preventing these regressive measures. What they will do as a coalition is hard to discern. Probably not much of anything.

It is hard to discern because the whole thing has come together in a short span of time and they haven't publically announced anything yet.  But aside from simply preventing the most heinous moves that Flaherty proposed, I can think of at least a few things a Liberal/NDP/Bloc government will probably do:

1. Serious climate change reform.  Canada is way, way behind on this, and with Barack Obama making it an important element of his policy heading into office next year, there really isn't anyone else holding out on the issue anymore.  The NDP, Liberals, and Bloc are all united on the need to do something serious about climate change.  I suspect a cap-and-trade system will be implemented before the end of 2009.

2. Heavy infrastructure spending.  Canada's infrastructure is in terrible shape (also the case for many other countries), and spending on infrastructure is I think widely accepted as being the most prudent way to address the economic crisis.  I think it's a stop-gap solution, but it's still necessary.

3. They'll probably take on a couple of opponents that are widely reviled by the Canadian public - the telecos and the banks - over issues like service fees.  I think all three parties are united on this issue.

4. Consumer-friendly copyright reform is probably pretty likely.  This is an issue on which the Bloc and NDP are united, and from what I gather, a good portion of the Liberal caucus as well.

5. The war in Afghanistan is likely to end, though I'm a bit wary about this as Michael Ignatieff's pro-bombing-everyone philosophy could prove difficult.  At any rate, I think that given how strongly the NDP and Bloc are against the war, how strongly the public is against the war, and the estimated savings (up to $7 billion over the next couple years), there would be a very strong push to end the war.  And it's about time.

Those are a few of the first things that came to mind, it shouldn't by hard to come up with others if you put your mind to it.

kylebailey260

Kady O'Malley has some of the transcript of the conference call....which was mailed from the PM's office to the press gallery????Am I reading her posting right????

George Victor

quote"

Really, the Liberal/NDP axis is very unlikely to be able to achieve much other than preventing these regressive measures. What they will do as a coalition is hard to discern. Probably not much of anything.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 How about beginning to create a green economy?  You know, one to replace the present one which is bringing us environmental armageddon?

Hardly think that those central issues in their own election platforms could be ignored, eh?

Interested Observer Interested Observer's picture

I agree that the opposition parties share a common agenda and clearly have lots to work with policy-wise.

Brian White

I guess tricky stevie is doing his nixon impersonation.

They will call it icegate down in yankie doodle land.

Shock horror, the ndp is talking to the block.

How the hel else are you going to get a coalition going if you are not talking to your proposed partners? 

kylebailey260

Robert Fife, CTV's ottawa dude, is reporting that a conservative got the call-in number for the caucus conference call, and recorded it.

 

I never realized that Robert Fife was an unofficial spokesperson for the Tories disguised as a CTV journalist...but then again, I always suspected CTV news was full of his kind. 

Bookish Agrarian

Webgear wrote:
Bookish Agrarian 

I could be confusing a few things. This is only an initial news release, I should have waited for more detailed facts.

 

I will re-read the original article again however there is nothing to indicate the conservative member broken into the meeting. I hope this detail gets investigated by the media in greater detail however since the media in this country is about as professional as a bunch of nursery school kids at playtime, I am not hoping for much.

 

However the focus of my recent posts still stands, all our elected members are not doing a very good job at running this country.

 

If you think the House of Commons is bad, try visiting a provincial legislature.  Good grief my visit to Queens Park recently was worse than when i took my kids to a play centre.  Appalling isn't even close.

Interested Observer Interested Observer's picture

Ahh.. yes. Canadians automatically view parties as having mature discussions on the governing of Canada as automatically slimey and nefarious in nature. Isn't that why they sent consecutive minority parliaments so that people would work together? Undecided

Interested Observer Interested Observer's picture

kylebailey260 wrote:

Robert Fife, CTV's ottawa dude, is reporting that a conservative got the call-in number for the caucus conference call, and recorded it.

 

I never realized that Robert Fife was an unofficial spokesperson for the Tories disguised as a CTV journalist...but then again, I always suspected CTV news was full of his kind. 

Yeah, up until this I thought he had some decency also.

Pages

Topic locked