TODAY: Nathan Cullen answers your questions on his candidacy for NDP Leader
Skeena-Bulkley Valley MP and NDP Leadership candidate Nathan Cullen will be dropping by babble today, February 16, at 2:30 PST/5:30 EST to answer your questions on his quest for the keys to Stornoway.
Potential interview questions have already been submitted here and here, and a list of those submissions has been assembled by the editorial staff of rabble.ca. Each selected question will be posed by a moderator (i.e. me) and then Nathan will offer his response. Once Nathan has responded to the initial question, babblers are welcome to offer comments and follow-up questions in this thread; although, Nathan may not be able to get to them all.
For an idea of how this session will run, see our previous discussion with Libby Davies last fall.
Unlike other threads on babble, abusive posts will be deleted immediately. In the interest of tidyness and readability, superfluous or digressive posts may be removed as well.
Come back at 2:30 PST/5:30 EST to read what Nathan has to say!
Just a quick reminder that Nathan Cullen will be here in a little over twenty minutes to answer your questions!
Hi Everyone! I'm here with Nathan Cullen and he's ready to answer your questions. So please join me in welcoming Nathan to babble!
Thanks for the welcome Catchfire. I'm keen to try out new politics in real time! Let the conversation begin
[withdrawn] :)
Hi Stephen, thanks for your question, but please read the terms of engagement at the top of the page. Hopefully we can get to your question later!
Our first question is about your much-discussed cooperation plan with other progressive parties as a strategy to defeat the Conservatives.
Hey I want to know more about your stance on Marijuana decriminalization because they're all sorts of levels this can be done. Are you talking about the way the Liberals did it a while back or more like Holland because both are classified as decriminalization?
I believe the incredibly strong showing on May 2nd allows us to lead a conversation that is most urgent right now. The Harpe gouvernement is fundamentally altering our nation and our ability to have a voice in our country's future. The crisis of climate change, growing inequality and the dominance of oil industry interests demands that we rise to the crisis and be more generous in our politics. The progressive majority of Canadians deserve a progressive government and we will bring in voting reform once government to ensure that this is the future.
If Canada were to become a republic (as you suggest as a possibility), how would we choose the head of state? What powers would the Head of State have over the PM and parliament?
Hi everyone -- thanks for your interest, but we have a protocol outlined in the opening post. Our first question is on the board, and open for discussion. To keep the flow going, please wait with your questions until the end. Nathan may not respond otherwise (although I think NDP_MEMBER managed to squeek one in!
Thanks for joining us Nathan.
Hey NDP_Member - thanks for the question. Answer in two parts. One is that for the next 3.5 years our efforts are to hold back the worst of the worst of the "war on drugs" crusade from the government. I believe that that war has been an unmitigated failure and when you're in a hole you shouldn't keep digging.
Decriminilization seems to be the place we can get to but first things first - a progressive government who's willing to have a real conversation
Nathan, we have one follow-up question to your co-operation plan. Many babblers have been wondering if your co-operation plan includes the Bloc Québecios. Considering the vast support the NDP recieved in Quebec this past May, why not include progressives from the BQ in your plan?
I hope this is related enough to constitute a follow-up. If you do not win leadership, will you continue advocating for this plan within the party? And if you are not leader, what else do you think can be your greatest contributions to beating Harper in 2015?
Hi Nathan. First, thanks for joining us. We spoke a while back (podcast from China) on developing a green strategy and not putting the economy at risk. You made some excellent points about the fault of this binary: it's either the environment or the economy. I wonder though how it is possible, in your opinion, to engage with a trading partner like China when all they really want are our natural resources? How do we go about dealing with China without sacrificing our principles (environment and human rights concerns included). Thank you and good luck.
Ryan
To the leftyinvestor - yes, absolutely I will continue to advocate for a strategy that I see as worthy of conversation and potential unifier for the country. With Avaaz and Leadnow advocating it has gained some real strength. In terms of the Bloc, that while I acknowledge they have progressive policies we are focused on Conservative seats and want to build on the progressive federalist vote from the last campaign. Talk of the Bloc brings us into another conversation that isn't helpful
Ok because just trying to clarify what is meant be decrimnalization? because its a term many politicians just throw around when there all tons of different levels of decriminalization.
Thanks for those responses, Nathan.
Time is flying so we should move to our second question, which concerns the NDP's rural policies:
ETA. Again, please re-read the opening post! We have a series of questions on themes that have already been submitted by babblers. We will try to get to all of your questions later, time permitting.
Nathan, we have one follow-up question to your co-operation plan. Many babblers have been wondering if your co-operation plan includes the Bloc Québecios. Considering the vast support the NDP recieved in Quebec this past May, why not include progressives from the BQ in your plan?
Good follow-up Catchfire!
This is a great question and fundamental both to the future success of New Democrats and Canadians more broadly. The heart of the answer lies in policies that drive the creation of a value-added economy. The rural community relies on this kind of economy to be healthy and strong. Respect for the differences that exist in rural Canada is what all of our policies (from First Nations rights and title to food security) is at the foundation of my work.
Hey Ryan1812 - thanks for the question and as we've just come out of Mr Harper's "Pandas for Pipelines" trip it's a critical question for both countries. Trade can (but not always) enhance cultural exchange and the improvement of rights on both sides. But this hasn't been at the heart of our trade policy for more than a generation. We can talk trade, human rights and the environment all at the same time ... but only if we create a government who cares about those things. We will.
-
Can't say I agree. Bloc voters were very helpful to the NDP winning Conservative seats in Québec and they will be essential to defeating the remaining Conservatives in the province. The NDP has already united most of the Liberal + Green support outside of Liberal-held seats. We need the Bloc to help us dislodge the remaining Conservatives.
Do you have a plan to improve the internet quality/cost in rural locations, because It's quite a joke in some locations...to get a half decent connection I have to pay over $140 a month to companies like Rogers and it is still subpar (drops, etc).
Nathan, we also have a secondary question on the same topic:
I've met folks on this campaign paying as much as $300 per month for bad high-speed
We had a rural infrastructure fund meant for this exact purpose. Some of the money was badly (read - to friends of the past government) spent and we must focus on areas of need. We have some of the highest rates in the world and this particularly hurts those out of the city
By the way, if the page seems slow, it's only because we have a huge spike in traffic right now. So please be patient.
I think we need both. Our gains in western Canada in the last election were decidedly not strong. Mr. Harper now takes the west for granted and we have incredible opportunity for growth here. In southern rural communities the issues are much aligned to what's happening in all parts of rural Canada. With a strong value-added manufacturing strategy and revamped trade strategy we can speak to all Canadians about creating the kind of progressive economy that will pay for the services that we need.
On to our third question, then, since we're getting a bit behind schedule:
Our very own Unionist has a series of three questions on your policy toward Quebec sovereignty:
2. Do you support the amendment of the Canada Labour Code to incorporate the same anti-scab provisions as the Québec code?
3. Do you support the application of Bill 101 to enterprises under federal jurisdiction in Québec?
Thanks for the answer Mr.Cullen.
I think we need both. Our gains in western Canada in the last election were decidedly not strong. Mr. Harper now takes the west for granted and we have incredible opportunity for growth here. In southern rural communities the issues are much aligned to what's happening in all parts of rural Canada. With a strong value-added manufacturing strategy and revamped trade strategy we can speak to all Canadians about creating the kind of progressive economy that will pay for the services that we need.
I like this answer. How can we show Canadians that "Mr. Harper now takes the west for granted" and how do we make that message resonate in rural ridings that the NDP does not currently hold?
Mr Cullen I have been told that you have had a surpising lack of people in Kitimat willing to sign up as members in the NDP in order to vote for you in the leadership campaign. I believe the community has turned to the right and is now a conservative stronghold community and will not look favorably on you in the future if you faill in your bid to become leader. What are your thoughts on this.
2. Do you support the amendment of the Canada Labour Code to incorporate the same anti-scab provisions as the Québec code?
3. Do you support the application of Bill 101 to enterprises under federal jurisdiction in Québec?
New Democrat policy, and one I support, is expressed in the Sherbrooke is that 50% plus 1 is a majority and according to the Supreme Court that is a mandate to negotiate. We have moved several private members bills in parliament to enable Quebecers to receive services from businesses under federal jurisdiction in French. I support these efforts.
I realize time's about up, but I'm dying to know, Nathan, if there's a way to stop the Northern Gateway Pipeline if Harper decides to override a negaive assessment by the board or panel overseeing the hearings.
PS: keep up the great work!
We could always use more help so if you want to help spread the word let us know.
The military budget has ballooned under the Harper govt. Do you support a reduction in military spending, and if so, by about how much? Also, how do we convert to less of a "war" economy, since a common (and legitimate) response to such a question is "what about those people whose employment depends on the military"?
Thanks for those responses, Nathan. Our next question concerns the recent international discussion raised by the #occupy movement.
Mr Cullen I have been told that you have had a surpising lack of people in Kitimat willing to sign up as members in the NDP in order to vote for you in the leadership campaign. I believe the community has turned to the right and is now a conservative stronghold community and will not look favorably on you in the future if you faill in your bid to become leader. What are your thoughts on this.
I'm not Nathan, but my thoughts are that's pure BS..you really think the people of kitimat support a oil pipeline going through it?
Traditionally private industry has existed under the power of the state and that it was a privilege (not a right) to operate a business. Now it seems that the tail wags the dog and that Canada now has a lobbyist for the oil sector in the prime minister and his cabinet. I'm not aware of any legislative barriers that prevent our governments from reestablishing the role and responsibility of the state.
Nathan,
What are your feelings on the situation in Libya? Do you still support the actions carried out by the RCAF on the poorly direction and mandate given by parliament?
How do you feel about illegal regime changes that Canada has taken part in over the last decade?
Catchfire, you're doing a great job and Nathan thank you for your answers. I'm still waiting on pins and needles for Nathan's answer to some of the questions that have been raised about his interest in Canada's relationship with the Crown and how that might affect First Nations among others.
Hi Todrick, we have a question about foreign policiy and Libya coming up, so please stay in tune with the flow of the conversation (insofar as that's possible!)
Sorry Catahfire
Thank you Catchfire for moderating this Q&A so effectively, and thank you Nathan for sharing your vision for Canada with us.
Hey Howard - I was coming just got busy.
I've suggested that Canadians should be asked what we want our relationship to be with the crown. It seems as passing strange that the Queen or her rep must sign of on all of our laws and allow or disallow parliament to be closed. If the power isn't real (they don't ever refuse to sign our laws from parliament) then why have it?
First Nations get no respect from the current government or the queen before that we need a new and respectful relationship on govt to govt relations
I really hate to beg while time flies by so quickly, but if Nathan could suggest a plan of action if Harper overrides a negative evaluation of the Northern Gateway Pipeline, I'll be really, really happy.
We may only have time for one more prepared question. This one concerns NDP's foreign policy and the current crisis in Libya and is from good ol' NDPP:
I still believe that I voted correctly given the information and the imminent threat from the Libyan regime. My only regret was that we didn't take more time in our deliberations prior to the vote being cast. In future we must seek greater and deeper council before we commit to armed engagements again.
Hey Howard - I was coming just got busy.
I've suggested that Canadians should be asked what we want our relationship to be with the crown. It seems as passing strange that the Queen or her rep must sign of on all of our laws and allow or disallow parliament to be closed. If the power isn't real (they don't ever refuse to sign our laws from parliament) then why have it?
First Nations get no respect from the current government or the queen before that we need a new and respectful relationship on govt to govt relations
Thanks so much for your answer. My question/concern is that as First Nation's treaties (and land claims) are signed with the Crown, and that they could lose those rights if Canada's relationship with the Crown is changed. It must be tough keeping up with all these questions!
I think you're awesome, Nathan, and I also love your sense of humour, especially in the debates!
I really hate to beg while time flies by so quickly, but if Nathan could suggest a plan of action if Harper overrides a negative evaluation of the Northern Gateway Pipeline, I'll be really, really happy.
Civil disobedience!
Hello Boom Boom
Good and sadly relevant question
Mr. Harper would almost certainly try to "overrule" an NEB rejection of Gateway two things come to mind: the law may not allow him to. Second, the people I've met and the folks I represent won't let that kind of injustice take place
He's put the whole process in disrepute with his bullying and put Canadians into a real state of anger by his attempted bullying. Bad move
Any chance of Pat martin or Romeo Saganash backing you in the future? I noticed that Pat martin is in favour of your joint nomination idea and you would think all the work you have done for the Aboriginal people in BC would help to get Mr. Saganash on board.
Superb, Nathan. Thanks for taking the time. We have just one more question about homelessness and housing prices...
Certainly at the heart of our work must be to bring in the national affordable housing strategy that Olivia Chow, Libby Davies and others have worked so many years to build. The rampant speculation that has built up in many markets (and in particular Vancouver and Victoria) is a direct result of permissive and overly lenient financing partly enabled by a lack of regulation and governments wedded to bubble economics.
This has been a great conversation and really enjoyed the forum. I'll be encouraging the other candidates to spend some quality time with Babble. If you want to keep the conversation going please drop by nathancullen.ca
Thanks for all the great questions
Good luck Nathan. We'd love to see you around these parts again!
Thanks, Nathan! I wish you the best in this leadership campaign.
Thank you Nathan, for taking the time to drop by babble - and for agreeing to kick off this babble Q&A series! It's been great to follow the discussion this afternoon... Good luck with the remainder of the campaign!! Please drop by anytime :-)
Thanks for joining us, Nathan. I know babble appreciates it.
For those interested, Brian Topp will be joining us next week on Wednesday, February 22 at 11:30 PST/2:30 EST, giving babblers another chance to interview an NDP leadership candidate.
In the near future Peggy Nash, Paul Dewar and Niki Ashton will also be dropping by, so stay tuned!
Missed him by that much, as Maxwell Smart used to say.
Too short! But interesting.
Any chance we could have Tom Mulcair?
Hello Boom Boom
Good and sadly relevant question
Mr. Harper would almost certainly try to "overrule" an NEB rejection of Gateway two things come to mind: the law may not allow him to. Second, the people I've met and the folks I represent won't let that kind of injustice take place
He's put the whole process in disrepute with his bullying and put Canadians into a real state of anger by his attempted bullying. Bad move
I must say Nathan has really risen in my estimation due to this reply - for which I give thanks.
We have approached all the candidates for leader and invited them to come on babble to answer questions. So, that's up to Mulcair. If you want him to come aboard, email him!
Oki-dokilly!
I should also ad(d), seeing how this thread received almost 1200 views in an hour, and our poor fundraising plea from rabble.ca columnist and board president Duncan Cameron only got 72 in its whole miserable life, if you want to see more of this kind of thing on babble and rabble, please donate or consider becoming a member!
Just took your advice and did so.
Dear Mr. Cullen,
Instead of having Mr. Harper shake his finger at 1st nations people about mis-spending, there are 1st nations people who have tried over the years to ensure justice at the grass roots level, only to find out we are the only group in Canada with NO JUSTICE SYSTEM. This would be a perfect time to introduce a Native Ombudsman, to ensure that the grassroots have a place to go, like every other Canadian.
My grandfather was the original Delgamuukxw vs the Queen, he knew what justice was, and he tried to practice. He was laughed out of meetings, as Band Council members would say..let the RCMP handle this...or whatever excuse they wanted.
It did or does not matter, 1st nations people can complain all they want, there have not been any results. The gov't seems to think the Band Council represents us, thru the AFN. This is not the case.
I would like to see other Canadians live this way!
Regards,
Galguumph
Thanks Nathan!
I still believe that I voted correctly given the information and the imminent threat from the Libyan regime. My only regret was that we didn't take more time in our deliberations prior to the vote being cast. In future we must seek greater and deeper council before we commit to armed engagements again.
Really, what different information was presented to you and the rest of parliament, that the rest of Canada already knew that the Libya was wrong and illegal?
You and the NDP supported an illegal regime change.
As was obvious then and more so now, they knoweth not what they do...
I though there was an anti-imperialist policy here.
On foreign policy you may be correct NDPP, but sheer repetition in that regard could also lead a person to surmise that they might have an inkling after all. If you take into context the party statement on Syria urging the Harperites to exert pressure on Russia and China to tow the US State Department's line, which at the same time condemned the hesitancy of the UN Security Council to green light the pattern of aggression laid down in the Libyan template, coupled with a statement regarding the Egyptian government clampdown on those erstwhile champions of freedom and democracy, the US funded NDI and the IRI, then we might very well be encountering amateur hour as you suggest, or alternately more kowtowing in full awareness to the Harper government's foreign policy agenda; as if we don't already have our fill of it from the Liberals and Conservatives alike. Either way it doesn't bode well out here in anti-warmongering ville. If the NDP actually wanted to make themselves useful, they'd step away from the narrative of the mainstream media more often, and instead keep an ear out from time to time for what progressive activism is saying, which in the case of foreign policy adventurism at least has been more or less where Canadians are in their views.
So Libya, a country whose people once enjoyed a standard of life rated among the highest in the world, according to the UN Human Development Index, is now reduced to a broken, violent, disfunctional shambles.
Canada's 'heavy-lifting' role in smashing it, murdering the head of state, and installing their own NATO-RAT, NTC terrorist regime, included our representatives voting in favour of "armed engagement".
This was done upon the basis of grotesque disinformation propaganda of the regime's 'imminent threat' without 'greater and deeper council,' or sufficient time to reflect upon the consequences.
I am not surprised by the lack of response to the issue of warcrimes, given that it was a Canadian who led this awful campaign.
Nor am I reassured, given that Syria and/or Iran look to be the next victims of this imperial piracy and killing spree, that those who represent me, will 'take more time in our deliberations' and 'seek greater and deeper council before we commit to armed engagements again.'
The only voices that really matter to them at such critical times, are not those of the people who voted for them. The voices that matter are the voices of the real masters, the big boys in Washington, Tel Aviv, London and NATO.
Either way - kowtowing and complicit or naive and unknowing, as has been said, it doesn't bode well. I'll not be voting for any of them anytime soon.
Nor will I. Take more time and seek greater and deeper council eh? Maybe they should try a seance to ascertain the opinion of the innocent Libyan dead, who wound up that way as a result of cowardly NATO aggression. I'm certainly in favour of them taking all the time they want for deliberations and then some, but far away from any decision making offices, where, if we could have our way for once, they could mull things over in company with the other two vicious packs of stooges, the Liberals and the Conservatives.
Looking at this thread in preparation for Brian Topp, I have a plea: please don't interrupt. Keep your questions to follow-ups. Otherwise it's a zoo.
I second that, but it's difficult to fit so much into so little time. Babblers aren't known for their restraint, but that's a good thing (most of the time)!
Some of us have popped in to these Q&A threads with a comment or two well before and after the show, but my take is that these things require absolutely no interruption while in progress, as they generally speak for themselves.
Looking forward to Brian's comments, I must say. Hope Mulcair does this format soon. No repsonse to my email yet.
I note that no one asked Nathan about proportional representation, because we've all heard him say his first bill as Prime Minister would be to change the voting system.
However, his website policy statement still says "Hold a national referendum on voting reform, asking Canadians if they a) want to change the voting system; and b) which new model they prefer."
I thought that was out of date. However, at a meeting in Toronto March 7 he made it clear that his "first bill" would actually be for a referendum, although he "could be persuaded" to stick to party policy, as also detailed by both Topp and Nash, to run on a PR plank in 2015 and implement it with no referendum.
I thought he had already been persuaded. No. A surprise.
Evan Solomon asked him about this on Power and Politics this morning - as to whether it would be his "first priority" - and I didn't catch the answer, except that he said something about MMP. I almost reached for the rewind button, but there is none... It must be online or will be soon.