babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
Support rabble | Advertise with us | Contact our staff | About rabble | Log-in or Register for a new account | Corrections | Privacy policy | Newsfeeds | Mailing lists
rabble: Features | Columnists | In Cahoots | Blogs | Books | Photos | What's Up | Polls
babble: Forum Topics | Active Topics
The rpn: About the RPN | Become a podcaster
rabbleTV: Program Guide | Features | Indie Inside | Best of the net
Copyright © 2001-2013 the authors
Syndicate
...and that may very well be happening. Some MPs are being made committee chairs and some other party related posts are apparently to be announced later.
Oddly, Hyer was very muted in his comments in TV, saying that he still expects to vote with the NDP 95% of the time and that he still hopes Mulcair becomes PM!
Stockholm-- rural Canada is not a tail. I think I know what you mean but I sure would prefer a less hostile dismissive tone to minority opinion in the party.
If the NDP wants to govern it will have to bridge that urban rural divide at least to some degree.
What I would like to hear from the NDP is something like the following:
Mr. Hyer has chosen to sit outside the party. Whether he comes back or not the NDP would like to keep communication open and look forward to workign with him in the House particularly on issues for Northern and rural communities for which Hyer is passionate.
Events, challenges and setbacks are tests. How the NDP responds to this is key.Burning bridges with someone who was elected as a New Democrat is a last resort and there seems to be no reason to do so. The NDP has lost two MPs to defection. Handling this well is going to be important if we want to avoid it increasing.
1:25 minute mark
But the votes on the LGR already happened - the point is that in 2015 there WILL be an NDP policy on gunregistration/control - and whatever that policy is - NDP candidates will have to support it. If Hyer were a bit more rational he would wait to see what the NDP policy was in 2015 - or even try to influence its content - and then if he can't live with it - either don't run for re-election or run as an independent. But why NOW...oh yeah, the shadow cabinet announcement last thursday.
Well it's certainly lose-lose if one's approach to it is whip-in-hand. We get enough of that from the PMO.
Seems to me there was a slightly more respectful and inclusive approach to this difficult issue a year and a half-ago.
I think you forget just how rancorous the issue was a year and a half ago and how Layton was raked over the coals letting any NDP MPs vote against the LGR at all. Remember how the BQ and the Liberals were erecting billboards accusing the NDP of being "soft" on keeping the gun registry?
I think that no matter who was leading the NDP right now - the days of being able to have it both ways and let the caucus vote all over the map on this issue are over. The party has to take a stance and stick with it.
I don't see what's "whip in hand" about the NDP appraoch now. Rafferty voted with the Tories to get rid of the LGR and he is now in the shadow cabinet and been welcomed back into the fold with open arms. Hyer obviously has some personal issues that could not resolved. Its actually remarkable that stuff like this doesn't happen more often considering that very single MP got elected by tens of thousands of people and tends to see him or herself as a prima donna.
No, I think my memory is just fine, in that I remember that Layton was successful in his approach, despite all the nay-sayers who said he was killing the registry, and that the NDP would be demolished in the election because of it.
So now we are told, even before a new proposal is on the table, that whatever it is will be subject to a whipped vote? Sorry if I don't quite see the sense in that.
Not a whipped vote - but that if you want to run as an NDP candidate in 2015 you must endorse the party platform and if that platform includes some form of gun registration then you must be prepared to support that along with the rest of the platform. That is what ALL parties do.
Layton's approach was to proposed an NDP version of the gun registry that was to be a very watered down version of the old Liberal LGR. Almost everyone in caucus went along with that and that is what I expect the NDP to propose as a policy for 2015. Virtually all of the NDP MPs from northern/rural ridings who voted to keep the registry and to support Jack's proposed reforms to it kept their seats.
Here is what I predict will happen in 2015, the NDP will nominate someone in Hyer's riding who will go along with the party policy (along with Rafferty from next door) and that person will win easily - Hyer will either retire as his pension will have kicked in by then or he's run as an Independent and get about 2% of the vote.
@ Stockholm #70
If that is the case then why does Mulcair even need to underscore the point?
Regardless of the issue, I think derisive comments like "Bruce simply feels that he's allowed to come up with his own decisions," are eerily similar to our PM's approach to consensus-building.
It's a needless and divisive waste of political capital, IMO.
(cross posted)
And I'm not so sure it will be the cake-walk you predict.... and certainly not in areas where the party hopes to GAIN seats.
The NDP needs to gain seats in suburban areas of the GTA and the Lower Mainland and also win as many of the seats it does not currently hold as possible in Quebec...I think being in favour of gun control is a win-win in those areas.
seems like the shadow cabinet snub was 100% of the reason for this, and also that it's probably not really all that well thought out. hyer will vote with the ndp on virtually everything, but will miss out on all caucus meetings, no longer sit on committees, and generally become irrelevant - which i suppose he may well have felt was his fate at any rate, given his lack of assignment. well, it's a shame. still, hyer has no chance at re-election as an independent, and this is likely a pre-cursor to an eventual retirement announcement, as stockholm speculated. very nice for him - no work to do, no accountability, plenty of time to run his business, and a pension kicking in when pretty much right away, post 2014. can't begrudge the guy a thing other than the unhelpfulness of his announcement, stepping on an unbroken string of positive press for the ndp.
Being excluded from the shadow cabinet need not mean "irrelevance". Other NDP backbenchers will be sitting on parliamentary committees, taking part in caucus, attending to party duties and hosting NDP luminaries at events in their ridings etc...as an Independent - you really are a big nothing.
This is kind of how I feel too.
Ok-- In case someone is reading... ;-)
I don't work for the NDP. But I sure would like to...
The gun registry will not be an issue in the next election. Why would it be? Why must there be a campaign plank about a dead issue? It seems to me that of the myriad of controversial issues this one should just be left to die. Of course convention will pass some policy or other but frankly when has that every meant that a controversial issue will make it into the campaign platform?
With stories like this one needs to hear his side, Mulcair's side and what actually took place. Not a good day for anyone involved.
Hyer was on P&P tonight, not a great interview - he talked about the Long Gun Registry, but I'm at a loss right now to recall exactly what he said. Sorry.
He basically said he still supports the party, he'll keep his membership card, wont rule out a return to caucus if possible, so long as his vague demands that the party be more "small d" democratic.
Evan tried to suggest he left over the gun registry, which he said no. Then he said "was it that you didnt get a shadow cabinet post" to which he said no. Then he said it was a "combination of things".
When Solomon challenged him on not calling or talking to Mulcair, he said "would have, should have, could have." Hardly a great defence.
Oh, never mind my synopsis: Here it is!
http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/News/Politics/1244504890/ID=2226036199
wow
Bizarre.
Clearly we are not seeing the full story. I don't think I have ever seen an interview as friendly to a party from somoene who left.
You are left wondering why he left--
Is it outrageous to suggest he'll be back?
He may try to come crawling back...whether the party will want him back is another question. The nice thing about having over 100 MPs is that as much as everyone is valuable and we never want to lose anyone - its not such a big deal to lose 1 out of 102 compared to losing 1 out of 19.
How many MPs in the NDP caucus now? 100 even?
ETA: oops, I forgot Craig Scott - so it should be 101 now - right?
101 minus hyer. 103 on may 2nd, minus jack, st denis and now hyer, plus craig scott.
The NDP needs more Craig Scotts and less Hyers.
Yes, but it would be a completely different story if there were enough changes on the government side to bring those numbers a bit closer to minority.
I realize Hyer is just one member, and he left for his own reasons, but the issue of grassroots vs central control and strong regional differences is a valid one.
I am just amazed and disappointed that Mulcair would commit to campaign and enforce support on the most divisive issue there is, particularly without draughted reforms on the table to distinguish his position from that of the Liberals. He just ensured that this issue will not be gone in four years, if for no other reason than Harper will not let anyone forget.
Speaking of which, I think Mulcair has something to learn from Harper - in his handling of the equally poisonous issue of abortion choice.
Well, I support having a long gun registry - nation wide - so I'm not going to be too critical of Mulcair on this.