;;
Mulcair will become Canada's next prime minister (thread #9)
Mon, 2012-04-30 01:05
#1
Mulcair will become Canada's next prime minister (thread #9)
Mon, 2012-04-30 01:05
#2
Mon, 2012-04-30 03:16
#3
I hate to be a stick in the mud (or whatever the phrase is), but I think the title of the last thread was more appropriate.
Mon, 2012-04-30 03:22
#4
oh, and I haven't seen this posted before...
By axing agencies such as the National Roundtable on the Environment and the Economy -- organizations whose main role is to produce statistics -- the government is going beyond simply restricting access to information, he said.
"The government wants to prevent inconvenient data from being generated in the first place," he said.
Mulcair said his party will keep fighting for transparency, even if that means its own feet will be held to the fire.
Good stuff. I hope to see more of it.
Mon, 2012-04-30 12:03
#5
Agree I am not a fan of counting chickens or being seen to...
Sat, 2012-05-05 14:43
#6
Perhaps more than a bit of a misleading headline
NDP leader Thomas Mulcair takes aim at oilsands
http://www.canada.com/news/leader+Thomas+Mulcair+takes+oilsands/6572776/...
Sat, 2012-05-05 14:54
#7
This is the correct approach which will lead to the NDP forming government
NDP Leader Tom Mulcair accuses Conservatives of showing no respect for democracy
http://www.straight.com/article-677546/vancouver/ndp-leader-tom-mulcair-...
Sat, 2012-05-05 15:11
#8
Okay, I'm a bit slow here, but:
Whatever happened to Claude Patry? Star labour candidate (head of the Arvida local). Shadow cabinet critic for Employment Insurance. Demoted by Mulcair to -- um, not even a Deputy Critic. Off the screen. If Bruce Hyer is sulking, what is Claude Patry doing? Anne-Marie Day was promoted to a full Critic position, well-deserved, but she took his EI slot.
And what happened to Raymond Côté, who was Critic for Small Business and tourism? Now François Lapointe, who initially got not even a deputy critic position, has Côté's position in the Shadow Cabinet as Critic for Small Business and Tourism, while Côté is out in the cold.
Sat, 2012-05-05 15:14
#9
Sat, 2012-05-05 15:17
#10
Sat, 2012-05-05 15:22
#11
Re-asserting sole ownership of the NDP thread franchise?
Sat, 2012-05-05 16:45
#12
Hébert: Is Justin Trudeau the Liberals’ salvation?
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1173339--hebert-is-j...
Sat, 2012-05-05 16:49
#13
Walkom: Stephen Harper’s stealthy war against wages and the environment
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1173290--walkom-step...
Sun, 2012-05-06 10:38
#14
I suppose at least we can say bye, bye Bob Rae. Finally
NDP holding their own, in Quebec and elsewhere
http://thechronicleherald.ca/thenovascotian/93330-ndp-holding-their-own-...
Sun, 2012-05-06 11:03
#15
Stephen Harper sings the blues
http://m.torontosun.com/2012/05/04/stephen-harper-sings-the-blues
Sun, 2012-05-06 11:06
#16
The free-enterprise boys are starting to get a bit desperate already.
Justin Trudeau should be the next leader of the Liberal Party. No, seriously.
If this guy’s name was Joe Smith, the notion that Liberals might turn to him would be a no-brainer
http://www2.macleans.ca/2012/05/04/justin-trudeau-should-be-the-next-lea...
Sun, 2012-05-06 11:12
#17
The Liberal crisis
Sun, 2012-05-06 12:39
#18
Once upon a time, Canadians could be proud of Parliament
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/second-reading/gerald-capla...
“The NDP do not support sending troops abroad for anything,” Mr. Baird stated. “Let us look at what the former leader of the NDP-CCF said. ‘I would ask whether we are to risk the lives of our Canadian sons to prevent the actions of Hitler.’ It was the former leader of the NDP-CCF, J.S. Woodsworth, who said that.”
So few words, so much distortion. I try to conjure up the process by which the Prime Minster’s Office decided on this scurrilous attack. Did some zealous young Conservative researcher just happen upon that 1939 vote? How did the Harper communications team decide this shabby riposte would resonate 74 years after the event to which it refers? Who in the world – or who even among the precious Conservative base – would have a clue what it might mean? Who knows? Whatever the thinking, it was deliberately chosen to be the government attack of the day.
The real story happens to be one of the most moving and dramatic in Canadian history, a tribute to our democracy and to the House of Commons as it once was. Just for the record, for those who’d rather not invent their reality, Mr. Baird’s claim that “the NDP do not support sending troops abroad for anything” is completely false, as even the most cursory check of the record shows. The CCF, the NDP’s predecessor, in fact supported Canada’s declaration of war against Nazi Germany in 1939, and when a volunteer army controversially gave way to conscription, the CCF supported that as well.
The back story is a fascinating if, until now, largely forgotten slice of Canadiana. J.S. Woodsworth was a Methodist minister who was elected as an independent member of Parliament from Winnipeg in 1921, having been active on labour’s side in the historic 1919 Winnipeg general strike. Despite his obvious idealism – his biographer, Kenneth McNaught, called him A Prophet in Politics – he was determined to make a tangible difference, and in 1926 agreed to sustain Liberal prime minister William Lyon Mackenzie King’s minority government in return for the introduction of old-age pensions. Mr. Woodsworth thereby set the foundations for this country’s welfare state – a monumental contribution to a better Canada.
When the socialist CCF party/movement was formed in 1933, in the heart of the Great Depression, Mr. Woodsworth became leader. Soon economic issues in Canada were being overtaken by the looming prospect of war in Europe. For his entire life Mr. Woodsworth had been a Christian socialist pacifist who believed all wars were the immoral product of capitalism and that war only begat misery and more war. Given the two wars he had himself lived through – the Boer War and the First World War – these were not unreasonable propositions. But as the march to war against fascism grew ever more inexorable, Mr. Woodsworth and his party slowly but steadily moved apart.
Hitler had to be defeated, and to this end pacifism had no contribution to make. After long, anguished debates, the leader failed to bring either the CCF’s national council or his caucus with him. In September of 1939, Hitler invaded Poland and Britain declared war against Germany. Mackenzie King summonsed the House of Commons to follow suit on behalf of Canada. In a riveting parliamentary moment, the CCF allowed its leader – ill, failing, demoralized – to present his lonely call for Canadian neutrality. But it was his heir-apparent and by then de facto CCF leader M. J. Coldwell who offered the party’s official and, with but one exception, unanimous support for the prime minister’s motion of war.
Repeating that war settles nothing, Mr. Woodsworth declared: “I rejoice that it is possible to say these things in a Canadian Parliament under British institutions. It would not be possible in Germany, I recognize that ... and I want to maintain the very essence of our British institutions of real liberty. I believe that the only way to do it is by an appeal to the moral forces which are still resident among our people, and not by another resort to brute force.”
He alone rose to record his opposition to the declaration of war.
In the words of Tommy Douglas’s biographers Thomas and Ian McLeod: “This event is considered by many to be one of the finest moments in the history of the Canadian Parliament. Even as every other member of the House of Commons voted to declare war, Mr. Woodsworth was recognized for his courageous ethical stand and his commitment to his principles.”
Through two decades as independent MP and then as leader of the small CCF parliamentary rump, no one challenged the King government more profoundly than J. S. Woodsworth, constantly seeking the better angels of Mackenzie King’s nature. In the end, addressing his own historic motion for war, the prime minister said:
“There are few men in this Parliament for whom I have greater respect than the leader of the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation. I admire him in my heart, because time and again he has had the courage to say what lays on his conscience, regardless of what the world might think of him. A man of that calibre is an ornament to any Parliament.”
Sun, 2012-05-06 19:24
#19
Arthur Cramer
The free-enterprise boys are starting to get a bit desperate already.
Justin Trudeau should be the next leader of the Liberal Party. No, seriously.
If this guy’s name was Joe Smith, the notion that Liberals might turn to him would be a no-brainer
http://www2.macleans.ca/2012/05/04/justin-trudeau-should-be-the-next-lea...
That made me so mad, I posted the following:
"This commentary is nonsense. Turdeau (both father and son) have no more claim to love of country then did TC Douglas, Jack Layton or I. That isn't the issue. The issue is who is best able to move us forward and away form over 35 years of disasterous fiscal and monetary policy. Trudeau shelved the Carter Commission that would have reformed the tax system, eliminated capital gains, and made the weatlhy pay their share. Our funding shortfalls today are directly attributable to this. In the early 80s wage and price controls was solely price controls. The LPC oversaw a regime where ordinary workers saw their wages suppressed in the name of slaying the deficit dragon. Trudeau is famous for supposedly shunning Thatcher and Regan, but the fact is that under his, and successive LPC governments, real wages fall, productivity grew, the gap between rich and poor increased, and services to Canadians in every imaginable area were cut in the name of so called deficit fighting. Martin, Manley continued this policy with not a whimper from so called progressives like Justin Trudeau, and the result is child and adult poverty, and working poor at a rate never before seen in the history of this nation. But no, you want us to believe that "love of nation" is all we need. Trudeaumania is the answer, elect the boy and all will be well. And how do you expect working people to take that to the bank. I love this nation just as much as his father and him. I served 25 years in the Canadian Navy and all that time voted NDP, and you want to tell me that I don't love my country as much as they because I didn't vote Liberal? Is that really the only answer you have? Vote Liberal? Again? What for St. Justin, he'll walk on water like Jesus Christ? You comments dispaly either a willful ingnorance of history, a resolute need to believe in a savoiur at all costs, or a willful arrogance that verges on the unimangianable. Or, maybe it is combination of all three. Where do you get off telling anyone we have to do it the same way all over again because that is our only chance. What is this, Star Wars? "Help us oboe wan Turdeau" (Freudian Slip?), you're are only hope? What cowardice!"
This makes me so G-d mad!
Sun, 2012-05-06 19:27
#20
Arthur Cramer
I will say this, if the LPC tries this, we are going to have to go after the Trudeau, and LPC legacy of governance and remind people what it means. We simply cannot let them get away with reviving and old, and untrue narrative. I am just fuming over this. What arrogance! If there is anyone who thinks Justin doesn't already see himself as the next PM, you are simply kidding yourselves. This is no G-d dam accident! Grrr!!!!!!!
Mon, 2012-05-07 14:24
#21
Relax, Justin's not going to run, he knows Bob Rae would slit his political throat before he even got near Mulcair and Harper, both of whom would demolish him. Also read his comments on Bob Rae and his self correctioning system, if he was going to take a stab at the job he wouldn't say something like that. In fact I wouldn't be surpised if Justin endorses Rae this time. Any leadership ambition is for the distant future for Justin.
Mon, 2012-05-07 15:13
#22
Any of you saw that:
Sorry if it has been posted before. What a ridiculous piece of...
Mon, 2012-05-07 15:17
#23
Does anyone own www.harpersconservatives.ca?
Mon, 2012-05-07 15:24
#24
Any of you saw that:
Sorry if it has been posted before. What a ridiculous piece of...
They showed restraint. There are no "scary" Halloween sounds playing in the background.
Mon, 2012-05-07 16:01
#25
Another sad pathetic attack from Tories. Didn't they used to be good at making attacks?
Carol Goar is right about the Tories getting sloppy.
Mon, 2012-05-07 16:28
#26
I found it hilarious. At first I thought it was a parody website. But then the Conservative's don't really do humour, do they.
Mon, 2012-05-07 16:50
#27
Any of you saw that:
Sorry if it has been posted before. What a ridiculous piece of...
They showed restraint. There are no "scary" Halloween sounds playing in the background.
How did the Conservative's case against this person go?
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/tories-tussle-with-widow-ov...
Seems rather hypocritical that they could go after a widow for using their logo and then not only use but even distort the NDP logo.
Surely the NDP could consider a trademark infringement case?
Tue, 2012-05-08 10:17
#28
Stephen Harper's Conservative government losing its sheen
NDP has pulled even as unconstrained Conservatives show their pointy edges
http://www.vancouversun.com/opinion/Yaffe+Stephen+Harper+Conservative+go...
Tue, 2012-05-08 10:52
#29
Arthur Cramer
That's old news.
Tue, 2012-05-08 11:02
#30
Boom Boom
WRT to the thread title, presumably all of the federal parties are already planning for the next election (2015?). The NDP likely believe they have a very good chance at forming the next federal government, and, hopefully, are listing the changes made by Harper that have to be either rescinded or modified. And making an election platform for 2015 that will have broad, mass appeal across the country. I shudder to think of what the Conservatives are planning to do if they win in 2015.
Tue, 2012-05-08 11:13
#31
Dont frighten yourself.
'Just' more of the same. As now, working on making the changes to Canada as difficult to reverse as possible.
La lutta continua.
Tue, 2012-05-08 11:41
#32
Arthur Cramer
Noticed regarding BC, Grenier has it closer as the Huff Po notes. Man, that guy is such a hack! Why doesn't he change his blog name to "308liberals.com"?
Tue, 2012-05-08 16:37
#33
Sounds more like like the poor Globe is moaning over the loss of 1 of the 2 right-wing parties in Canada.
‘Sad and pathetic’ anti-Mulcair salvo lacks punch of past Tory attacks
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/sad-and-pat...
Tue, 2012-05-08 16:50
#34
Quoting the NDP in the story headline is the Globe moaning about problems for the right?
And Grenier is just a plain hack, not a hack for the Liberals. [He descibes/described himself as BQ aligned.]
Tue, 2012-05-08 17:00
#35
I suggest that NDP members stop nosing through the offal produced by the MSM and talk to real people. Why bother reading all that drivel. It merely clouds ones sense of what should be important.
Wed, 2012-05-09 18:24
#36
So the fight begins.
Tom Mulcair’s call for environmental responsibility hits nerve in the West
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1175215--tim-harper-...
Wed, 2012-05-09 18:27
#37
Come to think of it we need a Prime Minister. Canada is supposed to have one.
Wed, 2012-05-09 18:29
#38
This is concerning in that it has the potential to split the left-of-centre folks into 2 camps - the ones that vote, and the ones that don't!
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1175715--hebert-ball...
Wed, 2012-05-09 18:32
#39
RCMP spied on B.C. natives protesting pipeline plan, documents show
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/1175824--rcmp-spied-...
Wed, 2012-05-09 19:35
#40
This is concerning in that it has the potential to split the left-of-centre folks into 2 camps - the ones that vote, and the ones that don't!hebert-ballot-box-seen-as-dead-end-rather-than-means-to-an-end
i don't think it's troubling
Wed, 2012-05-09 19:58
#41
Whats with reading a Toronto newspaper to find out about the West?
The RCMP is spying on every effective activist in this country. Didn't you get the memo?
Wed, 2012-05-09 21:01
#42
Yea, right!
The revelations add ammunition to critics who have charged that the Harper government is waging a campaign to demonize legitimate opponents of resource developments like the Northern Gateway, by labelling them as radicals or including them in Canada’s “counter-terrorism” strategy.Saik’uz First Nation Chief Jackie Thomas, a member of the Yinka Dene Alliance who made a cross-country trip on the “Freedom Train” to protest in Toronto against the pipeline on Wednesday, said she has had suspicions for some time about RCMP surveillance.
“We’ve always been peaceful, but this is how they try to paint us as the enemy,” said Thomas, a grandmother and mother of four concerned that an oil spill could destroy the lands she hunts and fishes on with many of her community members.
“The federal government seems to be using all its arms to push through this project against the will of anyone who opposes it, but we won’t be deterred. It is not a crime to defend our land and waters from a tarsands pipeline and to make the future safe for our grandkids.”
According to the documents, the RCMP unit gathered intelligence from unspecified “industry reports,” newspapers and websites, and Facebook and Flickr photo accounts.
They also appear to have monitored private meetings, including one between First Nations and environmental organizations held in Fraser Lake, B.C., at the end of November, which Thomas says was not announced publicly.
The meeting’s purpose was “to strengthen the alliance between First Nations and environmental groups opposing Enbridge,” an intelligence report from December states.
Enbridge declined to comment about whether it has been exchanging information with the RCMP.
Wed, 2012-05-09 23:15
#43
Thu, 2012-05-10 09:55
#44
Lou Arab
Is Mulcair walking back previous pro-Israel positions?
During the NDP leadership campaign, Mulcair was often portrayed as the most pro-Israel candidate in the race. That was because, in 2008, the left-wing magazine Canadian Dimension published a translated quote from Mulcair, in which he said, “I am an ardent supporter of Israel in all situations and in all circumstances.” (“Je suis un ardent supporter de toutes les instances et de toutes les circonstances d’Israël.”)
In his interview with the Straight, Mulcair emphasized that he is also an “ardent supporter of the creation of a Palestinian state”.
“That has always been the NDP’s position,” he said. “We should create a state for Palestinians and we should have a state for Israelis: a classic two-state solution.”
He added that this should be achieved “within a framework of international law and UN resolutions”.
“So on the international-law side, we know that the current [Israeli government] settlement policies, for example, go against the fourth Geneva Convention,” Mulcair stated. “So that’s something very clear in the NDP position, which has always been my position.”
Given his opposition to settlements in the occupied territories, the Straight suggested that Mulcair wasn’t an ardent supporter of Israel in all situations and in all circumstances.
“There is no contradiction between the two,” the NDP leader replied. “You can be an ardent supporter of a country and say that something that they’re doing in that case has to be changed. But it doesn’t mean you’re not a supporter of the country. You have to be very careful with those words. What I’m saying is I’m not going to use my opposition to something that they’re doing as an excuse to call for an end to the state of Israel, which is what some of the adversaries of Israel do.”
Thu, 2012-05-10 11:40
#45
If anyone predicted that Mulcair's personal support for Israel would take a back seat, then they were awful quiet about it during the leadership campaign. I remember "indistinguishable from Harper" was the battlecry here. KenS is one of the few people who noted that the NDP positioning on I-P is vague. But whenever someone posted a quote from the NDP platform, the battlecry became "then the whole NDP is indistinguishable from Harper".
Regardless of whether it was predictable or not, I'm really pleased to see Mulcair committing to peace. No war with Iran. No more settlements in occupied territories. A state for Palestine.
For what it's worth, I wonder if there's something lost in the translation of "Je suis un ardent supporter de toutes les instances et de toutes les circonstances d'Israel." Maybe in French is sounds less like uncritical support of the Israeli government, and more like uncritical support of Israel's right to exist.
The last thing: there's a lot of pressure for politicians to give into anti-Islam hysteria. We have to keep pressuring the NDP and Mulcair to resist that. Whether you think Mulcair has changed or he's been right all along, keep pressuring him.
Thu, 2012-05-10 11:44
#46
He's doing as I predicted he would: now that he is Leader, his personal support of Israel takes a back seat to the de facto positioning of the NDP on the issue.
Previously, Mulcair stretched the limits of heavily tilting towards Israel in practice, while staying within the bounds of the NDPs formal position. That's easy, since the 'literal position' is so vague. But in practice, the NDP is as critical of Israel as elected Canadian politicians generally get, and Mulcair as leader is now re-positioning himself to be there.
Of course he says that this was always his position- and I'm not really questioning him on that. But the intent of that old quote often kicked around was to express all but uncritical support of Israel, and he is as predicted pedaling away from it now. He was wise to just leave it alone during the race, even knowing this was where he would be going.
Jack generally left others to speak about Israel and Palestine issues. Mulcair will probably do that even more.
Thu, 2012-05-10 11:51
#47
Thu, 2012-05-10 12:29
#48
Thu, 2012-05-10 13:42
#49
We should create a state for Palestinians and we should have a state for Israelis: a classic two-state solution.
Is the two state solution the NDP's official policy?
I want to like Tom but he needs to show more of an unbiased approach than just saying he supports a two state solution.
Where are the comments from Mulcair regarding the almost 1,600 political prisoners on a hunger strike in the Israeli gulag. They are supporting a smaller number of prisoners who have been jailed for months and years without being charged or convicted of any crime. That might be a good place to show the NDP stands for something not just support for Israel. Although since Canada also has laws now that allow for imprisonment without the benefit of due process he would first have to call for overturning the terrorism laws here.
Personally I think that one secular state is the answer most likely to bring lasting peace. But I am neither Israeli or Palestinian so my views are irrelevant as are the NDP's on the "solution."
"No member of our caucus, whatever other title they have, is allowed to invent their own policy," said Mulcair. "We take decisions together, parties formulate policies together, and to say that you're personally in favour of boycott, divestment and sanctions for the only democracy in the Middle East is, as far as I'm concerned, grossly unacceptable."
I am still waiting for him to apologize to the people of Turkey, our NATO ally and the people of Lebanon. This "Israel is the only democracy" is bullshit. Israel is a racist state that denies basic freedoms based on religion.
Thu, 2012-05-10 14:32
#50
I was objecting to his dismissal of the other democracies in the region. That sticks in my craw. I hope you are right and at least he will not repeat that bullshit anti-Arab racism.
Thu, 2012-05-10 15:00
#51
That latter quote is what he said in the heat of the Libby affair- in case anyone really thought there was any doubt he was then stretching NDP 'policy' as far as he could make it sound like it goes.
Which is the same Tom Mulcair that provided that more recent supporter of Israel forever quote that got so much circulation, and the Straight brought up to him.
Like I said, we will not be hearing any more of this from Tom Mulcair. But if you want peace, dont expect sacrifices at the altar. The changed Tom Mulcair you have got. But there will be no apology for stands of the past.