Jagmeet Singh, NDP Leader

Another thing is, B.C. has actually increased its fossil fuel exports as U.S. ports have taken the principled stand of reducing their coal exports.

Controversially, almost all of this thermal coal is coming from the United States. As lawmakers in Washington and Oregon have begun shutting down their own coal ports due to environmental concerns, thermal coal producers in Wyoming and Montana have simply diverted their product through Canada.

http://nationalpost.com/news/politics/yes-anti-pipeline-vancouver-really...

Of course it doesn't.

But this isn't just a case of coal being safer. One of the biggest charges levelled at the tar sands is that they are so dirty, and coal is far moreso. And this is also a jurisdiction - Vancouver - taking action against climate change on the one hand, but with the other profitting because of other ports closing their doors to coal.

And the bottom line is that no, they aren't reducing those exports. They are the biggest exporter of coal in North America.

Well this thread isn't about pipelines either, so I don't think that puts me off-topic.

You read Sean's post at #651; you quoted from it. I was actually commenting in line with some of his points about parties acting in their own interest. If there is any example of that stronger than the approval of Site C, it is B.C. profitting off of American ports' decision to oppose coal exports.

As for coal not being an issue because it doesn't spill like oil, that is just an even starker example of kicking a bigger problem down the road and hoping no one will notice:

Coal is the single biggest contributor to anthropogenic climate change. The burning of coal is responsible for 46% of carbon dioxide emissions worldwide and accounts for 72% of total  greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the electricity sector. If plans to build up to 1200 new coal fired power stations around the world are realized, the greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) from these plants would put us on a path towards catastrophic climate change, causing global temperatures to rise by over five degrees Celsius by 2100. This will have dire impacts for all life on earth.

https://endcoal.org/climate-change/

Coal might not be quite as sexy an issue as oil, but it is a far bigger problem. It is the biggest source of Saskatchewan's record carbon footprint. And B.C. is continuing to profit off it just as Alberta is with the tar sands. At the same time they pride themselves on standing up to pipelines because that will dirty up their backyard.

Quote:

That is, the question will apply equally to trains transporting dangerous goods.

Trucks too?

If they end up having to say "we don't want ANY hazardous stuff going on" that could get interesting.

Pondering wrote:

Rev Pesky wrote:

From Pondering:

If that is so the Supreme Court should decide very quickly. If the feds don't act BC could take months just to formulate the question.

​I'm not sure how having the Supreme Court reiterate that pipelines are federal jusidiction would change things. BC is not challenging federal jurisdiction, they are challenging some aspects of the construction of the pipeline. They would continue to do that no matter what.

If BC would agree beforehand that they would end their opposition to the pipeline if the Supreme Court said pipelines were federal jurisdiction, then there may be a point in doing it. Otherwise it's just a useless waste of time. 

The question BC will be referring to the Supreme Court will be based on the province's jurisdiction on the environment and health and safety, not pipelines in particular. That is, the question will apply equally to trains transporting dangerous goods. 

Is there a question regarding Indigenous lands?

I don't think the Province can win on this question. Risk benefit judgement woudl be the Feds. The Province likely woudl be able to bring measures for details of regulation provided they not negate the Federal decision.

Jagmeet Singh can rebound, but has a lot of work to do

http://ottawacitizen.com/opinion/columnists/kurl-jagmeet-singh-can-rebou...

Why then is this great man suppressing BDS resolutions within his party and tacitly supporting the outrageous full-court Canadian press against Venezuela? NDP=No Difference Party.

If that CBC interview this morning is any indication, Singh appears to be on track to do much better than most people expect in the 2019 election. 

If his CBC interview this morning is any indication Singh is going to be fine.

How many elections did Layton run in with poor NDP showings before 2011? 

A new website http://www.calculatedpolitics.com has been created for the 2019 federal election run by two guys with polling experience (one of whom has ties to the NDP having been VP of the NDP Hull—Aylmer riding association.

The other riding that is opening up by the departure of Kennedy Stewart, Burnaby South, is currently leaning Liberal (according to their data)

and Outremont is expected to go Liberal as well (according to their data)

He's not winning Outremont. There is no correlation between Horwath's NDP winning the Ontario election and Singh winning Outremont. To believe that you'd have to be smoking some powerful banana peels.

I guess a strong provincial NDP performance in Ontario, particularly if they hold or make gains in the Brampton area, would provide a further argument for Jagmeet to refrain from seeking a parliamentary seat until the next federal election, on the grounds that he would have such a good shot in his home riding that it is both an unneccesary risk and a waste of resources for him to try to win elsewhere in the meantime. On the other hand (1) even if the Ontario provincial election goes really well for the Ontario NDP there is no guarantee that result will translate into federal gains a year later and (2) it does seem like Jagmeet is having real problems maintaining his hold on caucus right now while he is not a member of it. An NDP sweep of Brampton would help Jagmeet immensely, but I'm not sure it would kill the byelection speculation all together - nor should it.

 I agree with Alan Smithee that Jagmeet running in Outremont would probably be a bad idea. It's the kind of thing he would do if he was actually looking for a way out of his current job (e.g. if he's got an appointment coming to him from incoming premier Horwath). Even then, if the NDP can't scare up a reasonably good candidate from Quebec to run there, and instead decides to burn its leader, the federal party is in even worse shape than I thought. If all Jagmeet wants to do is run in and lose a byelection, he might as well run in Leeds-Grenville-Thousand Islands and Rideau Lakes. That way he could at least lose in Ontario.

I think Jagmeet running in Outremont (or any other current prospects, with one exception) is extremely unlikely. Burnaby South, however, is potentially promising if Jagmeet does decide he needs to enter Parliament sooner than next fall. It's far from a cakewalk but it has a much longer-standing NDP history than Outremont and a large South Asian (though not necessarily Sikh/Punjabi) population that could rally around Jagmeet and welcome him despite his non-local status. Further, with respect to the Ontario NDP's performance, there could even be a halo effect for the NDP on the west coast if there is a byelection there within a few months of a ONDP victory. There is some evidence that momentum from Rae's shock 1990 victory in Ontario helped lift Doer's Manitoba NDP from third place back into second in the provincial election that happened five days later, as well as helping propel the march to victory by Harcourt's BC NDP and Romanow's SK NDP the next year.

On the other hand if Jagmeet does take the plunge in Burnaby of course the other parties will try hard to punch the NDP in the nose by running strong candidates against him, so it's still far from a sure thing. More importantly, so long as the standoff continues between the B.C. and Alberta NDP governments over TMX, Jagmeet is going to continue to be wedged between their two opposing positions. The pipeline will be a big issue in Burnaby South (the previous NDP MP was just convicted of criminal contempt for his role in protesting it). While it seems Jagmeet has already made the decision to largely back the BC NDP's position, therefore likely burning his bridges in Alberta, if he is forced to actually campaign on this issue he can only further exacerbate the split and that's probably not in the long term interest of the federal party.

So obviously he's got a lot to think about.

More Ruth Ellen Brosseaus, please

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/editorials/globe-editorial-more-...

..a canadian dimension editorial.

NDP falls far short of needed leap to the left

Canadians hoping to see bold ideas and a more radical orientation emerge from the federal New Democrats’ February convention in Ottawa are surely feeling disappointed. Four months after Jagmeet Singh’s first ballot victory, a party still struggling to regain its balance following electoral demolition in 2015 again failed to capitalize on a historic opportunity to distance itself from and challenge the Liberals with a transformative left-wing vision.

While the convention saw Singh endorse progressive policies, including publicly-funded infrastructure, tax reform and paid sick leave, he didn’t take the “big ideas” far enough. Ultimately, the party sided with a “less timid” (Singh’s words) form of centrism divorced from the demands of systemic economic and social change.

This is all the more frustrating considering the appetite for more far-reaching social change is palpable and growing. Polls released in January by Nanos and the Institute for Research on Public Policy reveal that more Canadians than ever dislike the Liberal government. In fact, Justin Trudeau’s approval ratings are nearly identical to those of Stephen Harper before the last election.

quote:

Yet it was little more than little steps that the NDP offered up in February, positioning itself less as a viable Left alternative to the Liberals and more as a meek tweak on many of the current government’s policy pillars. Even one of the NDP’s braver proposals, a national pharmacare program, is already slated for adoption by the Liberal Party in advance of the 2019 election.

Perhaps most tellingly, an opportunity to outflank Trudeau on the fight against climate change and in efforts towards reconciliation with Indigenous peoples by adopting the Leap Manifesto was squandered for a second time (it had been rejected once before at the party’s policy convention in 2016).

Meanwhile, the night before the convention, 500 youthful activists attended a rally organized by Courage to Leap. Scarcely 100 of them were NDP delegates — a telling indication that young radicals either do not see the NDP as a likely vehicle for social change or eschew parliamentary politics altogether.

Of course, it would be unfair to characterize the convention as wholly unsuccessful. It was significant that Singh spoke to the party’s social democratic heritage when he called for expanded health care, closing tax loopholes, building affordable housing, and bolstering environmental stewardship. But he fell sadly short on other issues, notably energy and foreign policy.

The convention saw not a single anti-pipeline resolution, and on the subject of Palestine, often a sore spot for party members, tensions raged over a resolution aimed at putting diplomatic and economic pressure on Israel to end the Occupation. The resolution was ultimately defeated.

As Andrew Mitrovica wrote in Al Jazeera, “for Canada’s pretend socialist party, its supposed ‘values’ are all too malleable and, as such, human rights for Palestinians appear to be an optional extra and are indeed deployed selectively.”

Federal NDP has been too busy purging one of its members, and making excuses for another, to worry about which direction it’s heading.

I’m wondering if we are going to have a realignment in Canadian politics as voters don’t seem very supportive of any of our political parties these days

Remember not that long ago about how there was a feeding frenzy about how Andrew Horwath had to go, and now voters in Ontario are giving serious consideration to making her their Premier. 

Kind of reminds me of all the nonsense presently surrounding Jagmeet. It too will pass, and I have high expectations for the NDP in the next federal election

Quite the dancer!

http://dailyhive.com/vancouver/toronto-jagmeet-singh-dance-caribbean-carnival-video

I like Don Davies comments here

https://mobile.twitter.com/Tom_Parkin_

The more I see of Singh the more I am liking him. And if the Trudeau Liberals falter, and presently they sure are wobbling, progressives may be turning to Singh to stop the Conservatives in next year's election.

Jagmeet Singh Says Opposition To Trans Mountain Has Nothing To Do With Upcoming B.C. Byelection

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2018/05/23/jagmeet-singh-trans-mountain-bc...

Posted elsewhere

Singh disappointed by NDP collapse in Quebec byelection

NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh speaks to reporters in the in the Foyer of the House of Commons on Parliament Hill in Ottawa on Tuesday, June 19, 2018. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Justin Tang

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/singh-disappointed-by-ndp-collapse-in-qu...

Ken Burch wrote:

Singh should go.  He's had his chance and we now know that there's nothing he can possibly do or say that will help the party at all.  He has failed.

How do you see that happening?

Well, the NDP will always be the "conscience of parliament" even if they go to 10 seats. Every silver lining has a cloud.