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.
Canada now has a Liberal/Tory grand coalition gov't
January 28, 2009 - 9:49pm
Let's continue the discussion here.
NDP Leader Jack Layton: "We have a new coalition now on Parliament Hill: It's a coalition between Mr. Harper and Mr. Ignatieff ... Today we have learned that you can't trust Mr. Ignatieff to oppose Mr. Harper. If you oppose Mr. Harper and you want a new government, I urge you to support the NDP."
I think that kills the coalition ... finally
I am shocked - shocked - that so many babblers who were so recently ready to jump into bed with a Liberal government have now turned around and condemned the Liberals... for being Liberals!
Jim Laxer sure has changed his tune about Jack Layton:
"Jack Layton has become the real leader of the opposition. He showed courage when he reached out to the Liberals to form a progressive coalition that could provide Canadians with the leadership they need to cope with the economic crisis. He tried the option of working with the Liberals. Michael Ignatieff has walked away from that option. Layton has retained his integrity and his clear understanding of what the country needs. Progressives now have one party and one party only available to them: the NDP."
Look, the NDP tried to "unite the left." They were willing to make some compromises to achieve it. The Liberals have now refused. The option is dead and now the NDP is going to have to fight like the dickens for the people they represent (e.g. 62% of Canadians who didn't vote for a Conservative government).
Shocked are you? Really?
I supported the coalition when it occured and with Dion as head of the Liberals. I recognized the coalition was dead as an idea and a strategy as soon as Ignasty was crowned King of All of Canada's Liberals and immediately began talking around rather than to his supposed coalition partners.
I don't think the option is dead. There may be another time where defeat by coalition is feasible and desirable again. NDPers don't have to sulk because of an entirely predictable action by the Liberals. It's probably for the best right now anyway.
Stockholm quoting me in the previous thread; me quoting Stockholm here:
In that sentence I meant liberal voters not the Liberal Party. Sorry, should have been more clear and I know I'm very inconsistent with caps.
I don't think the Libs (this time Liberal Party) have ever said they are "just like" the NDP. They say they share some values. They say that the Cons are scary and should be kept out office so vote Lib (ABC).
The Cons did, by and large, what the Liberal Party wanted them to do with the budget. This vote is on the budget. It is not on what happened in November. If they had voted in November, the gov't would have fallen. The Cons changed their tune. They get to stay in office.
This is all about political machinations.
The Liberal Party could (if they had any decent pr peeps) spin this favourably, and indeed they are trying by saying they are responsible for the budget. The only reason Harper/Flaherty have all this spending is to satisfy the Liberal demands. Layton ensured his demands would not be met by refusing to vote for the budget before having seen it.
Canadians, by and large, do not want an election. They do not want the Coalition, unfortunately either. If they did, we would have one. Outside of Quebec and Babble it is not popular. Suggesting that anyone who did not vote for the Cons, voted for the Coalition is faulty logic. Lots of Cdns who voted NDP or Lib are not happy about the coalition. Congrats to Harper and the Cons for their slimy spin on separatists.
43! confidence votes! I love to count! AH!-AH!-AH! AAAAAAAAAH!
Liberal, Tory, it's the same-old same-old
The Conservatives have already said they would accept Iggy's amendment.
So the NDP becomes irrelevant.
Gee, that's different!
Just because the Conservative's say they will "accept" Iggy's amendment doesn't mean that they will vote for it. The amendment would still need NDP and BQ support to pass.
I don't quite understand this attitude that if you stake out a position that doesn't win in the short-term - that makes you "irrelevent". That would be like saying that during a majority parliament - everyone was irrelevant. Or you could say that when the Liberals under Dion abstained 44 times it made the NDP and BQ "irrelevant" because their NO votes couldn't defeat the government.
Its never irrelevant to stake out a position on an issue and in the next election - the parties that refused to surrender to harper's bullying may suddenly become high RELEVANT.
Here's one more babbler who's glad the NDP is free, finally, to take some principled stands once again. We all noticed, too, that today Duceppe figured he had no reason to muzzle his raison d'être any longer -all that sweet coalition talk about what was good for Canada and Quebec- and was very adamant about considering Quebec first, Canada be damned if need be.
So, cards on the table. Except for the Herpetic Cons, of course, who've adopted liberal/Liberal discourse for this budget but who'll gradually give away the shop to the corporate sector.
King Stephen and Crown Prince Igor. Nice partnership.
Spector is right. The libs want to amend the Budget Bill. The Cons write the Lib amendment into the Budget. The Libs and Cons vote for the Budget. The NDP and Bloc vote against. One bill; one vote. Ladadee, life goes on...
Stockholm, I agree that those who refuse to surrender to the Cons this time around will have something principled to offer voters, if not at the next election, in another one eventually.
The Liberals lost a considerable amount of support over the period they yessired to the Cons. Coincidence? I hope not.
So, who does the 62% majority support now?
The coalition idea was a good one.
Some things you win, and some you lose.
And I'm tired of people suggesting that the coalition wasn't popular, as the last poll, EKOS I believe, showed 50% support for it. The Cons have been on a massive pr campaign to discredit it, but we wouldn't expect anything less from the Cons. We don't vote for prime minister (each political party has a process for choosing their respective leaders, and one will become prime minister) nor do we vote for coalitions, when we actually vote at election time.
First you vote on the amendments, then you vote on the entire bill. If the cons don't pass the amendment, the libs won't pass the bill. Didn't you guys watch the little cartoon about how bills become laws? :P That's actually American but good none-the-less.
But seriously: first reading: Bill is printed
Second reading - amendments are made - sometimes referred back to Committtee - months can pass.
Third reading - bill is voted on as amended.
Then Senate gets its 3 readings. Then Royal Assent from the GG.
The budget will get sped through but bills can take a year or more.
Yes it is.
The coalition idea was a good gambit, but it lost all its shine when Ignasty took the leash of the Liberal Party. I agree with the poster who said the NDP is now free again to stake out principled positions. They should begin doing so. That in itself would set them apart from the ConLibs.
As long as Iggy is the head of the Liberal party, that coalition will never be feasible. First, he would never agree to it; second, the NDP would be crazy to enter one with him since he is totally untrustworthy and would sooner join a coalition with the Cons before the NDP.
The conservative gov't will fall eventually. If Iggy thinks he can win the next election, we vote; If he doesn't, he might look towards the Coalition. The Bloc would be for it. Quebec doesn't want another election. Depends on how badly Layton want to be a cabinet minister.
Perhaps he should now be called IGG-George
_________________________________________________________________________________________________ Our Demands Most Moderate are/ We Only Want The World! -James Connolly
Do you regard Iggy's taking over from Dion to be a fundamental change in the Liberal Party?