Democratic Coalition ideas

115 posts / 0 new
Last post
Wilf Day

Harper and his apologists like to claim that replacing his minority government with a Coalition having the support of the majority of MPs -- and MPs who were even elected by the majority of voters, for a change -- would somehow be "undemocratic."

An Alice-in-Wonderland argument, as we can see:

Quote:
`When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'

`The question is,' said Alice, `whether you can make words mean so many different things.'

`The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, `which is to be master - - that's all.' 


  

HUAC

Aha!  Lurking way below the radar and moving at the glacial pace we are familiar with:

http://www.oliphantcommission.ca/English/About/about.php

With the economy heading south, having Steve's mentor in the dock (again) just may refresh some memories re who voted for what and when, possibly even raise an eyebrow or two among the populace, as the breadlines they're standing in reach the horizon and beyond.

I can easily envision some potential crankiness here.   

 

 

Brian White

I agree that all the public fear of the coalition was planted in the papers. Coming from a part of the world where coalitions are totally normal, I saw shocking dumb remarks from political pundits all the time and their expressions! It was as if they had to eat raw shit from a pig farm. Murphy at least.

I certainly think your idea is plausible. I cannot find any reason for the GG granting Harper an extension when Harper lost the confidence of the house.

Harpers reason, coalition is unstable hardly qualifys when he himself called off his last minority government due to instability.  

UNLESS she is working for "The BIG BOYS" who control the liberal party. They wanted to quash the Dion attempt to retain power. Fearing that it would be permenently retained. Also, they feared rae would eventually beat their lovechild in a fair fight down the road. So first they used the gg to kill off dion. (remember he would be PM right now if the GG had used logic) and then they used the liberal party exec to beat rae.

Iggie is doing his best to nullify the coalition for his masters. Its a theory and it might be true. I believe a coalition is necessary to finish off Harper. This is essential for Canada to continue as a democracy.

But Iggie could fuck it all up if his masters are dumb enough. 

outwest wrote:

  The public would have accepted a coalition. As one of Nixon's henchman used to say: "If you have the guts (b***s) to do something - hearts and minds will follow."

All this talk about the "public not liking" Rae or Dion or Layton or the Bloc or Harper or Mackay or anyone else is pure red herring baloney. The public thinks what the media tells them to think, as with time it can become accustomed to anything, including  lies, backtracking, prevarications, corruption, and outright deception.

Think of Mulroney's air scandal, Harper's income trust fund reneging, the Liberals turnabout on NAFTA, blah blah blah blah blah. Nary a whimperfrom the "outraged public" about any of that now.

Don't tell me the coalition couldn't have succeeded. The big boy Liberals didn't want it to succeed. End of story.

peterjcassidy peterjcassidy's picture

I  have strongly backed JAck and the colation but some of the thoughts on its tuture , such as versions of "Unite the Left",  make me nervous.  We need a braader discussion in the party on  a colaition or accord and where we go from January 28th.   repeat the call for a Federal council.

Fidel

Is Iggy a nationalist?

Quote:

The energy status quo is unfathomable and Ignatieff, quite naturally, has questions. He's an intelligent man. Why are we a big net importer of oil in the East and a big net exporter in the West?  Why indeed? And where is that east-west hydro corridor? What about stringent NAFTA energy provisions?

18,000 jobs goin' south with unrefined oil from tar sands

Free trade at twenty by Duncan Cameron

Quote:
An expatriate academic, writer and broadcaster living in Britain at the time said Canada signed its own economic death warrant when it signed the free trade agreement. His name: Michael Ignatieff

Let's hope the Igg man still holds that thought til at least the end of the month or next perogy fest, whichever comes first.

madmax

Sarann wrote:

Retraining is not passe.  The more education the more we adapt to the world as it is. 

  Sounds good doesn't it? And you are the person the government caters to with these kinds of feel good announcements and programs.

Enjoy. 

madmax

Sarann wrote:

Elizabeth May would make a great senator. 

Yes, Elizabeth told us she would make a great senator, too.  Did such a great job, she helped undermine the integrity of the coalition. Elizabeth May wants a Cushy Senate Seat no differently then the Harper Hacks who received one. 

 

Quote:
I'm not  a green voter but I think she is honest, out spoken, environmentally on the mark, and doesn't have a hidden agenda.  Why wouldn't I like her better than some of those who were chosen.  Her party got almost a million votes and no seat. 
 

Elizabeth May is no different then any other backroom dealing politician.  Just because ones hidden agenda becomes exposed, doesn't mean it wasn't meant to be hidden. I see you have changed from saying "She" received almost 1 million votes to "her party" received  almost 1 million votes, just ignore the fact that she  contributed to the failure of the coalition with her quest for a self serving Senate Seat.   

Quote:
 If she was in the senate those people would have a voice. 
The NDP has no one in the Senate and they have a "voice" without resorting to patronage. I have yet to see anyone in the Senate give me a voice, regardless of how i voted.   The Senate could give Elizabeth May the Freedom to express her pro life believes above her pro choice position, without having to go to the electorate or facing the party. Elizabeth May comes from a "Club" not a movement. Clubs are made of elitists. Senates are made of Elitists and Hacks.

We need a referendum to abolish the Senate or face further abuse from the likes of Harper, the next Liberal Government and elitists like Elizabeth May who believe they are entitled to large salaries and little work.

Once the Senate is abolished we could offer former Senators jobs in community service such as street sweeping. Then people like "senator May" could do something for those near one million people who voted for "her" ermm, Green.

Quote:
 

They are certainly not going to vote for the conservative demonizers and denegaters no matter how subtely they try to make their little points, and neither am I. Your subtelty doesn't work fellas.  We can spot you every time. 

What on earth are you talking about???

Brian White

I grew up in ireland in retraining mode. I got turned away from numerous jobs with the "you are overqualified" talk.  So I had  the mad max sentiment for years. Germans would tell me "ireland is going to be the boom area of europe and i would say, "have you been there?" in disbelief.

but when things finally did turn around, Ireland was ready with the youngest best trained workforce in europe. So speaking from experience, if you figure out the right retraining, then it can be a very good thing.  It is probably a lot better to retrain people than to blow the money on the suv companies.

I do not want to buy a car but now I am being forced to pay for cars for the next 20 years. 

madmax wrote:
Sarann wrote:

Retraining is not passe.  The more education the more we adapt to the world as it is. 

  Sounds good doesn't it? And you are the person the government caters to with these kinds of feel good announcements and programs.

Enjoy. 

madmax

Ontario is not about to "turn around" when the purpose of the free trade agreements is to dumb down the economy, while creating the illusion of a technical and well paying service sector economy.  Considering I have both College and University and many many certificates, and there are more on the horizon, you mistake the fact that I am a believer in education and training.  Education and training provides a person with something that cannot be taken away. 

However, the is this mindset out there that all the people unemployed or losing their jobs are uneducated or poorly trained nicompoops who, if trained, will earn a better living and more secure future.

Once again, I watch as the government retains quality assurance/inspectors etc, in the health care fields, only to discover their is little to zero full time work available, and then these same people find themselves working for a temp agency back in a warehouse or manufacturing environment.

As for being overqualified, if you are applying for government jobs, that is never the case, and if you are applying in the private sector, you tailor your resume to the position applied. Dumb it down is very common, as the jobs that have been created in the "new economy" require few skills and are part time in nature.

The people being displaced from Auto, a small sector of the industrial economy that has been shattered in Ontario, has some of the more highly trained and skilled workforce to be found, much like anyone involved in manufacturing. 

The country requires an industrial policy.

Fact is, Ireland did what China did and that is what Ontario had but surrendered after a hundred years. If you think we can employ engineers for $600 a month, or get people to read Xrays for $249 a month, it is not going to happen. 

People need jobs to go to and as far as I can tell, if you want to make 2 to 3 times + vs the trend in the private sector, you must get a public sector job.

The Coalition has the best platform with regards to forestry and industrial policy. This is a result of the NDP challenging the official positions of the LPC which was the same as the CPC.  The LPC has to change if it is going to make a difference and needs the "coalition partner" to hold it accountable. 

 

 

 

 

Brian White

 Fact is Ireland has a higher income than Canada per capita. Presumably you think that irish rates are $600 per month?

Fact is i came over here for a woman. Fact is I left a high paying job to do so.  

Fact is, you do not know fact from fiction. 

madmax wrote:

Fact is, Ireland did what China did and that is what Ontario had but surrendered after a hundred years. If you think we can employ engineers for $600 a month, or get people to read Xrays for $249 a month, it is not going to happen.

 

madmax

To clarify.  My intent was not to box Chinas wages with Irelands, unfortuneately, it can be read that way, which if read that way, is wrong, so my apologies for the confusion of my sentence struture. My intent was to demonstrate that both Ireland & China have a well trained and skilled labour force to meet the latest labour market needs in order to secure capital investments supported by government incentives. However, those countries, have been well positioned to receive foreign capital investment along with government incentives. 

Canada has the same well trained workforce. It is this workforce that are losing their jobs, the same jobs to china and elsewhere.  I only intended to compare the wages of an Engineer in China, which can be had for as little as $600/month. 

Same goes with CNC, Lab Technologists etc... and when we consider workplaces such as Banks, Insurance, and Communications, all these operations can be run and many are run from India or in some cases Africa.

Thus, getting a financial quote, or an insurance quote, in fact getting past the quote and purchasing policies, stocks, or communications service is done outside of this country, same for diagnostic services.

Canada has become a resource export nation, a warehouse nation, and is rapidly becoming a post industrial nation.

Losing the industrial base, at this rate, will lead to a meltdown. The cost of losing these jobs over the past few years has had a large effect on local economies.  This was the trend that was supported by NeoLiberal economic and trade policies supported by consecutive liberal and conservative governments. It is a throwback to a time before Canada was a nation and all we did was supply resources for Europe and behave like a good colony.  

Sir John A MacDonald created a country with a National Policy that would have made no Econonic sense at the time. Certainly a policy that would never be supported by free market capitalism. But it built a country.

We have no governments with a vision for Canada. Growth for Growth sake built upon an expanding low wage economy is not healthy or sustainable, and when the downturn occurs, there is no boomcycle that returns a better future for more Canadians, just an end to a downturn, with the wealthy able to make bigger gains.

Fact is, Mr. White, I am concerned about the Canadian Economy and the government policies that are nothing more then Platitudes and spin.

I work with the government on its training programs and they have made many positive changes to their training programs to allow more people to participate and take advantage.

But this is only one side of the coin.  

 

 

 

 

  

Sarann

If there is anything Elizabeth May doesn't have it's a hidden agenda.  She is refreshingly outspoken and honest.  It is not wise for conservatives to talk about who has and has not got a mandate.  The democratic coalition would have a mandate of 62% of voters.  The NDP has a voice because it has members of parliament.  We need proportional representation of some kind.   The system we have is so skewed it is an embarrasment.  Every developed country has some form of proportional representation except Britian, US, Australia and Canada.  I can't believe the rest of the world is all wrong. 

Highlander

Actually Sarann,

Even Australia has a form of PR, the Single-Transferable Vote, for their Senate elections.  Not my preferred method of PR and not in the House of Commons, but still something.

roystin

Harper can no longer be trusted, his financial statement revealed his
true intentions, the tip of the iceberg if he were to win a majority.
His back-down on those proposals is only temporary, a short term
sacrifice toward winning a majority, but he will enact all those
proposals eventually if he gets the chance, and he can do a lot of it
with "executive orders in council" without passing laws or even
consulting parliament. If he realises his days are numbered as P.M.,
then he may do as much damage as possible under ashort-lived minority
returned to power by the new liberal leader Michael Ignatieff.

Hopefully you all have figured most of this out, Neither The liberals
nor any of the opposition can support Harper when parliament is
recalled, he intends to sell off canadian federal
assets, probably to his friends at bargain prices alla Haris and hwy
no. 407, or the failed Ontario Realty Board SCandal, in which Earnie
Eaves pocketed 50 million by flipping an Ontario Provincial realestate
asset which he purchased with a provincial loan for 20 or 50 thousand.
Many others were given the same deal, it is unclear to me if all were
stopped and moneys returned as it was not well covered by the media, i
wonder why? Remember also that Harris , that means Flaherty and Clement
also, intended to privatise Ontario Hydro- thankfully we had the great
blackout of 2003- remember, other wise they would have done it, and then
were would we be now. And harper can do such similar things without
consulting parliament:

If Harper passes one confidence motion- namely a comprehensive ( if
vague) budget, he won't allow another confidence motion until he's
ready for another election, perhaps as short as six months to a year-
he'll rule by "executive orders in council " and effectively undermine
Federal laws and parliament as he did during the last two years, and he
will sell off valuable federal government assets in the
mean time, though he may promise not to because of the coalition,
but we know what his promises are worth. He will do it eventually, we
have to get him out of federal politics once and for all, for the good
of the country!

Canadians deserve to understand his real intentions, he intends to sell
off canadian federal assets, just like mulroney and harris- he has
admitted it and he will do it

The media is distorting public opinion polls, and may try to force an
immediate election if Harper loses a non-confidence vote- Canadians need
to be prepared to win an election if somehow the g.g.
choses to ignore democracy, and with this info we can persuade the g.g.
to allow the liberals to form a minority government. If Harper wins, we
all lose, just as with Mulroney and Harris, they are all cut from the
same cloth.

We need to get rid of Harper from parliament, once and for all, for the
good of the country, and for the good of the conservative party- they
need to get an new leader and this will help them understand
that- he has disgraced himself with own sincere plans as revealed in
his financial statement, backing down from that is only temporay, we
know what the truth is now, we know what he do if he got power again.
Under Harper the conservatives can never win a majority government
because of the damage done in Quebec, they don't understand that has
reprecussions in the rest of central and eastern Canada, with a much
more sophisticated understanding of la Belle province than Western
Canada.

He Can't be trusted, His budget must be brought down regardless of its
contents, because there are no laws to make him stick to it if there are
any ambiguities in it, or do so much more with "executive
orders in council", Harper, Flaherety and Clement must be defeated.
If the conservatives are allowed to rule, those three must resign and
be barred from any access to government, but that sort of compromise is
not likely if possible at all. Therefore Ignatieff must ask the g-g to
be allowed to form a government, and she must concede to his request,
otherwise democracy has failed, the social contract is broken and
"peace", order and good government are in serious peril. Harper can't
be trusted, we must not have another election till the coalition has
been given a chance.

good luck, the country is depending on you, don't let us down

At the very least you must warn the public of this grave threat -
harper's plans to privatise public assets, billions and billions of
dollars worth, in his own words, and explain it clearly, link him to the
407, through flarhety and clement- don't forget about the listeriosis
debacle, due to deregulation like walkerton- work the facts, don't let
the media force its selective memory on the canadian public, we need the
coalition now, before harper does anymore damage , and he will with
executive orders in council. act boldly, act now!

Harper can't be trusted! Regardless of the content of his next budget,
He must be forced to resign! There must not be another election until
the full effects of the last election are allowed to be carried
forward, there is no justice without due process, the coalition must be
allowed to stand!

madmax

Sarann wrote:
If there is anything Elizabeth May doesn't have it's a hidden agenda.
Nor is she part of the coalition, nor does she have a seat, nor was she wise enough to put Canadians needs before her personal need for a Senate Seat.  

Quote:
 She is refreshingly outspoken and honest.
Most politicians are outspoken. That is hardly refreshing, but standard fair for a leader of a political party on the fringes. Elizabeth May was not honest or forthcoming with either the electorate or her own party. 

Quote:
 

The democratic coalition would have a mandate of 62% of voters. 

The coalition would technically have the support of the LPC and NDP MPs only. If you wish to encompass those voters who voted for these MPs then you have support of roughly 26% and 18% respectively from the LPC and NDP.

This is nowhere near the 62% myth and the LPC/NDP were foolish to promote a 62% figure only to be undermined by polls that gave roughly 41% support for the coalition.  Which isn't a terrible figure in politics, but is a far cry from 62%.

 

Quote:
The NDP has a voice because it has members of parliament. 
That is correct. Electing MPs gives political parties a voice in parliment. It is how the system works.

 

Quote:
We need proportional representation of some kind. 

Cool idea..... I rarely hear about PR on babble :)

madmax

Here is an article stating that Jack Layton paid the biggest price for supporting the coalition.

Quote:

Layton the biggest loser in coalition folly

By Lorne Gunter, For The Calgary HeraldJanuary 6, 2009 11:03 AM

The Tory-versus-coalition flap defined Canadian politics this past year. Even though it came late in the year and despite the fact there was also an election, the constitutional crisis caused by the Tories' overreaching attempt to defund their opponents and the Liberal-NDPBloc attempt to overturn the results of an election less than two months after it was held will be the political event longest remembered from 2008.

And the more I reflect on it, the more I am convinced Jack Layton was the crisis's biggest loser.

If we assume the coalition is dead (and it 99.9 per cent is), then the party and leader who have fallen the farthest back as a result of the power play are the NDP and Layton.

So how does the coalition find its feet. An aloof Liberal with more in common with Harper then Layton. An NDP sliding in the polls and unable to speak its mind, while part of a coalition that is currently DEAD SILENT.

Is it time, the right time for Layton to cut bait officially regarding the coalition.

Clearly the LPC believe they can stand on their own two feet now that they NDP showed the LPC what a spine looks like.

Currently the LPC are playing the NDP as a side dish that they can take or leave.

The failure of the Dion lead coalition plus the lack of committment from the LPC has left the NDP holding the coalition baggage and the BQs laundry ticket. 

How does the NDP pry itself away from what could well turn out to be return to the 90s in terms of public support.  Is there a way that the NDP can regain the agenda and take the initiative now that the LPC has put the breaks on the coalition choo choo.

 

Wilf Day

madmax wrote:
. . .  now that the LPC has put the breaks on the coalition choo choo.

Many media pundits have claimed this. But what Liberals have said so? Links, please.

 

Sean in Ottawa

Stuart_Parker wrote:
Here's who has won so far: the Canadian people. We're getting a stimulus package instead of an austerity package. I'm a New Democrat and I think that, when it comes to the day-to-day lives of working people over the next year, forcing Harper to comply with the G20 stimulus agenda was absolutely worth us losing 60% of our supporters in the West in the short term.

Wow, I wish this were true.

Unfortunately we have a bait and switch going on. Canadians need and want a stimulus package and instead we are going to get diminished government through tax cuts that will be sold to us as a stimulus package. In a recession that is expected to last over a year, it is bad advice to load up on debt and people won't fall for it -- not business and not individuals. What we are going to get is almost no stimulus but further help for those who have at the cost of those who have not. And they got at least some New Dems confused or fooled. Harper has won this big time. Canadians are so sadly misinformed and the media too compliant that they will think that a round of tax cuts to the rich is in fact stimulus. I started a thread on this with an admittedly long post trying to explain this earlier today.

madmax

 Liberal MP Jim Karygiannis says coalition is finished,

 Liberal MP hinted Thursday that a Grit-NDP coalition to bring down the ... could end up pitting MPs in the coalition against each other. .

Guelph Liberal MP Frank Valeriote has become the first in his party to openly oppose--albeit.

 

And Liberals are ready to ditch the tainted word coalition.

Liberal MP Marlene Jennings in a recent interview with the Canadian Jewish News. According to reporter David Lazarus, Jennings, who served as the top Liberal negotiator for the deal, reacted with impatience whenever the word came up. "There is no coalition," she told him.

 

Regardless of the posturing and shifting away from the word coalition, the Silence of the Liberals is deafening

 

 

Sean in Ottawa

And by the way the new Liberal leader was clear in the last election that he likes tax cuts-- so he and Harper will cut the taxes for those of us with decent incomes and screw the people who really need help.

In the long term as I said in my other post the government ability to do anything including maintain basic programs will be compromised-- this recession is a neo-con's dream-- under cover of darkness they will dismantle the government while calling it stimulus. Next year they will say the cupboard is bare and the axes will come out. Health care? Can't afford it-- here you go private sector. 

Please everyone, stop thinking Harper and crew are stupid. They aren't. While you think you won something you just got screwed. These people think strategically and long term. It is essential that people start to review what they are saying and doing in terms of the long range effect this will have on their clearly stated objectives of smaller governments from themselves and a framewok imposed on future governments that forces them into the same situation. Massive tax cuts are difficult to reverse. First you have the economic blow they can create when taxes are first imposed and second they are difficult politically. The Cons know they are taking apart something that would take incredible resolve and will and likely decades to put back together. And, these guys are looking that far down the line.

Sean in Ottawa

I said before the NDP has to move away from the coalition and some people here said to me no, no stay the course somehow when the NDP is left alone there will be benfits in being in a coalition by ourselves.

Politically, the damage is already happening, we are associated with an idea that has unfortunately been discredited and abandonned. Like any relationship the one left behind usually suffers more than the one who left. When the Liberals were screwing around and Dion blew it, we should have walked. Then we might have preserved our ability to re-introduce the idea under circumstances that might lead to success and thereby look like leaders rather than losers as we do now.

It would have cost the party no political capital to admit that the public was only luke-warm at best and the Liberals were in no position as yet to lead a coalition. this would have been a small attack on the Liberals that would have done us no harm in admitting the truth everyone could see. Then we could have come back in the future saying now is the time. 

By not admitting that this was not the time we will not be believed when we say it is. And that could have been as early as the dropping of the budget on the 26th.

If the NDP had backed away in mid December and gone back to the public with an aim to get support and advice as to what to do with the budget we might have come full circle by budget day with a winning option but now we are more likely to be seen as irrelevant, predictable opportunists who have so little public support that nobody need listen. And if the Cons do something really aggressive we could end up in an election we could lose badly.

This is what I thought then and in the last month, there has been nothing to change my mind. Our one track policy has led us to posturing about the coalition rather than addressing the bigger problem with the Cons idea of replacing a direct stimulus with more tax cuts.

Frankly there is a lot at stake here. I think Layton's leadership could be doomed if the party continues to misplay this one. It may take a while but he might never recover as leader.

You have to be seen as dynamic, as leading and as aware of the political realities. Sticking with a coalition that in the end resulted in ending Dion's tenure leaves Layton associated more with Dion and failure than success. And the coalition is an option that could be revived-- that is exactly how Ignatief is playing it. He can revive it when he thinks it can work and he will look like the leader and Layton won't.

roystin

your trusting the corporate media as to whether the coalition is alive or not? There is your fundamental problem in your reasoning- the corporate media is trying to support this junta of harper's that is completely undemoratic- in any other civilised country there would have been a smotth transition to a coalition- its only in third world puppet democrcies this kind of manipulation of democracy would be allowed. so the corporate media is our enemy, and democracy is at stake- no exageration here- and if i could believe me i would exagerte, except the stakes are to high. And yes this is a high stakes game for jack, but not for the party, and if jack is hoping to have any influence on the national scene he must be willing to take chances, as long as he sticks to legitimate actions, and not worry about the hype and bias of the press- canadians are smasrter than that, and were sick and tired of being bullied by the media- democracy is at stake. I turned away from jack because he had been propping up this conservative government, if he continues to do that he will have completely lost all integrity, now is no time to quit, he must stand by his priniciples, to the to the end, to finish  what he began, or he really will be scene as a laughingstock. The strongest moves in chess are threats, let the coalition stand as a threat, if iggnatief decides not pull the tigger, it will be his responsibility for supporting harper, but leave the doo r open to wrok with all sincere parties in the house, leave petty political fighting aside. Iggnatief is a much more credible leader than dion or harper and because he is a little further to the right than dion, the coalition has that much more chance than before of succeeding. We can't afford another month of harper incompetence, much les a year or two. We need the coalition now- democrcy must be allowed to stand, the results of the last election must be aceepted, it was harper who called the election and asked for a majority- it was rejected, those results must stand, the coalition must be handed the reignsof government as is their legitimate democractic right and duty.Harper can't be trusted, no matter what promises he makes, no matter how good his budget sounds, if its a good budget, the coalition will enact it.

roystin

Harper can no longer be trusted, his financial statement revealed his true intentions, the tip of the iceberg if he were to win a majority.  His back-down on those proposals is only temporary, a short term sacrifice toward winning a majority, but he will enact all those proposals eventually if he gets the chance, and he can do a lot of it with "executive orders in council" without passing laws or even consulting parliament, he's already shown he's willing to defy his own laws recently passed such as the fixed length of term for federal elections.  If he realises his days are numbered as P.M., then he may do as much "damage" as possible under a short-lived minority  returned to power by the new liberal leader Michael Ignatieff.

Hopefully you all have figured most of this out,
Neither The liberals nor any of the opposition can support Harper when parliament is recalled, he intends to sell off canadian federal assets, probably to his friends at bargain prices alla Haris and hwy  no. 407, or the failed Ontario Realty Board Scandal, in which Earnie Eaves pocketed 50 million by flipping an Ontario Provincial realestate asset which he purchased with a provincial loan for 20 or 50 thousand.  Many others were given the same deal, it is unclear to me if all were stopped and moneys returned as it was not well covered by the media, i wonder why? Remember also that Harris , that means Flaherty and Clement also, intended to privatise  Ontario Hydro- thankfully we had the great blackout of 2003- remember, other wise they would have done it, and then were would we be now.  And harper can do such similar things without consulting parliament:

If Harper passes one confidence motion- namely a comprehensive ( if vague)  budget, he won't allow another confidence motion  until he's ready for another election, perhaps as short as six months to a year- he'll rule by "executive orders in council " and effectively undermine Federal laws and parliament as he did during the last two years, and he will sell off valuable federal government assets in the mean time, though he may promise not to because of the coalition,  but we know what his promises are worth.  He will do it eventually, we have to get him out of  federal politics once and for all,  for the good of the country!

Canadians deserve to understand his real intentions, he intends to sell off canadian federal assets, just like mulroney and harris- he has admitted it and he will do it

 The media is distorting  public opinion polls, and may try to force an immediate election if Harper loses a non-confidence vote- Canadians need to be prepared to win an election if somehow  the g.g. choses to ignore democracy, and with this info we can persuade the g.g. to allow the liberals to form a minority government.  If Harper wins, we all lose, just as with Mulroney and Harris, they are all cut from the same cloth.

We need to get rid of Harper from parliament, once and for all, for the good of the country, and for the good of the conservative party- they need to get an new leader and this will help them understand that- he has disgraced  himself with own sincere plans as revealed in his financial statement, backing down from that is only temporay, we know what the truth is now, we know what he would do if he got power again.

Under Harper the conservatives can never win a majority government because of the damage done in Quebec, the conservatives don't understand that has reprecussions in the rest of central and eastern Canada, which has  a much more sophisticated understanding of la Belle province than Western Canada.

 He Can't be trusted, His budget must be brought down regardless of its contents, because there are no laws to make him stick to it if there are any ambiguities in it, or do so much more with "executive orders in council".  Harper, Flaherety and Clement must be defeated.

    If the conservatives are allowed to rule, those three must  resign and be barred from any access to government, but that sort of compromise is not  likely if possible at all.  Therefore Ignatieff must ask the g-g to be allowed to form a government, and she must concede to his request, otherwise democracy has failed, the social contract is broken and "peace", order and good government are in serious peril.  Harper can't be trusted, we must not have another election till the coalition has been given a chance.

good luck, the country is depending on you, don't let us down

At the very least you must warn the general public of this grave threat - harper's plans to privatise public assets, billions and billions of dollars worth, in his own words, and explain it clearly, link him to the 407, through flarhety and clement- don't forget about the listeriosis debacle, due to deregulation like walkerton- work the facts, don't let the media force its selective memory on the canadian public, we need the coalition now, before harper does anymore damage , and he will with executive orders in council. act boldly, act now!

Harper can't be trusted! Regardless of the content of his next budget, He must be forced to resign! There must not be another election until the full effects of the last  election are allowed to be carried forward, there is no justice without due process, the coalition must be allowed to stand!

Stockholm

Why all the hysteria? We will know whether the coalition lives or dies in exactly two weeks. Either Ignatieff decides to stand up to Harper and become PM in which case the NDP gets to be part of the governing coalition OR Ignatieff shows extreme weakness and goas back to the Dion strategy of being a coward running away from confidence votes like a dog with its tail between its legs. If the latter happens, then we probably have a good year of a Harper absolute dictatorship and during that year the NDP can blame Ignatieff for being responsible for every single solitary reactionary thing the Tories do.

People - stop getting hung up on th hort term and look at the long term. In almost every case, if the NDP paid attention to advice proferreed by all these chicken littles - god only knows how badly off we would be. I remember all the predictions that making a deal with Paul Martin would cause the NDP to lose official party status. I remember just a few months ago everyone freaking out over how Elizabeth may and her merry band of amateurs would drive the NDP into single digits. I remember so many of you freaking out about how the NDP would be wiped off the map for daring to oppose the carbon tax!  

I have confidence that Layton and his strategist know what they are doing - they have been right far more often than they have been wrong. 

roystin

where did you buy those rose tinted glasses, cause i guess i need a pair, because i am not an ideologistist or a party hack-  wn't blindly trust any man woman or party- as far as i'm cpoincerned the last four yeas have been a disatster for the country, we went from a 13 billion dollar surplus, which jack had the opportunity of forcing martin  to spend on infrastructure, and soccial justice issue, nation child care- to tory incopetance with the tacit supprot of the new democrats- and if we allow the liberals to trust this little dictator again, we may be in for 4 or eight more years of tory incopetence, but the ndp has a few more seats, wow, i guess i do have my priorities mixed up. and who cares if democracy is demolished by the media, the ndp may get a couple mpore seats in the next election, may be officail opposition status in an impotent opposition to a harper majority- but the ndp parties will be better with afew more seats we'll get more funding, if the torries don't eliminate as they promised in their last finacial statement a harper wish list- i guess i do need those rose tinted glasses

Hoodeet

A spelling note from your friendly neighbourhood pedant: it's "laissez-faire" (hands-off), unless there's an ironic intention to your spelling, M.Spector, implying that some hegemonic folks are too lazy to do anything.

But I do agree with you that the Liberals have already had too many nails driven into their coffin... by their own.

Wilf Day

On the Newsworld Politics Programme tonight, Susan Bonner questioned Ralph Goodale:

Bonner: We heard Ministers today saying that infrastructure sounds like its going to be a priority in terms of spending to stimulate the economy, Mr. Baird saying it's an immediate shot in the arm. What are Liberals thinking about what they would like to see in terms of more spending on infrastructure?

Goodale: "Well, Susan, this initiative should have been taken a long time ago. We know that under existing government infrastructure programming there's a backlog of about 3 billion dollars of projects that have gone through the vetting process as far as local communities are concerned, but the money still sits in Ottawa and has not been disbursed across the country. So there's that backlog that should never have existed, it goes back to 2006. The government should do its own homework and get its own program up and running and out the door as it should have done over the course of the last two and a half years. Secondly, there will need to be incremental investments over and above what is normally budgetted for for the coming year. What was budgetted for for past years never happened, so . . ."

Clear inference: they didn't spend the money they already had in the budget, so regardless what they promise to spend on infrastructure in this month's budget, why should Canadians trust them? 

Not an argument for supporting the budget or the government.

Brian White

 I agree with Wilf and Stockholm.  I think that regardless of what happens the NDP can look ahead to better numbers in parliament. In my local paper, they noted that economists are almost universally NOT inpressed with Harpers stimulus.  It is basically tax cuts for the rich. They all note that this has been tried with spectacular failure in the USA. They even have figures (from the prior trying of this type of tax cuts by gerogie boy)  for where the money is going to go.  Rich people will use the money (the income tax gift)  to pay down their mortgauges,  What good is that to someone who just lost his job?

 A stimulus package involves no tax cuts, rather the government putting money into road improvements (not more roads, but improving the ones we have), and cycleways, or windmills or solar hot water conversions on houses. (Something that provides employment for the people who WILL get laid off very soon) and improves the energy efficiency of our economy long term.  Even tree planting. (The forestry companys were allowed to IGNORE their duties with regard to planting as soon as there was a slight downturn).

(Tree planting companies laid off staff bigtime last summer)

There are MILLIONS of hectares of BC forests that could be replanted in a sound way ( different species of trees planted together) so no more beatles destroying monoculture.  LOTS of work out there.

We just need a government with a bit of imagination.  Tax cuts is a gift to harpers cronies. A stimulus package is something very different. 

Same result with regard to government debt. It WILL go up.

But would you rather pay down the mortgauges for rich people or would you rather have a job next summer? 

Thats the message we have to get across (and probably to liberal voters most of all) to stop Iggie sucking up to Harper. If we get that mesage across, Iggie will have to back down and become PM.

Fucking stupid statement but it is part of the odd reality that is Canada today! 

Wilf Day wrote:

On the Newsworld Politics Programme tonight, Susan Bonner questioned Ralph Goodale:

Bonner: We heard Ministers today saying that infrastructure sounds like its going to be a priority in terms of spending to stimulate the economy, Mr. Baird saying it's an immediate shot in the arm. What are Liberals thinking about what they would like to see in terms of more spending on infrastructure?

Goodale: "Well, Susan, this initiative should have been taken a long time ago. We know that under existing government infrastructure programming there's a backlog of about 3 billion dollars of projects that have gone through the vetting process as far as local communities are concerned, but the money still sits in Ottawa and has not been disbursed across the country. So there's that backlog that should never have existed, it goes back to 2006. The government should do its own homework and get its own program up and running and out the door as it should have done over the course of the last two and a half years. Secondly, there will need to be incremental investments over and above what is normally budgetted for for the coming year. What was budgetted for for past years never happened, so . . ."

Clear inference: they didn't spend the money they already had in the budget, so regardless what they promise to spend on infrastructure in this month's budget, why should Canadians trust them? 

Not an argument for supporting the budget or the government.

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

From Paul Kellogg's [url=open">http://www.poleconanalysis.org/2009/01/dear-jack-do-you-really-want-this... letter to Jack layton[/url]:

Quote:
Last election, young people – the young people I see every day as a teacher, the young people that you and I both saw when we were both teachers at Ryerson University – just didn’t care about a choice between Harper, Dion or yourself. They didn’t see themselves in any of the parties. But I was able to tell them – in good conscience – that there was a big difference between your party and the others. Your party was committed to bringing the troops home – the troops sent to war by the Liberals, and dying in increasing numbers under the Conservatives. That argument worked. Young people hate this war. So when they were told that there was one party calling for an end to the war, they voted for you.

You have now lost their vote. You have sent them the message that principles like stopping a murderous, barbaric war are not as important – as what? What exactly did you get from your deal with the Liberals? Afghanistan is on the shelf. Taxing the corporations is on the shelf. The only thing you seem to have “won” is the promise of six cabinet seats. A religious man who greatly influenced me – an anti-war minister of the United Church – would have known what to call this – a mess of pottage. Look it up.

The coalition gambit was a top-down bureaucratic, back-room deal – and has been perceived as such by millions of ordinary Canadians who are recoiling in horror. The terrible effect of this backroom coalition adventure has been to bring Stephen Harper back from the dead – he’s soaring in the polls – and to accelerate the arrival of Michael Ignatieff as head of the Liberals – the same Michael Ignatieff who supported George W. Bush’s war on Iraq. Do you really want to sit at the cabinet table with Michael Ignatieff in the chair?

Sean in Ottawa

I agree with M. Spector.

The NDP needs to return to NDP issues and concerns and get away from the rotting body of a long dead coalition. We are looking like the literature classic where the family keeps the dead relative at the table as if she were alive because they do not want to admit she died (can't remember which story this is but I am reminded of it now).

We would not be saying we are not in favour of a coalition, just showing that we can recognize facts and are not living in a fantasy-- this would allow us to move on based on current realities. We do not have time for this to play out and we will end up shortly opposing not just a Con budget but a Con-Liberal one. Our strategy needs to be more appropriate than it is now. The first question may be why can we not support a budget endorsed by a partner of ours?

Fidel

Paul Kellogg should explain to his students that Canada is a Northern colony of the U.S. and projecting their foreign policies for many years. And I hope Kellogg is also explaining to his students just how this obsolete electoral system has frustrated millions of Canadian voters since an extremely undemocratic neoliberal agenda was foisted on Canadians by U.S. and Canadian rightwing ideologues since Brian Mulroney.

If Kellogg does desire to point out a list of important differences between the NDP and the two big business and pro-USA parties in power and sharing power in Ottawa for the last 140 years in a row, I think I might be able to send him a brief lecture outline for the sake of better informing his students.

But apparently the choices are not difficult at all for Kellogg and the young people he talks to. This particular bit of Ottawa's vicious toadying to US empire expansion in Central Asia has put him and his students over the top. They've decided to take a stand on one single issue come the failure of neoliberal policies-induced financial meltdown around the western world or high water, and to heck with Canadians losing their jobs or the scores of children still living anywhere below poverty in this Northern colony. United we stand divided we fall. And there are so many issues for the left to be divided by. Paul Kellogg and his youthful friends have discovered their single issue and are going to challenge Canada's plutocracy and vicious empire without the NDP. Good for them, and I hope they achieve something by it. Meanwhile the two big business parties still arent budging on Afghanistan. The NDP could do nothing and quit this democratic coalition, but quitting on Canadians is what the Harper coalition of scabbed together rightwing forces have already done. Quitting is not an option for the NDP based on a single foreign policy issue. The troops are in the Stan for a few more years, and everyone knows it. Meanwhile there is no shortage of other issues just as important as phony war in the stan that need tending to. 

madmax

roystin wrote:
. I turned away from jack because he had been propping up this conservative government,
  I would like to see this mildly amusing comment supported. Seems everything you said went into question with this line.

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Fidel wrote:

Paul Kellogg should explain to his students that Canada is a Northern colony of the U.S. and projecting their foreign policies for many years.

And this would excuse the NDP's capitulation on Afghanistan how, exactly?

Quote:
And I hope Kellogg is also explaining to his students just how this obsolete electoral system has frustrated millions of Canadian voters since an extremely undemocratic neoliberal agenda was foisted on Canadians by U.S. and Canadian rightwing ideologues since Brian Mulroney.

Perhaps you could help by explaining how a perfect proportional representation system would bring the NDP to power with just 2.5 million votes?

Blaming the electoral system is a cop-out. Even if you could explain why the NDP is under-represented in Parliament it doesn't explain why they have to knuckle under to the neoliberal war agenda.

Quote:
If Kellogg does desire to point out a list of important differences between the NDP and the two big business and pro-USA parties in power and sharing power in Ottawa for the last 140 years in a row, I think I might be able to send him a brief lecture outline for the sake of better informing his students.

You could start by explaining the difference between the positions of Jack Layton and Michael Ignatieff on Gaza.

Then you could share your theory on why it is important for the NDP leadership to ignore resolutions on Afghanistan passed by its membership conventions.

Sean in Ottawa

At present CTV is airing the Ignatief townhall on the economy.

As I said more than a month ago this is what the NDP needed to do-- instead we are left with a dead coalition idea watching our main electoral opposition in our competative ridings show us how it is done.

The NDP frankly is looking out of touch and irrelevant at a time when it needs to pick up the agenda in very public and visible ways. 

The problem is this navel gazing -- this believing in our own propaganda -- this blaming the media and others when we don't have the right communications plans and this idea that we already have it right if only people would listen.

Sure there are a number of things we have done right but unless riding up and down the polls between 12 and 20% is considered success this is not good enough. We do need to engage the Canadian people and we need to stop excusing ourselves pretending its only about corporate money and prejudice.The NDP website provides 5 tour dates from the 15th to 22nd of December saying more to come-- here we are three weeks later nothing yet. But what did we learn from those held meetings? Well the NDP site has a few sound bites and theatre but under "plan" on the site we get the 2008 election platform. Nope, we have not put on the site any proposals or anything specific requests for the budget. The News of the last couple weeks on the site? Here are the statements on the site:

Statement by Jack Layton on the death of Canadian solider: Trooper Brian Richard Good

Statement by Jack Layton on the celebration of Orthodox Christmas

Hon Jack Layton’s statement on Canada’s gold medal win at the World Junior Hockey Championships

New Year’s Greetings from Jack Layton

Statement from Jack Layton on the deaths of three Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan
New Democrat statement on the situation in the Middle East

Merry Christmas: A holiday message from New Democrat Leader Jack Layton

Statement by NDP Leader Jack Layton on the death of Jim Fulton

Hanukkah Greetings from Jack Layton

Eid-ul-Adha Greetings from New Democrat Leader Jack Layton

The above is everything from the last month. For a party that claims to have Canadians back in a time of need, for a party heading into a crucial budget vote at a time of economic crisis this is simply not good enough. In fact it is no better than the other parties who we claim don't give a crap about working Canadians.

There is no indication on the NDP site that anythign at all is being done in preparation for the budget discussion beyond the vague three week old promise of more dates on a tour that has reported next to nothing of consequence.

The Canadian Centre For Policy Alternatives released a proposed alternative budget -- not a surprise as they do this every time but we did not comment on it at all. Why not?

Phil Fontaine released his comment two days ago: 

http://www.nationtalk.ca/modules/news/article.php?storyid=16607

Is the NDP a leader on these issues, a follower or irrelevant. This is not a time to stand around congratulating each other on what we have done but a scramble in the national interest to see that working people and vulnerable people's voices are heard. 

I get that the NDP may have trouble getting the word out on CTV news but surely it could be more up to date and dynamic on the economic crisis on its own website. This performance the last 4 weeks when we needed to step up to the plate has been about right for a party aiming at public support in the teens not one that wants to lead the country. If there is more being done then perhaps it is only the web staff that need to be given a wake-up call or moved to less demanding work otherwise there is a real leadership crisis in the party-- there is no waiting now. these days are analegous to an election campaign in their importance for timely action by the party. 

We better be doing more than posting 4 trite quotes from meetings  held a month ago if we want to be taken seriously on the economy. What choices would we make? What infrastructure would we priorize? How much would we spend? What is our position on tax cuts rather than direct spending?Where the hell is the urgent statement on EI provisions with what changes are required right now? Wher eis the updated NDP plan for the economy?
We say we want to be in government in 3 weeks but we sure don't look like it!

If all you think this is good enough- I hope you are happy in your self delusion-- if you think that any other party will do this job then think again. If you think that the party needs to do much better then call them, tell them. Light a friggin fire under someone's ass-- let them think it is their own job at stake -- at least they will think a bit more like millions of real Canadians we claim to support.

Fidel

M. Spector wrote:

Fidel wrote:

Paul Kellogg should explain to his students that Canada is a Northern colony of the U.S. and projecting their foreign policies for many years.

And this would excuse the NDP's capitulation on Afghanistan how, exactly?

Crazy George II led our stooges into the Stan. We're there until at least 2011 unless Paul Kellogg and his fresh faced friends know another way. In addition to Canada's long-time stoogeocracy's vicious toadying to Crazy Jorge de la Yayo, I'm sure I'm not the only Canadian with a few things to add to a long list of what's wrong in this Puerto Rico du Nord. We can all go our separate ways and pout in our different corners, but it will only instill even more power in the hands of those who have it. So I don't think Paul Kellogg's approach is going to bring the troops home this time, during this particular Crazy George II-led phony war on terror. But we do have  to think about a next time.

And with Crazy Steve wanting to spend like a wild man on military and all things military in coming years, the prospects for having to volunteer more Canadian troops to aggressive U.S.-led phony wars abroad in the near future are fair to excellent by the looks of things. Remember that Paul Martin said in response to a US reporter's question as to why Canada wasnt sending troops to the phony war in Iraq, former PM PM only stated that Canadian forces were stretched too thin as it was then, not that he wouldnt like to.

 I do appreciate your posts, M Spector, but after 140 years of the same-old same-old, I think it's time Canadians tried something different.

Fidel wrote:
]And I hope Kellogg is also explaining to his students just how this obsolete electoral system has frustrated millions of Canadian voters since an extremely undemocratic neoliberal agenda was foisted on Canadians by U.S. and Canadian rightwing ideologues since Brian Mulroney.

M. Spector wrote:
Perhaps you could help by explaining how a perfect proportional representation system would bring the NDP to power with just 2.5 million votes?

It's the dynamics of the current first-past-the-ghost system that distorts results, really. We have to consider not just why the NDP doesnt have the number of seats they should have if one person equalled one vote, we also have to consider that many people who do still believe in our dated electoral system enough to vote are voting strategically so as not to elect another Brian Baloney, or that they simply want to vote for the winning party or any of a myriad of reasons why some record low percentage of voters voted the way they did within the context of a first past the majority electoral system invented before electricity. You'd have to consult the babble experts on how eliminating the democratic deficit in Canadian elections might play out over time, because I can only speculate myself.

M.Spector wrote:
]Blaming the electoral system is a cop-out. Even if you could explain why the NDP is under-represented in Parliament it doesn't explain why they have to knuckle under to the neoliberal war agenda.

They're trying not to have to knuckle under to 100% of the neoliberal agenda as opposed to only some of it until such time as the democracy gap, which is now a canyon in this frozen Puerto Rico, can be dealt with by democracy-loving Canadians.

M. Spector wrote:
You could start by explaining the difference between the positions of Jack Layton and Michael Ignatieff on Gaza.

Right now with our phony electoral system, the leaders are obligated to give pat, brief comments on the situation in Israel. It's kind of like when the stoogeocracy in Ottawa helped out the CIA and US military when the vicious empire invaded Haiti for about the 25th time in 2004. How many Canadians are paying attention to what the NDP thinks about the war on democracy in Latin America anyway? With FPP and what Canadians have become used to over the last 14 decades in a row with politics, the NDP just doesnt have the time or resources to spend on a single foreign policy issue or any other single policy. Right now the best the NDP can do under the circumstances is let the two old line parties burn down to the wick with their failed second-hand economic and foreign policies. If Canadians really dont like the vicious toadying to US empire and imperialist ambitions abroad, then vote NDP but not for more of the same. It's pretty easy when you think about it. The NDP can lead the horses to water but cant make'em drink. We need a new way. The old way wasnt working some time ago.

Sean in Ottawa

I find it incredible that the NDP can't mount a grass roots campaign for a real response to the economic situation we are in now. We are not supposed to be tied to the right wing policies that got us here and so should have more options to bring to the table.

roystin

to madmax, how did harper get into power- firstly jack brought martin down, then jack passed a throne speach and gave himself a raise along with the rest of parliament, a money bill to cement the tory minority two years ago, jack crowned harper. Had jack instead used his position over martin, a lot of that 13 billion dollar per year surplus could have been spent on ndp supported policies such as a national childcare program, education, healthcare etc. And while the ndp has been 'soaring' on the verge of winning a majority according to some here, the conservatives have bankrupted the country in the best of times, how can we support our policies while we allow the conservatives to demolish the country. All these arguements over petty points are interesting, almost admirable theoretically/ asthetically, but principles have to be measured with the results of actions, to support the conservatives in action, reardless of of all your vocal protestations, over the liberals is like cutting off your head to spite your arse- I think most of you are really closet conservatives if not actual just pretending to be leftists, because thats the effect of your advocasies- and it is this petty idiotic hairsplitting of princiles which holds the ndp back, not to mention the far left (trotskyites/marxist-lenninists/ad infinitum )which is probably the root of the problem. For example, If you can't see elizabeth may is a tory sabatour you must have been dropped on your head as a baby- why else would she run in an unwinable riding, she's done a great job undermining/ splitting the left and bleeding the centre, its time for her reward,her turn at the trough to quote her former boss b.m.: maybe a senate appointment or some back room job with a great pension- once a mulroney hack, always a mulroney hack- pay less attention to their words and more attention to the effect of their actions, its time to wake up canada -who says the coalition is dead, only tory hacks, and if the results of your advocacies is to support the tories you need to look into the mirror a long hard time- the caolition is alive and well, and many of you will be surprised iggy can taste it and he will not let the coalition down-it was only under dion he hesitated to support it- with himself running the 'new minority government', it can't fail and harper's carreer is dead- quit your petty squabbling- try to see the big picture, for the near future as well as the long term, you have to stop living for a perfect future which will never come because you can't focus on today and tommorrow. as long as the ndp attacks the liberals they will end up supporting the conservatives- the enemy of your enemy ends up being your friend-ancient chinese wisdom only an idiot would argue with, the ndp must out perform the liberals not beat them up, otherwise they will be doomed to marginalisation,but most of you don't seem to care about that, perhaps are comfortable with it afraid to do anything for fear of criticism of not being perfect, but i'm probably wasting my words, bob has not betrayed his ideals, he's become more pragmatic, and i guess he's realised that most you committed ndpers need to be committed- you're intellectually stunted and closed minded, more concerned with winning petty arguments than actually improving reality and doing something- perhaps its just an excuse for lazyness, an excuse not to do anything- on the brink of victory but too afraid of the responsibility, ready to give up the cause and throw in the towel- don't advocate the end of the coalition, just quit it yourselves like the losers you are, we'll welcome you back once we've kicked out the bum dictator and cleaned up the House .

roystin

dear sean, don't stop dreaming about a better future, but work on improving the present

roystin

m.spector, how did they miss kicking you out of the ndp when they got rid of buzz, probably you'renot in the ndp, your either a lenninist or a tory its hard to tell the differance, both totalitarians in sheeps clothing- just a shit disturber bouncing from one contradiction to another self contradiction- you true ndpers need to learn to filter out the frauds, and not waste your preceous intellect arguing with them, you have little enough as it is to go arround

madmax

roystin wrote:

to madmax, how did harper get into power- firstly jack brought martin down,

  Martin brought Martin down. Martin was likely going to take down the NDP with him. The LPC was a tainted organization wallowing in scandal and internal duplicity. IIRC it was Martin that told the NDP to take a hike.  Apparently he believed he no longer required his socialist dancing partner as he was preparing for an election.

 

Quote:
 then jack passed a throne speach
There is something wrong when parliment starts challenging the throne speech. That is a foolish tactic that Harper tried to use during the Martin Era. It was Jack Layton who wouldn't go with the plan according to those 2004 records everyone likes to cite regarding coalitions and cooperation with the BQ.

Quote:
and gave himself a raise along with the rest of parliament,

There's something unheard of for a politician... 

Quote:
a money bill to cement the tory minority two years ago, jack crowned harper.
Do you have links for the above two statements?

Quote:
Had jack instead used his position over martin, a lot of that 13 billion dollar per year surplus could have been spent on ndp supported policies such as a national childcare program, education, healthcare etc.
If the Martin government was interested in supporting those things, do you think the NDP would have said, NO, that's bad. I believe it is precisely because the Martin Government gave the NDP the heave ho, because they had their own PR campaign of promises to launch as they were in election mode.  The fact that they performed a puzzling campaign and lost ground to Harper is the result of Martins non disciplined, beer and popcorn campaigns. The number of seats the LPC receive have are the result of the work and platform of the LPC.

Quote:
And while the ndp has been 'soaring' on the verge of winning a majority according to some here,
Some here appear eternally optimistic....

 

Quote:
the conservatives have bankrupted the country in the best of times, how can we support our policies while we allow the conservatives to demolish the country.
I don't know what "our" policies are, or who you are talking about.  The LPC policies historically cut the very services you advocate, and the cuts were by Paul Martin, in order to maintain those hefty surpluses.  Paul Martin is responsible for taking a Majority government to Minority then to opposition.  It was his responsibility to highlight his economic record and cuts to social services and transfer payment.  But not even the CPC created the stentch of adscam. That was a made in the LPC backrooms.  There is no clock to turn back and change those historic effects on the outcome of the election or the very impetus for it.

Quote:
 All these arguements over petty points are interesting, almost admirable theoretically/ asthetically, but principles have to be measured with the results of actions, to support the conservatives in action, reardless of of all your vocal protestations, over the liberals is like cutting off your head to spite your arse- I think most of you are really closet conservatives if not actual just pretending to be leftists, because thats the effect of your advocasies-
  I enjoy this comment because it appears that the democratic coalitions ideas are in jeapardy because Mr. Ignatieff can comfortably appear as a Bush Conservative or a Harper Conservative, with his foreign policy and economic visions.  That doesn't prevent Iggy from being a typical say anything opportunistic Liberal. That is the whole point of the LPC.

Quote:
and it is this petty idiotic hairsplitting of princiles which holds the ndp back, not to mention the far left (trotskyites/marxist-lenninists/ad infinitum )which is probably the root of the problem. For example, If you can't see elizabeth may is a tory sabatour you must have been dropped on your head as a baby- why else would she run in an unwinable riding, she's done a great job undermining/ splitting the left and bleeding the centre, its time for her reward,her turn at the trough to quote her former boss b.m.: maybe a senate appointment or some back room job with a great pension- once a mulroney hack, always a mulroney hack- pay less attention to their words and more attention to the effect of their actions, its time to wake up canada -
Trotskies say this or you?  

 

Quote:
who says the coalition is dead, only tory hacks, and if the results of your advocacies is to support the tories you need to look into the mirror a long hard time- the caolition is alive and well, and many of you will be surprised iggy can taste it and he will not let the coalition down-it was only under dion he hesitated to support it-

I don't have much faith in politicians who advocate for torture :)

But if you say he won't let us down..... What me worry Cool 

Quote:
 try to see the big picture, for the near future as well as the long term, you have to stop living for a perfect future which will never come because you can't focus on today and tommorrow. as long as the ndp attacks the liberals they will end up supporting the conservatives-
I believe it was the NDP who gave the LPC a handup after 18 months of humiliation under Dion and the disasterous federal campaign. The NDP provided the mechanism and handup for a party that would be on the verge of non existence as we know it, if federal funding had been terminated.  It appears from all records that the NDP could survive the pain, but the LPC would be mortally wounded. For a party who you claim is out to destroy the LPC, they sure seem to act funny. Creating a coalition and working with the BQ, while publicly the LPC are screwing up like no tommorrow with Dion, yet the NDP remained loyal straight through the train wreck.

One might question the LPCs interest in the NDP and the coalition which is probably no longer needed as many LPC MPs and supporters believe. Many LPC supporters believe the LPC can stand on their own two feet and challenge Harper alone.

Quote:
he enemy of your enemy ends up being your friend-ancient chinese wisdom only an idiot would argue with, the ndp must out perform the liberals not beat them up, otherwise they will be doomed to marginalisation,but most of you don't seem to care about that, perhaps are comfortable with it afraid to do anything for fear of criticism of not being perfect, but i'm probably wasting my words, bob has not betrayed his ideals, he's become more pragmatic, and i guess he's realised that most you committed ndpers need to be committed-
You're the CPC plant right. Because with friends like this..... Sounds like the coalitions is warm and fuzzy.

 

Quote:
you're intellectually stunted and closed minded, more concerned with winning petty arguments than actually improving reality and doing something- perhaps its just an excuse for lazyness, an excuse not to do anything-
  You hurt my feeling.... and I only had one left.

Quote:
on the brink of victory but too afraid of the responsibility, ready to give up the cause and throw in the towel- don't advocate the end of the coalition, just quit it yourselves like the losers you are, we'll welcome you back once we've kicked out the bum dictator and cleaned up the House .

I will forward your message  to the LPC MPs..... I am sure they will be happy to read it. 

 

 

Fidel

Roystin, if they want to vote for stoogeocracy, then they are entirely free to do so. It's their democratic right to vote for the total Americanization of Canada and some other really stupid things that have happened in this country over the last 30 years or so. But the choice is theirs. Who are we to ask why?

madmax

Apparently Iggy talked this over with his coalition partner.........Stephen Harper.

 

Tax Cuts

Quote:

He called for fast, targeted tax cuts for low and middle-income Canadians, a "shovel-ready" economic stimulus package with an emphasis on infrastructure and for changes to the EI program.

 

"I think it's important for us to have tax cuts for low and middle-income Canadians, to increase their purchase power," Ignatieff told reporters after the meeting.

Iggy is the man.  So what is the difference between Harper and Iggy again?

 

 

Fidel

madmax wrote:

Apparently Iggy talked this over with his coalition partner.........Stephen Harper.

 

Tax Cuts

Quote:

He called for fast, targeted tax cuts for low and middle-income Canadians, a "shovel-ready" economic stimulus package with an emphasis on infrastructure and for changes to the EI program.

 

"I think it's important for us to have tax cuts for low and middle-income Canadians, to increase their purchase power," Ignatieff told reporters after the meeting.

Iggy is the man.  So what is the difference between Harper and Iggy again?

Well at least Iggy is making sense when he does talk about tax cuts. Supply side conservatives in the US explain the 1929-30's economic depression in a certain way that says manufacturers werent producing enough product for people to buy and leading to depression.

That and a lack of money in circulation.

Demand side Liberal Democrats in the US explained that the last deep economic depression was due to the poor and middle class not having enough money to spend on products and services while the rich were hoarding money. That and a lack of money in circulation.

So which is it? Do poor and middle class Canadians have enough money to increase overall demand and stimulate a labour-led economic revival across Canada?

I think the difference is that Stephen Harper will suggest that his multibillion dollar tax cuts for rich people and corporations will trickle down to the rest of the economy, like Ronald Reagan said would happen.

Here's what I think. I think tax cuts for the rich and corporations will lead to some recovery and take longer to work but cost a lot more than tax cuts for the poor and middle class. Money to the poor and middle class will work to stimulate a labour-led recovery more quickly than expensive and unecessary trickle-down a la Steve Harper and his Republican Party wannabes.

 

Sean in Ottawa

roystin wrote:
dear sean, don't stop dreaming about a better future, but work on improving the present

That's my point. What's yours?

Fidel

Sean, Why should the 62% majority back down to herr Steveler and his American style spending on all things war and economic madness in general?

roystin

we can all relax i have it on very good authority that iggnatief will vote to defeat the harper budget- and there is no way the g-g. can deny iggy's request to form a government, get the champers ready! and lets ignore these tory plants, the rotor tiller is coming , they'll make great composte, national composte. congratulations to all you pro coalition bloggers its all but done, very sincerely- i would forward the e-mail i recieved from one of our most heroic m.p.s confirming this but that might be indiscrete- but maybe i will some other time- anyway congatulations and relax its all over for harper now!

madmax

Fidel wrote:

Sean, Why should the 62% majority back down to herr Steveler and his American style spending on all things war and economic madness in general?

What 62% majority? I fully expect the LPC not to back down but to join the Prime Minister in tax cuts, American Spending, and economic madness along with war.  Infact, we have seen a dramatic move on the LPC part to buy up the CPC realestate.  I expect the LPC to try to regain ground on the right with the intent to challenge the CPC directly on their turf.

 

madmax

roystin wrote:
we can all relax i have it on very good authority that iggnatief will vote to defeat the harper budget- and there is no way the g-g. can deny iggy's request to form a government, get the champers ready! and lets ignore these tory plants, the rotor tiller is coming , they'll make great composte, national composte. congratulations to all you pro coalition bloggers its all but done, very sincerely- i would forward the e-mail i recieved from one of our most heroic m.p.s confirming this but that might be indiscrete- but maybe i will some other time- anyway congatulations and relax its all over for harper now!

Where do I bet?

roystin

where ever, how ever much you want, but we really don't care what tory hacks, in disguise or in the open think, and if you've heard any rumours about iggy supporting harper, thats just a scheme to lure harper and his neo-facist agenda into the open which i helped cook up, although there was enough in the financial update that this scheme isn't abssolutely necesary, but it also has the effect of taking the neo fascists and their propagandists in the corporate press off guard and cooling things down: if harper wants to hang on to power, then he has to be friendly with the liberals over the next few weeks and iggy has the opportunity to be polite and cordial, and offer some hope harper can continue to govern, there's no need to give him any warning he doesn't have a prayer. harper is out, along with his comon sense goons flatulence flarhety and cement head clement. But maybe i'm bluffing and iggy really will back harper, yeah thats it, aww shucks! hah! The new minority government is on for the 28th of january- yes iggy may seem almost as bad as harper, but we're only comparing with harper's tip of the iceberg, there's 90% more that is very scary, which we would have had to live with if he had the chance to win a majority- but thats all over now, the neo cons will hold a leadership review in the spring, much to the relief of many back bench conservatives who have been holding their breath waiting to see if this little dictator harper could actually win a majority- they're tired of being pushed around and silenced by this little tyrant and will throw him out, ensuring a fairly lengthy minority liberal-ndp government, as they hold a leadership review in the spring,a leadership convention in the summer or early fall, probably mail in after a short campaign. HOPEFULLY MCKAY OR PRENTICE WILL BRING SOME REAL COMMON SENSE INTO THE CONSRERVATIVE PARTY, before harper destroys it as his idols mulroney did with the p-c's federally and harris, flarety and clement did with the p.c.'s in ontario- its not good for democracy to have the conservatives demolished over and over again, its bad for the ndp and the liberals- though its nice to gloat over in the short term-the reply from the m.p. confirming the demise of harper's government, was a forwarded letter sent to a select few riding constituents a couple of weeks ago, his resending it reaffirms his commitment, and though it is wisely cautious and humble, the implications are clear as to what will happen in the house come end of january,here is a short exert:

Mr. Flaherty’s Economic Update, however, turned out to be fundamentally, economically, distressingly inadequate. It did not reflect the dimensions of our problem. Other countries were acting seriously and determinedly. ...(he was) not.

But Mr. Harper just couldn’t resist. He chose to do what he had done before, but never so outrageously as this time. It was the very wrong moment to do the very wrong thing.....

Second, a coalition government, though unusual in Canadian experience, is absolutely contemplated under our Constitution. In our Parliamentary System, a Government needs the support of the majority of the House of Commons. With a majority government, that support need come only from all the members of the governing party. With a minority government, there needs to be support from members of other parties as well. Mr. Harper’s Conservatives have 143 seats out of 308 in the entire House of Commons. A majority, therefore, is 155. The Coalition represents 163 seats. Just as it has been for the 141 years of our history, this Coalition would be a Government that represents the majority of the House of Commons. Again, different from what we are used to but entirely contemplated by our Constitution.

The last point –

I have said all that I’ve said above because the situation we have before us is not just about Canadians deciding between a Harper Government and a Liberal-led Liberal-NDP Coalition Government.

There is no doubt the Coalition has its work cut out for it. Between now and when Parliament resumes on January 26th, it must demonstrate to Canadians that it can be a strong, stable, effective Government. It needs to begin planning and setting out its priority directions like a Government. It needs to be ready to govern if it is called on to govern by the end of January. That is its challenge. That is its bargain with Canadians.

But Mr. Harper has a challenge too. And his challenge, I believe, is even harder.

A Prime Minister sets the tone of the House of Commons. Respect gets respect. Disrespect breeds disrespect. The Prime Minister is now fighting to stay on to win a battle that need never have been fought in the first place. To preside over a Parliament whose dynamics, whose very relationships, he has poisoned and destroyed. It’s too late. This Parliament cannot work with this Prime Minister. All of us have heard the angry voices every day in the House of Commons, and now across the country.

Mr. Harper has scorched the earth of civility and trust for all of us. For him, it is over. He cannot be trusted. He cannot repair what is irreparable.

We need a new Prime Minister.

madmax

roystin wrote:
where ever, how ever much you want, but we really don't care what tory hacks, in disguise or in the open think,

Nor do I. A hack is a hack.

I do care about the level of support for the coalition outside of the two parties.

Facebook support against the coalition is 161,655

Facebook support for the coalition

"I am part of he 62% majority" = 35,579

"I am for a progressive coalition" = 23.047 (of which many are the same names as above).

The anti-coalition page continues to build support and I had never heard of it until today.

The Pro-Coalition pages have been around for over a month. They lost their drive sometime around the Dion fiasco and the suspension of parliment.

Momentum is still an important part of politics and Conservative supporters are still milking the tit, whereas Coalition supporters have sucked theirs dry. 

 

 

Pages

Topic locked