Chretien, Broadbent brokering possible coalition

The Libs need to bring their rightwinged support into alignment.  Given the comments at CBC and other places, there are rightwinged folk complete against this, and I don't think all of them are Cons.  So, whomever it may be who can calm those Liberal rightwinged folks needs to do so.  Goodale might have some traction there, I dunno.

Oh, such *interesting* times!

And ya, here's hoping we all get to see Stevie Sweater Guy sink in his own shit.  Oh dear, am I falling into shadenfreude?

NDP Leader Jack Layton and Stephane Dion have
discussed "roles and responsibilities” in a new coalition, an NDP official
confirmed.

 It is
expected that Layton would have a place in the new cabinet, and “various
players would play different roles,” the official said.

..........

BQ leader Gilles Duceppe told reporters he laid
out conditions for Bloc support for a coalition, and that he is quite open to
the idea.

“We said that we won’t be part of a coalition and
having ministers from the Bloc; this is very clear. But we’ll consider a
coalition that would respect more Quebec values and interests.”

Duceppe has had meetings with Layton and Dion,
and still wants “stimuli concerning economy, to have a real plan for
manufacturing and forestry sector, to have a better conditions for the
employment insurance and so on.”

“We had meetings. I discussed with Jack Layton
yesterday and Stéphane Dion. But we’re having those discussions looking at if
we can come to an agreement but we’ll take the time we need.”

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/545220

That's called progress.

Cueball wrote:

So. That "idiot" Alice Klien might have been right after all.

I notice no one responds to this post

Although I agree with the coalition myself, I'm still not onside with a unite the left concept that would merge the two parties into one.  This is more like a popular-front, to which I actually wouldn't be anithetical.  For example, in ridings where the Tories were first or second, only one candidate from either the Liberals or NDP would stand for election, depending on which party had the higher vote total. However, an explicit merger is something I would personally oppose.  I'd sooner support the non-voter movement.  And if the NDP-Liberals ever merged, I probably would.

Its worth noting that the Liberals are the ones who have the greatest need of a clearly outlined coalition/agreement.

They are in very serious trouble if the new government falls anytime before the end of the Spring session of the House. So they are vulnerable to the NDP or the BQ deciding its in their best interests to pull the plug.

So both the NDP and the Bloc are in very strong positions as to demands they can make. And it boggles my mind to think how complex would be guarantees that would keep the Bloc in line even if pulling the Bloc becomes sufficiently in their interest. But it probably helps a lot that they are most concerned about their competition with the Cons- and they do not need huge or endless goodies for Quebec from the government to be in good standing against the Conservatives.

I was skeptical that the PM designate for this animal would be anyone but Dion. Because of the dynamics of the Liberal leadership contest.

Too much chance Goodale could build up so much political capital and popularity that he would get 'drafted' to stay on. That would be the worry with Dion too. But with Dion the rivals can extract ironclad guarantees [guarded by a poison pill probably] that Dion WILL step down for the new Leader, no matter what.

So the rivals presumably got those guarantees, and as soon is it is strategically feasible Dion will be making his promise, and maybe making the guarantee method public as well.

And I don't think this would have been difficult to achieve. Dion stands to be able to leave on a very high note- the polar opposite to his present image. Its a win-win for everyone in the Liberal party.

the regina mom wrote:

The Libs need to bring their rightwinged support into alignment.  Given the comments at CBC and other places, there are rightwinged folk complete against this, and I don't think all of them are Cons.  So, whomever it may be who can calm those Liberal rightwinged folks needs to do so.

If you organize the comments on CBC by how frequently they're recommended, you'll see that a number of comments in favour of a coalition have well over 1000 people recommending them.  That's pretty huge for an ongoing news story.  I think the Conservatives seriously misjudged this on a number of fronts, but the PR front is clearly the biggest.  It appears right now as though there are a lot more people in favour of a coalition government than against it.

EDIT: In the time since I last checked, apparently a number of anti-coalition comments have been bumped up, so it's not as clear as it once was.

EDIT: It seems there are conflicting reports on who would lead the government.

CP has a source stating that it has already been decided that Dion will stay on for the next little while, but others are saying that the other opposition parties do not want this and neither do the liberals, so it's very unclear.

I really don't want to see Ignatieff as PM though!

I've defended Dion on here before but in all honesty, I'm not sure he would be the best choice, it would have to be someone who is good at working with others, he hasn't really demonstrated that ability.  Still, maybe he has learned something from the past year.  In any case from what Kinsella has posted, it doesn't sound like Iggy has any desire to focus on anything but the convention at the moment.

Interested Observer wrote:

I really don't want to see Ignatieff as PM though!

  I don't think many Canadians do either, which is why the NDP might go for it. The Liberal caucus, however, seems pretty gung-ho on Ignatieff. It's anyone's guess.

The NDP loses something like 50% of its funding if the subsidies are dropped. The Liberals lose something like 66%, right?

The NDP and Liberals fundraise comparable amounts. The funding changes would level the playing field between the Liberals and NDP and probably mean they couldn't spend the campaign maximums anymore.

The Tories on the other hand would have no trouble spending the maximum. Who really wins here?

I think that most Canadians recognize that this would be temporary. They might be unhappy to see someone who is running in the leadership race be PM-- we need a full time PM but beyond that the public who would support a coalition would not care.

this must be a sign of an impending apocalypse. Canadian poltics are interesting!

THere is one problem, not only do I think Dion stinks and is a weak leader, like the majority in his party who want this "out to lunch" clown gone, the public definitely doesn't want to see Dion as Prime Minister, even for a day!!! He is viewed as a useless twit and he made that impression in ridings he visited. There is a credibility problem to back Dion after suffering the worst electoral % in LPC history. Dion is not liked and viewed as an idiot inside and outside parliment by members of the LPC. There has to be choices better then Dion.

Just don't say Bob Rae.... and I can keep my supper down.

Harper: Opposition is working in the back rooms to take over power rather than winning it.

KenS wrote:

Bringing down the Consevatives in this manner was always technically possible for Dion. It was always even possible he could force the leadership rivals into line behind him. Possible, but more than unlikely. It would take an adept politician to pull that off. And that Dion is not that is a big part of the reason he is such a dud.

And once the train was in motion,  amandate dropped onto Dion' lap. A very hedged and limited mandate indeed, but a mandate nonetheless.

If you say Dion is a DUD and you are not alone in that thought then, he should not be Prime Minister ever.

And just having something fall into your lap, is no indication that this individual has any ability to govern. Who knows what nutty stuff he will come up with. 

Dion is in the position he is in because he is incompetent. Harper is in the position he is in, because he is a selfish, thoughtless powermongering bully. But that is no reason to take the ball from the bully and hand it to someone with the proven ability to hand the ball back to a bully.

Dion didn't orchestrate this.... this is not Dions time. Even the LPC don't need a dud, even as a figurehead. 

Frustrated Mess wrote:

Where's our resident NFU guy on this (I've become  an associate member by the way)? I assume he must be mad as hell and marching to Ottawa to take Broadbent by the collar and tell him no way on earth will honest, salt-of-the-earth, hard working NDPers join arms with self-interested, sell-out, namby-pamby Liberals. I'm absolutley sure that's what he would say.

This would be a great time to revisit some of those threads, wouldn't it?   

 

I guess you mean me - sorry I didn't realize I was to delay the work I had to do today to follow threads on babble.  In the future maybe you could have Michelle or oldgoat give me a call at home to turn on my computer.

For what it is worth here is my take, although it has already been addressed by others.  There is a huge difference between shacking up during an election and trying to rig the outcome.  Once Canadians have spoken though is different.  Much different actually.  As a long time supporter of PR I understand that this kind of governing is in the best interest of Canadians - in this case a clear majority of Canadians.  That you seem unable to tell the difference between the two suggests to me that you need to do some reading on how our Parliament really works and evolved into its current form.

That said welcome to the NFU.  You will find vigorous, heated, but friendly debate is the norm within the organization.  You should fit right in!

Here's some coalition scenarios.....

The economy worsens, and people blame both the Liberals and the NDP for screwing up, and elect a Conservative majority next time, just in time for economic recovery.

And, as a result, the Conservatives become the "Natural Ruling Party" as the Liberals did after Bennet. 

Nice bequeath to your kids and grandkids.

Or,

The economy gets better faster than people expect, and the Liberals look like heroes, and they get elected to a majority government that undoes whatever cool things the NDP managed to get done during the coalition period.

 And, the capital L Liberal and capital C Conservative buerocrats do everything in their power to embarass any NDP Cabinet Ministers we have in the coalition.

 Politically, this is suicide for the NDP.

Tommy Paine, Your scenarios are certainly possible, but no risk no reward.  I don't think, 'the economy sucks right now' is a sufficient excuse to abdicate an opportunity to influence government policy.  The NDP can only do their best at making that influence effective and successful and hope that the public recognizes their contribution.  But that's democracy, what is new?

I don't think the Conservatives would hire Ekos, though.  Paul Martin might.  I can't imagine the Liberal party itself running a poll like that, using Martin's name but not Chretien's.

"...but no risk no reward."

All risk, no reward.

CBC

"Early Friday, the prime minister's communications director, Kory
Teneycke, dismissed talks of a potential opposition coalition as
"undemocratic.""

Of course, an argument can be made that a minority government is undemocratic.  

What nonsense is this?!? :

Étonnamment, ce n'est pas le chef du Parti libéral, Stéphane Dion, qui a répliqué à la déclaration du premier ministre Harper, mais deux députés, John McCallum et Marlene Jennings. Ne cachant pas qu'ils discutent avec les autres partis de l'opposition, il semble que les libéraux cherchent à gouverner avec l'appui des autres partis. Ainsi, selon toute vraisemblance, ils ne formeraient pas un gouvernement de coalition avec les néo-démocrates, tel qu'il a été question jusqu'à présent.

Are the liberals seriously trying to pretend that they expect the NDP to install them as the sole governing party—without any role in the cabinet for the NDP?

Tommy_Paine wrote:

"...but no risk no reward."

 

All risk, no reward.

 The reward is government experience, and with luck and hard work, some evidence of competence. The lack of that is a big strike against the NDP in a lot of people's opinion.