Continued from here.
Issues Pages:
NDP Leadership 48
Fri, 2011-12-09 07:34
#1
Idealistic Prag...
NDP Leadership 48
Fri, 2011-12-09 07:42
#2
I still have seen nothing at all about what Mulcair's cap and trade plan is.
Lots of discussion here about different emphases of Topp and Mulcair. But no offerings to my asking about what the plan is.
Most of the newspapaper articles referr to "Mulcair's plan released today/Thursday"- but there is nothing on his site, or anywhere else I can find.
So far, I have just seen him talk about the need for cap and trade. I did not say just talk about it- because featuring it is notable in itself.
But I do want to see this plan.
Fri, 2011-12-09 07:45
#3
Idealistic Prag...
Every time I hear Brian Topp say, "we don't have to become Liberals to win" I want to show him a mirror.
I wonder if that's a subtle attack on Mulcair for being a former Quebec Liberal? He did bring up Buzz Hargrove with Peggy. He's good with the dog whistle politics.
At the event where I met him, Mulcair mentioned that he thinks it is just that. All I can say that it doesn't resonate like that with me at all ("we don't have to become Liberals to win" is something lots of people were saying loooooong before there was even a hint of there being an imminent leadership race), and so it sounded kind of paranoid to me at the time. But it's interesting to hear that there are people it does come across that way to.
Fri, 2011-12-09 07:47
#4
Idealistic Prag...
double post
Fri, 2011-12-09 08:17
#5
Here is what I said last night when I first heard about Mulcair's announcements:
I'm impressed by what I heard of Mulcair's proposal to expand the NDP's existing cap and trade program.
Anyone know of if/where there are more details than the news announcements?
Note to HM and others:
Notice that even though there are no details at all around, I have acknowledged the significance of the featuring of this issue in itself. That Mulcair has called attention to it, and that it is a wedge to be devloped... irregardless of how much detail is shown at the outset.
Let alone that I am not waving it off as minor, as you did with Topp's tax proposals even when he released his policy paper. And that is despite knowing that even when Mulcair does publicly release his plan, the details are just going to be tweaking the existing NDP policy.
If I used your standards it would be, "oh, so what, a trifle."
Anyway, still like to see the actual plan.
Fri, 2011-12-09 08:51
#6
Yes, plans are good, prattle is the pits.
Fri, 2011-12-09 09:19
#7
There is an irony that is somewhere in Mulcair's plan.
It appears that Mulcair is talking about extending the coverage of what the NDP's existing cap and trade proposal applies to. And that existing program would collect considerably more revenues than the annual $18billion in new revenue Topp's tax proposal would bring in.
Which brings up two distinct questions.
1.] Where does all that money go? [The existing NDP policy allocates it in general terms, with some of the detail fleshed out.]
2.] The optics.
How the optics will be dealt with are interesting.
It's tax increase from the NDP again. And already.
When all the other candidates- Mulcair included- said in one way or another when asked about Topp's proposal that I dont think we want to be going there. But here we are again. Looking at the future of the NDP, not particular candidates, that's fine with me. [Same as with Topp's plan: advances/pushes us out of the box.]
On the surface, its not a tax per se.... which frankly was one of the biggest reasons for going with cap and trade when Layton, Cullen and crew took a hard look at developing a thorough policy: carbon pricing was going to be a hard enough sell, we dont need the ball and chain of 'carbon TAX'. Not that there were not equally compelling programatic advantages to cap and trade, but that was certainly there.
While the word 'tax' is not in there, it is very easy to call it a tax- and essentially truthful. With the higher profile the NDP has now, and Mulcair apparently ready to make the WHOLE plan, and its actual core, more of a feature than Layton ever did.... it is going to be 'NDP tax increase' this time.
Same as with people saying that Topp's plan was just telling the membership what you know they want to hear- it is possible that Mulcair only means to make a big deal of this during the race. In both cases, I dont think so. As a stategist with his eyes always on public optics, it is a certainty that Topp knew from the outset he could not just toss out his tax policy to impress the members, then just let it sit on the shelf if he became Leader. I am only slightly less certain that Mulcair was aware from the beginning of a similar dynamic around what he brought out yesterday.
Fri, 2011-12-09 11:48
#8
Lou Arab
And the dig he put to Peggy Nash is hardly a dog whistle- it was a blatant poke. Which by the way is the only time I have seen him do that.
Topp's use of 'dont have to be Liberals to win' is a dig at a perceived weakness. And Mulcair does not do that?
I know that some people were a little annoyed at Topp's mention of Hargrove, and his 'attack' on Dewar, but I think it was pretty tame. I also think there is a good case to be made that a leadership race that is too friendly does the NDP no good in the long run.
Does anyone really think the next leader won't have to respond to much harsher attacks from the Conservatives? I thought Topp's debate tactics showed us how Dewar and Nash reacted on their feet (pretty well) and how Mulcair acted when getting squeezed out of a key debate moment (also pretty well).
I wasn't generally thrilled with Topp's performace in the first debate, but I thought those moments showed some of his political skill and forethought.
As Ken noted, the use of 'we don't need to be a Liberal to win' is very clever. It uses a time worn NDP line that many in the party react well too while also poking a percieved weakness of Mulcair.
While I personally don't feel the need to elect a leader who can trace their party roots back to Tommy Douglas, I can't help but admire the effectivness of the tactic.
Fri, 2011-12-09 11:57
#9
It is directed at Mulcair [most of all]- but it is just Tom and others opinion it is because he was a Liberal.
It is an utterly timeless stock phrase in the NDP. If you aren't paranoid, and dont have seriously damaged memory, THAT is the button that should be pushed in your head.
Tom Mulcair has not been in the NDP long enough to know that. But he is surrounded by people who have, as are people here who repeat this.
And the dig he put to Peggy Nash is hardly a dog whistle- it was a blatant poke. Which by the way is the only time I have seen him do that.
Topp's use of 'dont have to be Liberals to win' is a dig at a perceived weakness. And Mulcair does not do that?
Fri, 2011-12-09 12:31
#10
I'm mildly curious to know what bright idea Topp had in mind with that Buzz Hargrove shot.
Historical footnote. Babbler Scott Piatkowski is working on Peggy's campaign. And I believe it was Scott who introduced the motion to expell Buzz at ONDP Council. I only heard about the meeting, but I am sure he at least spoke strongly for the motion.
Fri, 2011-12-09 12:39
#11
writer
«Ce n’est pas un débat politique, mais pour choisir un chef»
Romeo Saganash talks about the race, and what he believes it's about.
Fri, 2011-12-09 13:04
#12
Mulcair wades into New Brunswick provincial politics to speak out against fracking and talks about green energy partnerships with First Nations. I detect the influence of Saganash's ideas are spreading 
Fri, 2011-12-09 13:12
#13
You nailed it OnTheLeft. I know Howard rejects Third Way on its foreign policy but the economics is totally Third Way.
Maybe, but I wouldn't know because I don't really know what the Third Way was about. All I know is that Tony Blair is a liar, probably sold peerages for money, and goes around the world trying to explain things like his government's business (and terror suspect) dealings with Moammar Qaddafi...among other greatest hits.
Fri, 2011-12-09 13:35
#14
Mulcair wades into New Brunswick provincial politics to speak out against fracking and talks about green energy partnerships with First Nations. I detect the influence of Saganash's ideas are spreading
Or how about the somewhat more direct relationship, viz co-chair of his campaign, NDP Leader Dominic Cardy.
Speaking of whom: Politician: Oil firm tried to shut me up
... the article I posted earlier here.
Fri, 2011-12-09 13:36
#15
So what's the scoop about what is in Mulcair's plan?
Even in BC, we are nearing the end of the 'news week'. Anything more on or about the plan?
There is no news realease on Mulcair's site. But one obviously went out to the media, and by the repitition of "Mulcair's policy that was released today" that had to have been in the release.
So....
Fri, 2011-12-09 14:06
#16
Good interview with Mulcair in TheTyee. I found the article on the Pundit's Guide website.
Fri, 2011-12-09 14:11
#17
Good interview, but in case it was in relation to my post...
...still not the plan.
Fri, 2011-12-09 14:22
#18
Mulcair explains his views on carbon tax vs. cap & trade.
Fri, 2011-12-09 14:22
#19
Good interview, but in case it was in relation to my post...
...still not the plan.
Nope and I don't know where to find the plan any better than you do.
Fri, 2011-12-09 15:06
#20
«Ce n’est pas un débat politique, mais pour choisir un chef»
Romeo Saganash talks about the race, and what he believes it's about.
What a silly interview. He brags that three journalists - including Chantal Hébert - said his French was the best, "even better than Thomas Mulcair". He says none of the other candidates had to go through the kind of background he did. He brags that he's the only candidate who will have visited all regions of Canada before the holidays - after which, he says, he will take two weeks of "well-deserved" vacation.
If there was anything of substance in the article, I must have missed it.
Does he always talk like this? Does he think like this?
Fri, 2011-12-09 15:09
#21
I just learned that Robert Chisholm was born in Kentville, Nova Scotia. What a COMPLETE disgrace. There are plenty of Acadian francophones around that part of NS. If he grew up in Kentville he would have heard French regularly as a child. You hear it at the movie theatre, you hear it at A&W, you hear it at the farmer's market. No more excuses!
Fri, 2011-12-09 15:17
#22
Topp was endorsed by two more BC MLAs today - Raj Chouhan and Kathy Corrigan both of Burnaby.
Fri, 2011-12-09 15:24
#23
Topp was endorsed by two more BC MLAs today - Raj Chouhan and Kathy Corrigan both of Burnaby.
He also received MP Kennedy Stewart's support. Are these all people that had endorsed Peter Julian?
Fri, 2011-12-09 15:26
#24
I just learned that Robert Chisholm was born in Kentville, Nova Scotia. What a COMPLETE disgrace. There are plenty of Acadian francophones around that part of NS. If he grew up in Kentville he would have heard French regularly as a child. You hear it at the movie theatre, you hear it at A&W, you hear it at the farmer's market. No more excuses!
It's tragically ironic that the two NDP leadership candidates with the most questionable French (Chisholm and Dewar) were born and raised(?) in bilingual towns.
Fri, 2011-12-09 15:34
#25
Actually Kennedy Stewart endorsed Topp a few weeks ago...I don't think Corrigan or Chouhan had endorsed anyone previously.
Fri, 2011-12-09 15:35
#26
Actually Kennedy Stewart endorsed Topp a few weeks ago...I don't think Corrigan or Chouhan had endorsed anyone previously.
Thanks for the clarification.
Fri, 2011-12-09 15:56
#27
I just learned that Robert Chisholm was born in Kentville, Nova Scotia. What a COMPLETE disgrace. There are plenty of Acadian francophones around that part of NS. If he grew up in Kentville he would have heard French regularly as a child. You hear it at the movie theatre, you hear it at A&W, you hear it at the farmer's market. No more excuses!
I have to wonder if you have ever been to Kentville. Nova Scotia has 10% francophones, and I'm struggling to think of a place where you are LESS likely to ever hear people speaking French. Truro and Pictou County would be as less likely, but no worse.
Let alone whether you would hear it in the theatre, now or 30 years ago.
And what does that linked article have to do with it?
Fri, 2011-12-09 16:07
#28
Actually Kennedy Stewart endorsed Topp a few weeks ago...I don't think Corrigan or Chouhan had endorsed anyone previously.
Thanks for the clarification.
Kennedy Stewart was one of five MPs who publically called on Peter Julian to enter the race and stated that they would support him if he were to run. I believe that Stewart endorsed Topp almost immediately after Julian's announement that he would not run. It should be noted that prior to Julian passing on the race, only one BC MP had endorsed Topp (Libby Davies), but four more endorsed Topp within a couple of days of Julian's announcement (Jean Crowder, Jasbir Sandhu, Jinny Sims, and Stewart), and I'm inclined to think that they had been expecting to support Julian (or at the very least, to not endorse against him).
It should also be noted that most of Topp's support from BC MLAs came shortly after Julian's announcement, and probably was also related to this. Chouhan and Corrigan are both Burnaby MLAs who are publically close to Julian, and I feel fairly confident that they would both have enthusiastically backed him if he had run.
Fri, 2011-12-09 16:26
#29
Scott Piatkowski
I'm mildly curious to know what bright idea Topp had in mind with that Buzz Hargrove shot.
Historical footnote. Babbler Scott Piatkowski is working on Peggy's campaign. And I believe it was Scott who introduced the motion to expell Buzz at ONDP Council. I only heard about the meeting, but I am sure he at least spoke strongly for the motion.
Thanks to the babbler who alerted me to the mention, which I probably wouldn't have seen.
Yes, I think it was pretty obvious why Topp threw in the gratutious reference to Basil.
When I was considering whom to support, I did need to satisfy myself that Peggy was not responsible for the CAW's disastrous electoral strategy of the past two decades. Realistically, if anyone can talk them out of continuing to pursue that strategy, it's Peggy.
Ultimately, I'm supporting her because I think she's the best candidate -- with the right combination of experience in community activism, internal party politics and Parliament. She understands the economy and how to make it work for Canadians, and I think it's pretty obvious that will be the theme of the next campaign. And, frankly, all other things being equal (which they're not), I will happily take the opportunity to end nearly 150 years of electing male Prime Ministers.
Fri, 2011-12-09 16:27
#30
I suspect that its just a matter of time before Julian himself endorses Topp.
Fri, 2011-12-09 16:37
#31
Julian won't be endorsing Topp himself. As this article from back in October says, Julian has said that he will stay neutral in the race.
http://www.globalmontreal.com/ndp+race+a+showdown+between+the+establishm...
Fri, 2011-12-09 16:56
#32
The kids will need to see the Boomer generation and its progeny in action against climate change.
Anyone with a plan,hereabouts - anything beyond the stream of carping, head counting drivel?
Fri, 2011-12-09 18:04
#33
Topp will not run in Danforth
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/topp-wont-r...
Fri, 2011-12-09 21:34
#34
tragically ironic
That made me laugh. Slightly overstated, no?
Fri, 2011-12-09 21:51
#35
Malcolm
I'm not sure how anyone could be wondering about the purpose of Topp's dog whistle reference to Prominent Liberal Hack Basil Hargrove.
It was designed to highlight one of Peggy Nash's vulnerabilities - perhaps her greatest vulnerability - her association with one of the most despicable quislings in the history of Canadian politics. (At least Bob Rae, Ujal Dossanjh, Ross Thatcher, Hazen Argue et al had the decency to quit the NDP before campaigning for the Liberals. That lying sonofabitch Basil pretended to be a New Democrat and used his party card as a prop in his crusade to destroy the Canadian left.)
Personally, I don't think Peggy should be held accountable for the fact that her boss was an unprincipled Liberal hack. But the purpose of Topp's reference was blindingly obvious.
Fri, 2011-12-09 22:04
#36
Sorry my link didn't work...
Fri, 2011-12-09 22:04
#37
one of the most despicable quislings in the history of Canadian politics
That made me laugh too. Slightly overstated, no?
Fri, 2011-12-09 22:09
#38
Arthur Cramer
Any thoughts about Topp ot running Toronto Danforth? I see the post above. I was jjust wondering what people thought?
Fri, 2011-12-09 22:10
#39
Former Ontario NDP leader Howard Hampton has endorsed Robert Chisholm.
http://www.robert2012.ca/former-ontario-ndp-leader-howard-hampton-endors...
Fri, 2011-12-09 22:20
#40
Howard Hampton seems like a pretty big endorsement to me. I'd completely written off Chisolm. If Hampton thinks Chisolm's advantages are enough to offset his deficiency I'd love to hear more rationale about why.
Fri, 2011-12-09 22:22
#41
one of the most despicable quislings in the history of Canadian politicsThat made me laugh too. Slightly overstated, no?
It's an old joke - Malcolm's been using that line for years. I think he's softening, though... I believe it used to be just plain "[b]the[/b] most despicable quisling..."
Perhaps Hargrove gives Malcolm a buzz?
Anyway, on a more serious note, Malcolm's suggestion of "greatest vulnerability" on Nash's part being that she served as assistant to the president of the largest private-sector union in Canada would, in any other context, be condemned for the toxic anti-union slur that it is. Which is why I was taken aback by Topp's reference in the debate.
But I thought Topp was actually being more principled. He framed his question to Nash in the sense of (my paraphrase), "when serving in a high position in the auto workers' union, how did you view the tension between economics and environmental concerns?" That's a legitimate question that unions, worried about job loss in the manufacturing and other spheres, must constantly ask themselves. Where Topp crossed the line somewhat was by pushing the "Buzz" button, and turning a potentially legitimate discussion into a drive-by smear.
Fri, 2011-12-09 22:30
#42
tragically ironicThat made me laugh. Slightly overstated, no?
Fri, 2011-12-09 23:07
#43
I find it interesting that, of 17 Ontario MPPs, the only endorsements are Rosario Marchese for Paul Dewar, and Cheri DiNovo (Peggy Nash's provincial counterpart) for her. No one yet for Topp; and it's remarkable that Mulcair has not a single MLA or MPP anywhere.
Fri, 2011-12-09 23:18
#44
Any thoughts about Topp ot running Toronto Danforth? I see the post above. I was jjust wondering what people thought?
My impression (and I have nothing more to support this) is that the decision suggests the Topp campaign is struggling. If the leadership race had remained the "coronation" of early Fall, I believe Topp would have run in Toronto Danforth, no question.
The line about needing to run in Quebec - well, okay: in the general. After he became leader of the opposition, Chretien re-entered the House via a byelection in New Brunswick. Dodging this byelection, IMO, diminishes the seriousness of Topp's committment to electoral politics, but his leadership bid can't afford the diversion at this time nor the humiliation if he were to lose the nomination.
Fri, 2011-12-09 23:22
#45
autoworker
I just learned that Robert Chisholm was born in Kentville, Nova Scotia. What a COMPLETE disgrace. There are plenty of Acadian francophones around that part of NS. If he grew up in Kentville he would have heard French regularly as a child. You hear it at the movie theatre, you hear it at A&W, you hear it at the farmer's market. No more excuses!
I always regarded eavesdropping as impolite. Now, apparently, it's not only impolitic-- it's disgraceful!
Fri, 2011-12-09 23:34
#46
dacckon
Topp would have to run in the middle of his campaign, in an area he doesn't live in, while trying to get his name out. I would prefer what he is doing now, running in Quebec after (if) he wins. Its a very smart move. It'll solidify the link between Quebec and NDP while replacing an mp who was a ghost to the leader of the opposition. Also an oppertunity, a small one, to build the party in membership and volenteers in the region that he might run in.
And I still don't get the juggernaught/ failed juggernaught argument, it was going to be a challange for Topp regardless of that one respectable former party leader who endorsed him.
As for Chisholm, he has to be a leader, and a true leader knows when he shouldn't lead.
Fri, 2011-12-09 23:58
#47
Topp was endorsed by two more BC MLAs today - Raj Chouhan and Kathy Corrigan both of Burnaby.
I see Topp's press release: http://www.briantopp.ca/pressrelease
Sat, 2011-12-10 00:40
#48
I just learned that Robert Chisholm was born in Kentville, Nova Scotia. What a COMPLETE disgrace. There are plenty of Acadian francophones around that part of NS. If he grew up in Kentville he would have heard French regularly as a child. You hear it at the movie theatre, you hear it at A&W, you hear it at the farmer's market. No more excuses!
It's tragically ironic that the two NDP leadership candidates with the most questionable French (Chisholm and Dewar) were born and raised(?) in bilingual towns.
It is actually painfully easy to grow up in that area and no nothing of French. I'm sure he learned the basics just like everyone else but just because there are a few Acadian communities outside the area doesn't mean that he will learn it. That's not a great argument at all
Sat, 2011-12-10 00:50
#49
One more thing about Topp: he announced his endorsement for Craig Scott in Toronto Danforth. I don't think this was wise. It's a contested nomination, and I don't like the idea of a leader or prospective leader weighing in on this. As he said when explaining his decision not to run, it's not his riding. So keep out of it, then.
Sat, 2011-12-10 01:00
#50
Malcolm
one of the most despicable quislings in the history of Canadian politicsThat made me laugh too. Slightly overstated, no?
There have been many despicable politicians in Canadian history. I can only think of one who actually worked to destroy his nominal party from within.
Sat, 2011-12-10 01:09
#51
Malcolm
Anyway, on a more serious note, Malcolm's suggestion of "greatest vulnerability" on Nash's part being that she served as assistant to the president of the largest private-sector union in Canada would, in any other context, be condemned for the toxic anti-union slur that it is. Which is why I was taken aback by Topp's reference in the debate.
The context, though, IS significant. The point wasn't that she had served as assistant to a union leader, but that she had served as assistant to an unprincipled asshole who kept an NDP membership while doing everything in his power to destroy the NDP. That the job was in a trade union was, frankly, irrelevant to the question.
It isn't an anti-union slur. It is an anti-asshole slur.
I have no problem with slurring the sonofabitch.
I have a problem with the way he tried to smear Nash with it.