NDP shadow cabinet

138 posts / 0 new

Topic locked

Mon, 2012-04-23 15:39

KenS

I dont think its going to be openly aired. Its not in anyone's interest- at least not to tell all sides of it.

It is not necessarily as cut and dry as "competence". It could be a cluster of irritants, most of which may not even be policy/issues.

But I'm inclined to agree that probably its not just the LGR. I dont like the fact that the NDP I think needlessly stirred the pot again [before Mulcair became leader]. And it looks like Mulcair did what he could given that situation [ETA: looks like maybe that isnt true. Dont know enough to say.] He contributed to the situation as it is, but that still doesnt make him sole owner of it not being fixed.

Even if Hyer quietly does not re-offer to run as an independent, it isnt going to be easy to win that seat, and it isnt going to help the NDP in a number of other seats. We'll be seen as completely responsible, not Hyer.

Mon, 2012-04-23 15:39

#53

Paul Gross

Hyer is clear that being left out of shadow cabinet is the reason. The final vote on the gun registry was a while ago and Hyer got to vote as he pleased without sanction.

From http://www.brucehyer.ca

"First elected in 2008, Hyer was left out the NDP shadow cabinet announcement last week. "One of the jobs of any new Leader is to unite their party, and there are different ways to do that. Being excluded from any position was a clear message that my constituents will be muzzled."

Mon, 2012-04-23 15:42

#54

mtm

"Mulcair said he found out about Hyer's decision right before question period. He said it is not an ideal situation but that Hyer had made it clear to him that he felt he should not be bound by party lines.

"Bruce simply feels that he's allowed to come up with his own decisions," Mulcair told reporters.

The NDP leader said he couldn't name someone to the shadow cabinet who is not willing to follow the party's policy decisions.

"Bruce is not able to work within that system, the result is his departure today," Mulcair said. He also said he had lifted the punishments on Hyer and Rafferty in an effort to show they had "turned the page.""

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2012/04/23/pol-ndp-bruce-hyer.html

Mon, 2012-04-23 15:46

#55

Life, the unive...

The NDP needs to figure out fast that running on an LGR policy plank will be the end of any desire for government. There are ways to talk about gun control in Canada that could have lots of buy-in from all but the American wannabe extremists, but talking about a registry is not it, not even close. It is like waving a red flag in front of a bull and then standing behind the flag and expecting to not be run down.

Mon, 2012-04-23 15:50

#56

mtm

The accession of Mr. Rafferty to a critic portfolio shows that this is not about the LGR. This is about issues that Mr. Hyer has with the party system, and that Mulcair felt uncomfortable entrusting someone with a portfolio who does not feel they have to work within party policy.

Mon, 2012-04-23 15:53

#57

Stockholm

Running AWAY from any form of gun registration would also be a gigantic gift to the Liberals and the Bloc Quebecois who would exploit any NDP ambivanlence on the issue mercilessly. Unfortunately, there is a price to pay on this issue no matter what stance you take. Ultimately, you have to "dance with the ones that brung you" and the NDP being the party that dominates Quebec and urban Canada really has no choice. The tail cannot wag the dog.

Mon, 2012-04-23 15:56

#58

Sean in Ottawa

MP and leader fall out and MP quits the caucus. Not the first time this has happened.

That he was left out of the shadow cabinet is a flashpoint since I can see that this could be hurtful to a person who believed his role should be much greater. I am not saying it was right or wrong to leave him out but it is easy to see that this would create great disappointment. That might be no big deal but if it is coming on top of other issues then it could be insurmountable.

The full story is not clear. I'd really hope we could not get into assumptions here. Let's give both the NDP leadership and this MP the benefit of the doubt and see how they behave going forward. Leaving the party to sit as an independent is not a crime and I am not prepared to attack him for doing so. Clearly there is a lot more to this story and I am happy to wait for it.

For now, this is someone who ran for the NDP and therefore may have a lot in common with us. Let's not treat him as the enemy even if he is out of caucus. Hopefully with time there will be a better understanding whether he comes back in to caucus or remains out of it.

The people who were in the shadow cabinet probably ought to have been found some kind of role if not in the new shadow cabinet, somehow in the party. Something to think about.

Mon, 2012-04-23 15:57

#59

Bookish Agrarian

Hyer once stiffed me for a very expensive cab ride, on purpose. I am not really surprised that he would stiff the party that invested all kinds of resources into getting him elected and re-elected.

Mon, 2012-04-23 16:00

#60

madmax

Just so I am clear...

The NDP policy on the LGR is????

Rafferty and Hyer vote against it..I think there were others ...to...

How did the NDP vote on the LGR in 1993?

If Hyer can't be in shadow cabinet because .... he may vote outside the party at times..

I can see an interesting time with Rafferty as he is also his own man.

To think that you can campaign against something... for years... and get elected ... and there is no official policy...

Good luck with that..

Mon, 2012-04-23 16:01

#61

Unionist

C'mon, folks, maybe Bruce Hyer just wanted to step back a bit so he could have more time to run his [url=http://www.wabakimi.com/]company[/url]. Guy's gotta make a living, you know.

Mon, 2012-04-23 16:04

#62

Stockholm

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

The people who were in the shadow cabinet probably ought to have been found some kind of role if not in the new shadow cabinet, somehow in the party. Something to think about.

...and that may very well be happening. Some MPs are being made committee chairs and some other party related posts are apparently to be announced later.

Oddly, Hyer was very muted in his comments in TV, saying that he still expects to vote with the NDP 95% of the time and that he still hopes Mulcair becomes PM!

Mon, 2012-04-23 16:05

#63

Sean in Ottawa

Stockholm-- rural Canada is not a tail. I think I know what you mean but I sure would prefer a less hostile dismissive tone to minority opinion in the party.

If the NDP wants to govern it will have to bridge that urban rural divide at least to some degree.

What I would like to hear from the NDP is something like the following:

Mr. Hyer has chosen to sit outside the party. Whether he comes back or not the NDP would like to keep communication open and look forward to workign with him in the House particularly on issues for Northern and rural communities for which Hyer is passionate.

Events, challenges and setbacks are tests. How the NDP responds to this is key.Burning bridges with someone who was elected as a New Democrat is a last resort and there seems to be no reason to do so. The NDP has lost two MPs to defection. Handling this well is going to be important if we want to avoid it increasing.

Mon, 2012-04-23 16:05

#64

madmax

Stockholm wrote:

Running AWAY from any form of gun registration would also be a gigantic gift to the Liberals and the Bloc Quebecois who would exploit any NDP ambivanlence on the issue mercilessly.

Nonsense....

Explain the Clarity in May 2011 when all these NDP MPs were elected...

The parties with a CLEAR gun registery position in Quebec finished 4th and 5th.

Mon, 2012-04-23 16:06

#65

Brachina

Paul Gross wrote:

Hyer is clear that being left out of shadow cabinet is the reason. The final vote on the gun registry was a while ago and Hyer got to vote as he pleased without sanction.

From http://www.brucehyer.ca

"First elected in 2008, Hyer was left out the NDP shadow cabinet announcement last week. "One of the jobs of any new Leader is to unite their party, and there are different ways to do that. Being excluded from any position was a clear message that my constituents will be muzzled."

Okay I take back the principled comment because this shows Hyer's just being a Diva. Rathika got dumped too and she's not throwing a fit over it.

The funny thing is if Mulcair had backed away from the registery just as many babblers if not more would be throwing a fit. This is why I hate this issue more then any other, its the only issue that appears to be lose-lose for the NDP no matter what we do.

Mon, 2012-04-23 16:06

#66

Howard

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghgUGuCaxO0">Bruce Hyer</a> wrote:
I think there are three leadership candidates that can take us to power: Nathan Cullen, Thomas Mulcair, and Paul Dewar...

1:25 minute mark

Mon, 2012-04-23 16:11

#67

Stockholm

madmax wrote:
Just so I am clear... The NDP policy on the LGR is???? Rafferty and Hyer vote against it..I think there were others ...to... How did the NDP vote on the LGR in 1993? If Hyer can't be in shadow cabinet because .... he may vote outside the party at times.. I can see an interesting time with Rafferty as he is also his own man. To think that you can campaign against something... for years... and get elected ... and there is no official policy... Good luck with that..

But the votes on the LGR already happened - the point is that in 2015 there WILL be an NDP policy on gunregistration/control - and whatever that policy is - NDP candidates will have to support it. If Hyer were a bit more rational he would wait to see what the NDP policy was in 2015 - or even try to influence its content - and then if he can't live with it - either don't run for re-election or run as an independent. But why NOW...oh yeah, the shadow cabinet announcement last thursday.

Mon, 2012-04-23 16:15

#68

6079_Smith_W

Brachina wrote:

This is why I hate this issue more then any other, its the only issue that appears to be lose-lose for the NDP no matter what we do.

Well it's certainly lose-lose if one's approach to it is whip-in-hand. We get enough of that from the PMO.

Seems to me there was a slightly more respectful and inclusive approach to this difficult issue a year and a half-ago.

Mon, 2012-04-23 16:21

#69

Stockholm

I think you forget just how rancorous the issue was a year and a half ago and how Layton was raked over the coals letting any NDP MPs vote against the LGR at all. Remember how the BQ and the Liberals were erecting billboards accusing the NDP of being "soft" on keeping the gun registry?

I think that no matter who was leading the NDP right now - the days of being able to have it both ways and let the caucus vote all over the map on this issue are over. The party has to take a stance and stick with it.

I don't see what's "whip in hand" about the NDP appraoch now. Rafferty voted with the Tories to get rid of the LGR and he is now in the shadow cabinet and been welcomed back into the fold with open arms. Hyer obviously has some personal issues that could not resolved. Its actually remarkable that stuff like this doesn't happen more often considering that very single MP got elected by tens of thousands of people and tends to see him or herself as a prima donna.

Mon, 2012-04-23 16:27

#70

6079_Smith_W

No, I think my memory is just fine, in that I remember that Layton was successful in his approach, despite all the nay-sayers who said he was killing the registry, and that the NDP would be demolished in the election because of it.

So now we are told, even before a new proposal is on the table, that whatever it is will be subject to a whipped vote? Sorry if I don't quite see the sense in that.

Mon, 2012-04-23 16:32

#71

Stockholm

Not a whipped vote - but that if you want to run as an NDP candidate in 2015 you must endorse the party platform and if that platform includes some form of gun registration then you must be prepared to support that along with the rest of the platform. That is what ALL parties do.

Mon, 2012-04-23 16:33

#72

madmax

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Stockholm-- rural Canada is not a tail. I think I know what you mean but I sure would prefer a less hostile dismissive tone to minority opinion in the party.

If the NDP wants to govern it will have to bridge that urban rural divide at least to some degree.

What I would like to hear from the NDP is something like the following:

Mr. Hyer has chosen to sit outside the party. Whether he comes back or not the NDP would like to keep communication open and look forward to workign with him in the House particularly on issues for Northern and rural communities for which Hyer is passionate.

Events, challenges and setbacks are tests. How the NDP responds to this is key.Burning bridges with someone who was elected as a New Democrat is a last resort and there seems to be no reason to do so. The NDP has lost two MPs to defection. Handling this well is going to be important if we want to avoid it increasing.

If someone is reading the above quote.. take note....

If Sean Doesn't work for the NDP... he should.. lol..

Mon, 2012-04-23 16:39

#73

Stockholm

6079_Smith_W wrote:

No, I think my memory is just fine, in that I remember that Layton was successful in his approach,

Layton's approach was to proposed an NDP version of the gun registry that was to be a very watered down version of the old Liberal LGR. Almost everyone in caucus went along with that and that is what I expect the NDP to propose as a policy for 2015. Virtually all of the NDP MPs from northern/rural ridings who voted to keep the registry and to support Jack's proposed reforms to it kept their seats.

Here is what I predict will happen in 2015, the NDP will nominate someone in Hyer's riding who will go along with the party policy (along with Rafferty from next door) and that person will win easily - Hyer will either retire as his pension will have kicked in by then or he's run as an Independent and get about 2% of the vote.

Mon, 2012-04-23 16:47

#74

6079_Smith_W

@ Stockholm #70

If that is the case then why does Mulcair even need to underscore the point?

Regardless of the issue, I think derisive comments like "Bruce simply feels that he's allowed to come up with his own decisions," are eerily similar to our PM's approach to consensus-building.

It's a needless and divisive waste of political capital, IMO.

(cross posted)

And I'm not so sure it will be the cake-walk you predict.... and certainly not in areas where the party hopes to GAIN seats.

Mon, 2012-04-23 17:41

#75

Stockholm

The NDP needs to gain seats in suburban areas of the GTA and the Lower Mainland and also win as many of the seats it does not currently hold as possible in Quebec...I think being in favour of gun control is a win-win in those areas.

Mon, 2012-04-23 18:12

#76

flight from kamakura

seems like the shadow cabinet snub was 100% of the reason for this, and also that it's probably not really all that well thought out. hyer will vote with the ndp on virtually everything, but will miss out on all caucus meetings, no longer sit on committees, and generally become irrelevant - which i suppose he may well have felt was his fate at any rate, given his lack of assignment. well, it's a shame. still, hyer has no chance at re-election as an independent, and this is likely a pre-cursor to an eventual retirement announcement, as stockholm speculated. very nice for him - no work to do, no accountability, plenty of time to run his business, and a pension kicking in when pretty much right away, post 2014. can't begrudge the guy a thing other than the unhelpfulness of his announcement, stepping on an unbroken string of positive press for the ndp.

Mon, 2012-04-23 18:32

#77

Stockholm

Being excluded from the shadow cabinet need not mean "irrelevance". Other NDP backbenchers will be sitting on parliamentary committees, taking part in caucus, attending to party duties and hosting NDP luminaries at events in their ridings etc...as an Independent - you really are a big nothing.

Mon, 2012-04-23 18:33

#78

Howard

flight from kamakura wrote:

seems like the shadow cabinet snub was 100% of the reason for this, and also that it's probably not really all that well thought out. hyer will vote with the ndp on virtually everything, but will miss out on all caucus meetings, no longer sit on committees, and generally become irrelevant - which i suppose he may well have felt was his fate at any rate, given his lack of assignment. well, it's a shame. still, hyer has no chance at re-election as an independent, and this is likely a pre-cursor to an eventual retirement announcement, as stockholm speculated. very nice for him - no work to do, no accountability, plenty of time to run his business, and a pension kicking in when pretty much right away, post 2014. can't begrudge the guy a thing other than the unhelpfulness of his announcement, stepping on an unbroken string of positive press for the ndp.

This is kind of how I feel too.

Mon, 2012-04-23 18:43

#79

Sean in Ottawa

madmax wrote:
Sean in Ottawa wrote:

Stockholm-- rural Canada is not a tail. I think I know what you mean but I sure would prefer a less hostile dismissive tone to minority opinion in the party.

If the NDP wants to govern it will have to bridge that urban rural divide at least to some degree.

What I would like to hear from the NDP is something like the following:

Mr. Hyer has chosen to sit outside the party. Whether he comes back or not the NDP would like to keep communication open and look forward to workign with him in the House particularly on issues for Northern and rural communities for which Hyer is passionate.

Events, challenges and setbacks are tests. How the NDP responds to this is key.Burning bridges with someone who was elected as a New Democrat is a last resort and there seems to be no reason to do so. The NDP has lost two MPs to defection. Handling this well is going to be important if we want to avoid it increasing.

If someone is reading the above quote.. take note.... If Sean Doesn't work for the NDP... he should.. lol..

Ok-- In case someone is reading... ;-)

I don't work for the NDP. But I sure would like to...

Mon, 2012-04-23 19:10

#80

kropotkin1951

The gun registry will not be an issue in the next election. Why would it be? Why must there be a campaign plank about a dead issue? It seems to me that of the myriad of controversial issues this one should just be left to die. Of course convention will pass some policy or other but frankly when has that every meant that a controversial issue will make it into the campaign platform?

With stories like this one needs to hear his side, Mulcair's side and what actually took place. Not a good day for anyone involved.

Mon, 2012-04-23 19:14

#81

Boom Boom

Hyer was on P&P tonight, not a great interview - he talked about the Long Gun Registry, but I'm at a loss right now to recall exactly what he said. Sorry.

Mon, 2012-04-23 19:21

#82

mtm

He basically said he still supports the party, he'll keep his membership card, wont rule out a return to caucus if possible, so long as his vague demands that the party be more "small d" democratic.

Evan tried to suggest he left over the gun registry, which he said no. Then he said "was it that you didnt get a shadow cabinet post" to which he said no. Then he said it was a "combination of things".

When Solomon challenged him on not calling or talking to Mulcair, he said "would have, should have, could have." Hardly a great defence.

Mon, 2012-04-23 19:22

#83

mtm

Oh, never mind my synopsis: Here it is!

http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/News/Politics/1244504890/ID=2226036199

Mon, 2012-04-23 19:39

#84

Sean in Ottawa

wow

Bizarre.

Clearly we are not seeing the full story. I don't think I have ever seen an interview as friendly to a party from somoene who left.

You are left wondering why he left--

Mon, 2012-04-23 19:40

#85

mtm

Is it outrageous to suggest he'll be back?

Mon, 2012-04-23 20:00

#86

Stockholm

He may try to come crawling back...whether the party will want him back is another question. The nice thing about having over 100 MPs is that as much as everyone is valuable and we never want to lose anyone - its not such a big deal to lose 1 out of 102 compared to losing 1 out of 19.

Mon, 2012-04-23 20:11

#87

Boom Boom

How many MPs in the NDP caucus now? 100 even?

ETA: oops, I forgot Craig Scott - so it should be 101 now - right?

Mon, 2012-04-23 20:11

#88

mtm

101 minus hyer. 103 on may 2nd, minus jack, st denis and now hyer, plus craig scott.

Mon, 2012-04-23 20:15

#89

Boom Boom

The NDP needs more Craig Scotts and less Hyers.

Mon, 2012-04-23 20:19

#90

6079_Smith_W

Yes, but it would be a completely different story if there were enough changes on the government side to bring those numbers a bit closer to minority.

I realize Hyer is just one member, and he left for his own reasons, but the issue of grassroots vs central control and strong regional differences is a valid one.

I am just amazed and disappointed that Mulcair would commit to campaign and enforce support on the most divisive issue there is, particularly without draughted reforms on the table to distinguish his position from that of the Liberals. He just ensured that this issue will not be gone in four years, if for no other reason than Harper will not let anyone forget.

Speaking of which, I think Mulcair has something to learn from Harper - in his handling of the equally poisonous issue of abortion choice.

Mon, 2012-04-23 20:25

#91

Boom Boom

Well, I support having a long gun registry - nation wide - so I'm not going to be too critical of Mulcair on this.

Mon, 2012-04-23 20:26

#92

madmax

kropotkin1951 wrote:

The gun registry will not be an issue in the next election. Why would it be? Why must there be a campaign plank about a dead issue? It seems to me that of the myriad of controversial issues this one should just be left to die. Of course convention will pass some policy or other but frankly when has that every meant that a controversial issue will make it into the campaign platform?

With stories like this one needs to hear his side, Mulcair's side and what actually took place. Not a good day for anyone involved.

As has been said before any of this broke out...
The Conservatives will use the threat of the NDP and the Gun Registery as a wedge. The FEAR that the NDP would bring back the registery.

The REGISTERY is A DEAD ISSUE.... but not any longer...

Seems the NDP wants the Register back on the table even if their members and NDP voters are against it.

And I fully expect the Conservatives to use a wedge issue to hide their incompetence.

NDP has dropped the ball... twice..

Mon, 2012-04-23 20:28

#93

madmax

Stockholm wrote:

He may try to come crawling back...whether the party will want him back is another question. The nice thing about having over 100 MPs is that as much as everyone is valuable and we never want to lose anyone - its not such a big deal to lose 1 out of 102 compared to losing 1 out of 19.

Such arrogance.. welcome to the ... Liberal Party.

Mon, 2012-04-23 20:34

#94

madmax

doublepost

Mon, 2012-04-23 20:36

#95

6079_Smith_W

I'm not against bringing in gun control legislation nation-wide either.

But he made a terribly stupid and completely unnecessary political blunder. The Liberal Party's fuckup was dead until he pledged to "restore" it, rather than taking a fresh look at the issue and introducing the NDP's own firearms legislation.

Whatever his intent, he is now stuck to it.

Mon, 2012-04-23 20:51

#96

madmax

Gun Registery.
Too little too late.

Mon, 2012-04-23 21:09

#97

Boom Boom

Agreed, 6079.

Mon, 2012-04-23 22:34

#98

toaster

Thunder Bay can by no means be taken for granted by the NDP. Just look at the provincial results. Hyer and Rafferty themselves are a big part of why they were elected, not just the NDP. I can see the Conservatives winning this, if Hyer runs as an Independent (or if he doesn't run at all).

Mon, 2012-04-23 23:41

#99

Brachina

So he's still a member of the party, its not about the LGR, its not about his shadow cabinate position, he hasn't even discussed his concerns with Mulcair, and he may even come back to the party cacus later. He can't seem to explain what his problem is and no one else seems to be dealing with it. WTF is an independant or is he just a pouting New Democrat. How can you keep your membership in a party and be an independant? This will likely cost him any long term political future he had. Its so clear he didn't think before acting.

I have to say this its just world class stupid. Its also ignorant too, because he didn't even give Mulcair a chance to address his concerns. I just hope this rift can be fixed and his friends in Cacus can talk some sense into him.

Tue, 2012-04-24 04:15

#100

Vansterdam Kid

Sorry, but I blame Hyer on this. Admittedly we are all only speculating at this point. But considering the timing we can only conclude that 1) he made his decision after the Shadow Cabinet decision came out, so 2) it looks like he's basing it purely on power, meaning 3) he cares more about his personal position in the party than anything else.

Look, the fact of the matter is that it isn't just Quebecers who want strong gun control, so to make it into that sort of an issue is ludicrous. The vast majority of Canadians want it. The vast majority of Canadians also supported the Gun Registry. The party would have to come up with something and if it isn't something along the lines of a new Gun Registry, then the party would be ignoring the wishes of the vast majority of Canadians who want strong gun control.

Being anti-Gun Registry isn't just a minority position in the NDP, it's a minority position in Canada as a whole.

Tue, 2012-04-24 08:00

#101

KenS

For the record, I am much more skeptical about what is driving Bruce Hyer. I don't like the way the party has handled this, and that being true, beleive we needlesly courted adverse consequence. Which adverse consequences it would turn out to be is secondary.

So the fact I think Hyer does not make sense at all, that means squat to me.

Check this out:

Quote:

Mr. Hyer said he will now turn his attention to what he sees as the biggest problem facing Parliament: the democratic deficit and the need for electoral reform.

He said he is not going to drop his NDP membership and will vote with his former party 95 per cent of the time. But "I will now be able to say what I want, think what I want, and vote the way I want."

If Hyer pursues that, and it is both consistent and easy for him to do, then it seals for him a huge loyal constituency in the riding.

If he decides to run again, it does not at all seal for him overcoming the vote splitting to beat the Consevatives. But the NDP cannot possibly win the seat under those conditions.

If Hyer is a credible constituency politician- and there is no reason to think he isnt. [Now he'll spend even more time there.] And he wants to run again, then the best we can hope for is that he gets virtually all the Liberal votes, a BIG chunk of the Conservative votes that will go his way, and the hapless NDP candidate only gets the diehards.

The alternatives to that are kiss and make up [which Mulcair's promise on gun control would seem to make imposssible]. Or Hyer isnt interested in going on and quits.

Pages

Topic locked