The NDP is going to have to find it's way in some position that the Liberals don't already own and that doesn't seem possible.It's more than possible, it's both easy and obvious. ISDS. Investor State Dispute Settlement.
The NDP sort of went there a while back on TPP but then they dropped it.
There is a huge movement against it in Europe because it is also in CETA. Trans Canada is suing the States over Keystone and there are more suits against Canada so there are examples right now on how corporations can can force taxpayers to pay penalties to corporations just for exercising our democratic rights.
If many Europeans are against the ISDS, including leading politicians in multiple countries, enough that it is threatening the deal, and Canada doesn't want it, why can't we just drop it? The answer is we can just drop it. Those saying we can't are not backing up their claim.
On February 4th the Liberals are attending a TPP signing ceremony. It has no legal standing because it still has to be ratified and Trudeau has promised debates prior to that. The signing was a last minute plan and I think it is to help Obama push it through. If Obama succeeds the debates will lead to ratification based on the argument that we can't afford to be left out.
If we can stop ISDS in CETA, then it strengthens the argument against it in TPP. The argument that negotiations can't be reopened on TPP is that there are too many countries involved and we don't have a veto so the deal will just go ahead without us.
That isn't true of CETA. CETA has only two partners, Canada and the EU. There is no reason for either party to refuse the deal without that section. It can just be dropped.
Maude Barlow went to Europe to fight it because the movement against CETA is stronger there, maybe because it has the support of some political parties.
[b]What are the two primary concerns of modern progressives? Climate change and income inequality. If there is a third it is the undermining of democracy. All three are made more difficult to fight by trade deals written to benefit corporations.[/b]
Progressives are looking for political leadership and not finding it. Taking this path would not have won this election, and probably not 2019 either, but it could set the stage for a return to opposition status and maybe even a win in 2023.
Why didn't you mention my personal priority? An antiwar foreign policy. If that doesn't fit at or near the top of the list then I've ceased being a progressive.
Climate change, I question that because the Greens own it and the NDP or Liberals don't want to take it away from them. It's one of those alligators in the swamp issues in my opinion. Humanity will have to suffer immensely before the mainstream hooks into it.
Income inequality, depending on what pie in the sky progressives choose to be the optimal. However, the NDP may someday choose to lead us to a European Scandinavian model?
And again I point out, our ideals are not what we have seen come to fruition. I can't see a day when we will be able to pull ourselves away from the US model of selfish capitalism so that we become more like socially responsible capitalist countries of Europe.
I don't agree there is room for two parties on the left. And I would say that it is the reason why we haven't been able to take ourselves closer to the Scandinavian model and further away from US tyranny.