babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics

Topic Closed  Topic Closed


Post New Topic  
Topic Closed  Topic Closed
FAQ | Forum Home

This topic has been transferred to this forum: politics.  
next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » national news   » Hargrove completes the sell out

   
Author Topic: Hargrove completes the sell out
quelar
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2739

posted 24 March 2006 01:41 PM      Profile for quelar     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The CAW's National Executive Board has unanimously adopted a resolution that calls for members, local unions and staff across Canada to withdraw support for the New Democratic Party.

[ 24 March 2006: Message edited by: quelar ]


From: In Dig Nation | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
writer
editor emeritus
Babbler # 2513

posted 24 March 2006 01:42 PM      Profile for writer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Star URLs are always ouchy on babble. You might want to use tinyurl.com.
From: tentative | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
VanLuke
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7039

posted 24 March 2006 01:43 PM      Profile for VanLuke     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
posting to fix TAT

Tiny url is your friend. the bloody url button can drive one around the bend


From: Vancouver BC | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
writer
editor emeritus
Babbler # 2513

posted 24 March 2006 01:44 PM      Profile for writer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Looks like there's a similar thread started in "politics" anyway. Perhaps this one should be closed.
From: tentative | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
quelar
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2739

posted 24 March 2006 01:47 PM      Profile for quelar     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Nah, mine beat him by a minute
From: In Dig Nation | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
VanLuke
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7039

posted 24 March 2006 01:49 PM      Profile for VanLuke     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by writer:
Star URLs are always ouchy on babble. You might want to use tinyurl.com.

It's the Globe and Mail and maybe this version of it might have less problems (dunno; but it has less clutter)

http://www.rbcinvest.theglobeandmail.com/generated/hubs/headdex.html


From: Vancouver BC | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
VanLuke
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7039

posted 24 March 2006 01:52 PM      Profile for VanLuke     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
As bad as this is from a financial point of view for somebody like myself (who has criticised the NDP, although the BC NDP) frequently from what I consider criticism from the left, it's not necessarily bad.

I think the NDP should move further to the 'left'.

What a louse he is though


From: Vancouver BC | Registered: Oct 2004  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 24 March 2006 01:54 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
This shows that he is somewhat vindictive. I think the CAW at the local leve will continue to support the NDP.

But it might be the beginning of the end for labour's domination of the NDP.


From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
writer
editor emeritus
Babbler # 2513

posted 24 March 2006 01:56 PM      Profile for writer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Thanks for fixing it so quickly, quelar!
From: tentative | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 24 March 2006 02:10 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:
But it might be the beginning of the end for labour's domination of the NDP.

Or vice versa.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 24 March 2006 02:15 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
For the NDP to be able to develop into a party capable of forming a government, the relationship between labour and the NDP must be more of a working coalition or an alliace rather than a partnership.

There are significant numbers of people who don't vote NDP just because of the current relationship with laboour. It isn't that they are anti-union, it is that they don't think the political party they support should be beholden, in fact or in appearance, to any vested interest be it labour or corporate.

I have no objections to trade unions but I would rather neither they nor business were allowed to financially support political parties.


From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 24 March 2006 02:32 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:

It isn't that they are anti-union, it is that they don't think the political party they support should be beholden, in fact or in appearance, to any vested interest be it labour or corporate.

So they vote for the Liberals or the Conservatives who are "beholden" to corporate interests?


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
oUtHEre
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8973

posted 24 March 2006 02:39 PM      Profile for oUtHEre     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Here is the resolution, adopted by the NEB on March 21, 2006:

[ 24 March 2006: Message edited by: oUtHEre ]caw.ca

[ 24 March 2006: Message edited by: oUtHEre ]


From: tORonTo | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 24 March 2006 02:40 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
So they vote for the Liberals or the Conservatives who are "beholden" to corporate interests?

Or Green or in many cases, not at all.

From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
robbie_dee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 195

posted 24 March 2006 02:46 PM      Profile for robbie_dee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by oUtHEre:
Here is the resolution, adopted by the NEB on March 21, 2006:

I couldn't get your link to work, oUtHEre, but I think this is what you were looking for:

CAW’s NEB Encourages Withdrawal of Support for NDP

quote:
Has the CAW shifted to the "right" in its politics?
The CAW is a ‘social union.’ Blah blah blah.

Yes.



From: Iron City | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Critical Mass2
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10908

posted 24 March 2006 02:53 PM      Profile for Critical Mass2        Edit/Delete Post
You can't expect activists from the NDP to engage week after week after week in an immature hatefest on Babble and in newspapers against the democratically elected president of one of Canada's largest trade unions and not have that union pull the plug.

I never liked Hargrove but the deliberate campaign of libel against him went too far.

The NDP deserves the backlash from the CAW. And I hope my union also decides for political independence.

You brought this debacle onto to yourselves.

Hate Bob Rae. Hate Hargrove. Soon you'll be hating Layton. Immature scapegoating. So much easier that trying to find out why a majority of unionized workers today don't vote for the NDP.


From: AKA Critical Mass or Critical Mass3 - Undecided in Ottawa/Montreal | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
robbie_dee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 195

posted 24 March 2006 02:56 PM      Profile for robbie_dee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Immature scapegoating.

The CAW's recent resolution shows that there's plenty of immaturity to go around.

But frankly, they're driving off a cliff right now in more ways than one. If they can't clean up their own house there is nothing the NDP could do for them in any case.

It's sad, really.


From: Iron City | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 24 March 2006 02:59 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
You can't expect activists from the NDP to engage week after week after week in an immature hatefest on Babble and in newspapers against the democratically elected president of one of Canada's largest trade unions and not have that union pull the plug.

You seriously think the CAW made this decision because of what people were saying about Hargrove on babble (and in the newspapers)? Or even took that into account?

I won't say that's the most ridiculous thing I've ever read on babble, because there's constant competition for that spot, but it's up there.


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Critical Mass2
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10908

posted 24 March 2006 03:02 PM      Profile for Critical Mass2        Edit/Delete Post
To transmit your messages of support for unions standing up for their independence against attacks by effing politicians like those in the NDP, call Buzz's assistant:

Rita Lori, CAW HQ 1-800-268-5763


From: AKA Critical Mass or Critical Mass3 - Undecided in Ottawa/Montreal | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 24 March 2006 03:02 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by robbie_dee:
But frankly, they're driving off a cliff right now in more ways than one. If they can't clean up their own house there is nothing the NDP could do for them in any case.

It's sad, really.


You know, robbie_dee, I started the "concessions" thread because the CAW is the last, not the first, union in Canada to do concession bargaining historically. Do you know what other unions out there are actually giving away -- besides signing long-term no-strike deals? A little perspective would be appropriate.

Why not separate your dislike for Hargrove from a rational examination of a much bigger problem: The role of concession bargaining and how workers are to make advances in the current period?


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
robbie_dee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 195

posted 24 March 2006 03:06 PM      Profile for robbie_dee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Why not separate your dislike for Hargrove from a rational examination of a much bigger problem: The role of concession bargaining and how workers are to make advances in the current period?

As I posted on the other thread I think that Hargrove is part of the bigger problem because he has led the CAW away from that militant history of which its members should be proud. Sure change starts with the members, but we need good leadership, too.

But please feel free on that thread to advance your own suggestions on the role of concession bargaining and how workers are to make advances in the current period, too.

[ 24 March 2006: Message edited by: robbie_dee ]


From: Iron City | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Albireo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3052

posted 24 March 2006 03:24 PM      Profile for Albireo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I like how this resolution quotes the earlier "strategic voting" resolution.
quote:
‘Whereas: The CAW Council meeting in December 2005, by democratic decision, approved by an overwhelming majority of delegates, after a three hour debate, a resolution which argued that:

CAW endorse the sitting NDP members of Parliament and individual NDP candidates in potentially winnable ridings. In other ridings, in order to stop the Conservatives, we will decide what best contributes to electing a Liberal minority with an NDP balance of power.
...


If Buzz sticks to this latest resolution as closely as he stuck to the last one, then Layton and Hampton had better brace for some major hugz & humpin' from Hargrove.

[ 24 March 2006: Message edited by: Albireo ]


From: --> . <-- | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Doug
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 44

posted 24 March 2006 03:33 PM      Profile for Doug   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I bet if someone like Bob Rae wins the Liberal leadership, they'll get the CAW endorsement, this time officially. Which would be rather amusing considering how Buzz was always on about the NDP not being left enough.
From: Toronto, Canada | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
In Exile
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11601

posted 24 March 2006 03:33 PM      Profile for In Exile     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Critical Mass2:
[QB]
You brought this debacle onto to yourselves.

[QB]


I may want to hang onto that line for use down a few years down the road, when the handbasket the CAW is riding on ends up in the only destination it's current strategy of Gompersism will lead.

I wrote this elsewhere on babble, but it's worth repeating, that Hargrove is showing himself to be the vindictive, immature one here - first by equating himself with the CAW as a whole (Le syndicat, c'est moi) and using his expulsion from the NDP - which was intellectually and politically justifiable by the way - as a pretext to make the de facto break with the NDP that occurred in his head long, long ago into a official one. And someone must have mentioned this already but some of the comments that Hargrove made during the election ("I told them [the NDP] not to bring the government down" and "Jack Layton doesn't tell me what to do...") were immensely revealing - the first prima facie and second psychoanalytic evidence that his early embrace of Paul Martin, in no small way, sprang from pique that that pipsqueak Layton dared to defy marching orders. Buzz's actions came from a far-deeper - and darker -- place than fear of Tory majority.

From start to finish, this has been about naked power - who was going to be boss of the NDP-labour movement alliance - when it became apparent it wasn't going to be him, Buzz chose to bring the entire edifice down.

Short-term it may be rough on the NDP, longer term, if it seizes the moment to redefine its relationship as a political party to the entire working class as opposed to the official labour movement. Just as it was never true that what was good for General Motors was good for America, it's time that the NDP reconsidered the proposition that what's good for Buzz Hargrove and the CAW is good for the working class.

Taking this road is a much better bet - and a tad more dignified too - than getting on hands and knees and crawling to Buzz for forgiveness.


From: Boston, MA | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Critical Mass2
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10908

posted 24 March 2006 03:39 PM      Profile for Critical Mass2        Edit/Delete Post
Yup, Exile. Hargrove singlehandedly hijacked the entire CAW and forced it to vote for strategic voting, through voodoo or something. Just like Rae singlehandedly hijacked the Ontario NDP and forced everyone, caucus, cabinet, conventions, through hypnosis or drugging or black magic, to follow his decisions in the 1980s and 1990s.

You think people are that stupid? If this is how NDP activists see their own members, or union members, or voters....

Thanks but no thanks. Parties that insult me and my intelligence, and that insult the intelligence of the people I know do not deserve my vote.

You continue to bring this on to yourselves by this immature politics of rewriting the past and then excommunicating anyone who differs.

What i've seen of the NDP indicates that you are a party that refuses to grow and to learn from your mistakes. Because, of course, they can't possibly be your mistakes - they must be, can only be the dastardly diabolic acts of betrayal of Rae, Hargrove, Mclaughlin, or any other leader who somehow kidnapped the party while everyone was away on vacation.

Sorry, you cannot seriously treat voters as if they are that stupid and expect them to respect and support you.

[ 24 March 2006: Message edited by: Critical Mass2 ]


From: AKA Critical Mass or Critical Mass3 - Undecided in Ottawa/Montreal | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
In Exile
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11601

posted 24 March 2006 03:40 PM      Profile for In Exile     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
[
From: Boston, MA | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
In Exile
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11601

posted 24 March 2006 03:52 PM      Profile for In Exile     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Once more time - it was NOT advocacy of strategic voting that was the big offense here - NDPers might have hated it, I thought that divorced from the actual, existing conditions on the ground (ie. that given the Canadian political dynamic a call to strategic voting directly only at NDP supporters was going to result in a electoral slaughter if it was not countered directly)it was a naive policy, but the CAW executive had every right to advocate that their members vote for whomever had the best chance of betting a tory in their riding.

But a very legitimate argument can be sustained that Hargrove - and how many times does this need to be repeated - went FAR beyond the policy of advocating strategic voting and actively campaigned on behalf of Liberals seeking to defeat New Democrats. He went beyond the CAW's democratically arrived at policy to work against the party of which he was supposedly a member. A political party that can't find the backbone to spit out someone like that wouldn't worthy of support.

"If I am not for myself, then who will be for me? But if I am all for myself, then what am I? And if not now, then when?" The first question has to be answered by the NDP, the second by Hargrove in the dark of night, and the third by the so-called Canadian "left" that keeps passing up one opportunity to advance after the other for another chance to carry water for the Liberals.

Standing up to Hargrove is not the sign of a party unable to change, it's the sign of a party ready to move out of the past and it's own timidity. The NDP can't expect anyone to support it, if it can't even defend its own honour.

[ 24 March 2006: Message edited by: In Exile ]

[ 24 March 2006: Message edited by: In Exile ]


From: Boston, MA | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
cranford
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4956

posted 24 March 2006 04:03 PM      Profile for cranford        Edit/Delete Post
In Exile is right - the revisionism is being done by Hargrove's supporters. The resolution, while not ideal from the NDP's point of view, I think made sense. But instead of following it, Hargrove used it as cover to openly endorse the Liberals on a national scale. The only possible defence that Hargrove could have is that in hugging Maritn and in speaking for him (against the separatist Harper), he was misunderstood by the media who should have looked at the broader resolution. That is, the only reason the whole world saw his actions as a wholehearted endorsement of the Liberals was because of bad reporting by the media. If Hargrove were to make this argument, it would suggest a deeply worrying lack of media savvy, but I don't think that is his problem.

Frankly Hargrove knew what he was doing and knows what he is doing now. The real question is it in the best interest of his members.

I can't see how it is. Trying to drive the only pro-worker pro-union party into the ground is a bad bad idea (and that is clearly what he is trying to do by jumping onto the unite the centre left behind the Liberals bandwagon).

If the NDP disappeared, the Liberals would ignore unions completely (as opposed to mostly like today).

What Buzz is doing may be in line with the thinking of members of his union who are financially better off than most people, but as far as I know, not all members of the CAW are autoworkers. Also, there is a bit of a larger principle at play here, but I suspect that has been lost in the fog of ego.


From: Here and there | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
In Exile
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11601

posted 24 March 2006 04:10 PM      Profile for In Exile     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Consider the Democratic Party's relation with organized labour down in my neck of the woods from the Dems standpoint it sort of like master to whore - the labour movement is a convienent ATM, but the Dems would never want to be seen dining with it in a public place - unless of course one of its presidential candidates needs a Sister Souljah moment to prove that he's man enough to screw over his friends and get the keys to the white house.
From: Boston, MA | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Hephaestion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4795

posted 24 March 2006 04:42 PM      Profile for Hephaestion   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
Critical Mass wrote:
quote:
Parties that insult me and my intelligence, and that insult the intelligence of the people I know do not deserve my vote.

Cut the BS. The NDP never had your support *or* your vote in the last election, if it ever did. How many times now does this make it that you have "quit the NDP" in high dudgeon? It not only wears a little thin after the umpteenth feigned walk-out, it destroys what scintilla of marginal credibility you have left on this board.

Give it up.


From: goodbye... :-( | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
robbie_dee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 195

posted 24 March 2006 05:12 PM      Profile for robbie_dee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Could you imagine being married to him?
From: Iron City | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
writer
editor emeritus
Babbler # 2513

posted 24 March 2006 05:19 PM      Profile for writer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Twenty years after the divorce, he'd still be threatening to leave.

[ 24 March 2006: Message edited by: writer ]


From: tentative | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
robbie_dee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 195

posted 24 March 2006 05:23 PM      Profile for robbie_dee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
He'd also still be living with you, eating your food, and criticizing your cooking.
From: Iron City | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
beibhnn
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3178

posted 24 March 2006 05:48 PM      Profile for beibhnn     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Not to mention sending out regular media releases about your shortcomings and about dating your sister.
From: in exile | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 24 March 2006 06:02 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
... who is, naturally, so much better than you.
From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 24 March 2006 09:48 PM      Profile for Tommy_Paine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The Vichy Auto Workers.
From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
John K
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3407

posted 24 March 2006 09:55 PM      Profile for John K        Edit/Delete Post
The CAW resolution is offensive at some many levels it really is hard to know where to begin.

Surely there must be some courageous CAW Locals out there as disgusted as I am by this bizarre, Buzz-centric, top-down dictate from the CAW brass. If you were as disgusted as I was by the sight of Hargrove hugging Paul Martin and repeatedly endorsing the Liberals during the last federal election campaign - while you were trudging through the snow and cold in support of your local NDP candidate - stand up to Hargrove and refuse to unaffiliate from the NDP.

And I wonder what rank and file CAW members think of the following from the statement:

quote:
At present, the Quebec Council offers critical support to the Parti Quebecois (and the Bloc Quebecois in federal elections). The CAW has no relationship with the NDP in Quebec.

From: Edmonton | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 25 March 2006 12:04 AM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The CAW Executive Board is Hargrove and 15 other people.

The vote at the April 21 meeting of the CAW Council will be most instructive. Those 900-plus delegates are from locals across Canada, not comparable to Hargrove's Executive Board. They will be inclined to support Hargrove on maintaining the CAW's scope for independent action -- 85% of them voted for the original Council resolution, which nowhere stated support for any Liberal candidates -- but surely more than 15% of them will oppose urging all CAW locals and members to withdraw all support for the NDP and disaffiliate.

How many? Could it be a majority? If I were in the CAW, I'd give it a try. I expect the NDP leadership to give them a hand.

quote:
Originally posted by In Exile:
Hargrove is showing himself to be the vindictive, immature one here - first by equating himself with the CAW as a whole (Le syndicat, c'est moi) . . .

Good line.
quote:
Originally posted by In Exile:
it's time that the NDP reconsidered the proposition that what's good for Buzz Hargrove and the CAW is good for the working class.

Oops, now who's identifying Hargrove with the CAW?
quote:
Originally posted by John K:
And I wonder what rank and file CAW members think of the following from the statement:
"At present, the Quebec Council offers critical support to the Parti Quebecois (and the Bloc Quebecois in federal elections). The CAW has no relationship with the NDP in Quebec."


In my experience, the provincial and local leadership of the Canadian labour movement has no problem with Quebec union members staking their own course, and this is echoed by many rank and file members who have more respect for Quebec than some babblers.

From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 25 March 2006 12:43 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by John K:

And I wonder what rank and file CAW members think of the following from the statement:
At present, the Quebec Council offers critical support to the Parti Quebecois (and the Bloc Quebecois in federal elections). The CAW has no relationship with the NDP in Quebec.


Well, probably they're shocked, like you obviously are, that Québec exists, that there are nationalist strivings there, and that the Québec wings of the CAW and every other union which has any significant presence there are generally sovereignist politically and have been for decades, and that the Québec branch of the CLC (known as the Fédération des travailleurs et travailleuses du Québec) generally supports PQ and BQ in elections.

Or, maybe they're less ignorant and chauvinist than you give them credit for.

[ 25 March 2006: Message edited by: unionist ]


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 25 March 2006 12:48 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Wilf Day:
In my experience, the provincial and local leadership of the Canadian labour movement has no problem with Quebec union members staking their own course, and this is echoed by many rank and file members who have more respect for Quebec than some babblers.

In months on babble, I believe that's the first non-redneck comment from outside Québec that I've heard about the labour movement in Québec being (and voting) pro-sovereignty in general. Much appreciated.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
maestro
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7842

posted 25 March 2006 12:50 AM      Profile for maestro     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
From a CAW resolution:

quote:
CAW endorse the sitting NDP members of Parliament and individual NDP candidates in potentially winnable ridings.

In other ridings, in order to stop the Conservatives, we will decide what best contributes to electing a Liberal minority with an NDP balance of power.


So what will the CAW do when a Liberal minority ignores the NDP, and makes common cause with the Conservatives?

The obvious fault with the idea presented in this resolution is that the Liberal party is as much a party of big business as the Conservatives are, and given any number of alternatives, will always act in defence of business.

Of course the other point is that the CAW, and labour generally, should be trying to elect a NDP majority government. Even in the case where a majority is not possible, or extremely unlikely, it is in the interest of Canadians to elect as many NDP members as possible. That by itself puts pressure on both the Liberal and Conservative parties, regardless of minority or majority governments.

And what is the CAW going to do with it's political fund in any case, spend it trying to elect Liberals? I suspect most rank-and-file members would find that unpalatable.

Or perhaps they'll exit politics altogether, which again, I think the membership will find not to their liking.

In a sense the Hargrove is acting like the kid who demands that others play by his rules 'cause he owns the ball. So the other kids leave, and who does he play with? The bullies up the street, who laugh at his demands, beat the shit out of him and steal his ball?

However, he has asserted his independence. A Pyrrhic victory.


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
radiorahim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2777

posted 25 March 2006 01:10 AM      Profile for radiorahim     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
In my experience, the provincial and local leadership of the Canadian labour movement has no problem with Quebec union members staking their own course, and this is echoed by many rank and file members who have more respect for Quebec than some babblers.

That's quite true...the labour, women's and social movements have always been ahead of the NDP on Quebec autonomy.

The other way I see the Quebec motion as being more politically mature than what's happening in the RoC is the idea of "critical support"...in otherwords they support the PQ/BQ in elections but reserve the right to be critical when need be...And certainly the PQ is guilty of taking anti-union measures when in power that are just as serious as any taken by the NDP has in other provinces.

I will not be surprised at all if the CAW endorses McGuinty in the next Ontario election and whoever ends up leading the federal Liberals a year from now.

It all makes sense now. I think this was all planned. Buzz knew his actions in the federal campaign would piss-off the NDP. He knew there'd be a reaction post-election by members of the NDP and he would use that reaction as a springboard to officially move the CAW into the Liberal camp.


From: a Micro$oft-free computer | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
robbie_dee
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 195

posted 25 March 2006 01:32 AM      Profile for robbie_dee     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Wilf Day:
The CAW Executive Board is Hargrove and 15 other people.

The vote at the April 21 meeting of the CAW Council will be most instructive. Those 900-plus delegates are from locals across Canada, not comparable to Hargrove's Executive Board. They will be inclined to support Hargrove on maintaining the CAW's scope for independent action -- 85% of them voted for the original Council resolution, which nowhere stated support for any Liberal candidates -- but surely more than 15% of them will oppose urging all CAW locals and members to withdraw all support for the NDP and disaffiliate.

How many? Could it be a majority? If I were in the CAW, I'd give it a try. I expect the NDP leadership to give them a hand.


In light of the personal nature of this dispute, if the CAW Council were to reject the NEB's disaffiliation proposal that could grievously wound Hargrove's chances at reelection this summer. He would end up looking very weak.

I disagree with your suggestion that the NDP leadership could give CAW rebels much help, though. CAW members are notoriously independent-minded and I doubt that party apparatchiks carry much influence in internal union politics, besides people like Peggy Nash.


From: Iron City | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 25 March 2006 01:43 AM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by radiorahim:
I think this was all planned. Buzz knew his actions in the federal campaign would piss-off the NDP. He knew there'd be a reaction post-election by members of the NDP and he would use that reaction as a springboard to officially move the CAW into the Liberal camp.

I think you may be right, except that I doubt he wants the CAW to be "in" the Liberal camp. He's a bargainer. He wants to dance with the Liberals and the NDP. "Critical support" for the Liberals if necessary, but not necessarily critical support. Not actually the same as American labour's role inside the Democratic Party. He doesn't want to be inside any party. Dancing is more creative. More leverage, better bargaining.

The correct response by the NDP is to say "our partnership with the Labour movement is at the core of our party. The Labour Caucus at our federal conventions elects an Associate President of the party, two members of the Federal Executive, and 16 Federal Council members. We hope that as many CAW members and locals as possible will, like the rest of the Canadian labour movement, keep playing a core role in the Party. We do not ask that they always agree with the party, only that they "accept and abide by the constitution and principles of the Party, and are not associated or identified with any other political party."


From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 25 March 2006 01:52 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Wilf Day:
We do not ask that they always agree with the party, only that they "accept and abide by the constitution and principles of the Party, and are not associated or identified with any other political party."

What about Québec, Wilf?


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Nopiming
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3422

posted 25 March 2006 02:49 AM      Profile for Nopiming     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
THANK GOD BUZZ IS FINALLY GONE!!!

I won't ever again have to watch him tear up his membership at Convention in a self-righteous bout of indignation, nor will I have to stomach his lip-service to the left while he's on the campaign hustings with Belinda Stronach. (Of the same Stronach family whose Magna Corp has been busting workers' right to organize for years)

WHAT A VICTORY FOR THE NDP!!!

WHAT A VICTORY FOR WORKING PEOPLE!!!


From: Courtenay, BC | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Privateer
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3446

posted 25 March 2006 03:10 AM      Profile for Privateer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by radiorahim:

It all makes sense now. I think this was all planned. Buzz knew his actions in the federal campaign would piss-off the NDP. He knew there'd be a reaction post-election by members of the NDP and he would use that reaction as a springboard to officially move the CAW into the Liberal camp.

But keep in mind Buzz's comments late in the election regarding the BQ and the discomfort that caused Paul Martin and the Liberals. If he was acting in such a calculated manner, why did he damage his new political allies? That seems to be his pattern of behaviour, to embrace you and undermine you at the same time.

[ 25 March 2006: Message edited by: Privateer ]


From: Haligonia | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
a lonely worker
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9893

posted 25 March 2006 04:01 AM      Profile for a lonely worker     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Would be nice in all of this posturing that someone said they want to see proportional representation. Its the only way to stop this strategic voting for a "united Left" (gag).

Before more damage is done it has to be made a priority before serious damage is done to the only potentially left wing party in the ROC (and its definitely not Bob Rae Liberals).

Once PR comes in, people can dance with whoever they want and will lose their abilities to have public hissy fits to mold parties into their image.

We better move quick before the third way shows up here ...


From: Anywhere that annoys neo-lib tools | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718

posted 25 March 2006 04:12 AM      Profile for Reality. Bites.        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Privateer:
If he was acting in such a calculated manner, why did he damage his new political allies? That seems to be his pattern of behaviour, to embrace you and undermine you at the same time.

This was mentioned by one of the pundits on Politics yesterday. Hargrove is a toxic loose cannon, ultimately not anyone's ally.


From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
farnival
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6452

posted 25 March 2006 04:24 AM      Profile for farnival     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
at this point it might be useful to suggest that I think most CAW members will continue to vote for whomever they did before, and the NDP will continue to recieve the support and volunteer hours from those people that support them, union member or not. This is grandstanding of the worst kind, and I would assume that the NDP and it's membership and the CAW membership will rise above it and continue to work for positive results for anyone that works for a living, which is pretty much everybody.

For example, Bill C-48, the Workers First Bill, was meant to change bankruptcy legistation to require that employees are paid first in the line of creditors and that any pension shortfalls be made up before any other parties get any money. This helps anyone that is employed by anybody or company, regardless of whether they belong to a union or not.

This is what the NDP should focus on, and let the labour leaders that want to engage in showboating to move on to wherever they are going.


From: where private gain trumps public interest, and apparently that's just dandy. | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 25 March 2006 04:50 AM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by unionist:
"Originally posted by Wilf Day:
We do not ask that they always agree with the party, only that they "accept and abide by the constitution and principles of the Party, and are not associated or identified with any other political party."

What about Québec, Wilf?



I expect there are no union locals in Quebec of any union that have affiliated to the NDP. The NPD-Quebec constitution does not even mention affiliation. If it did, it would say "not associated or identified with any other federal political party."

I don't believe the national CAW has even affiliated to the NDP; affiliation is done by locals. So the fact that the CAW's Quebec Council gives critical support to the Bloc has no relevance to a decision by a CAW local in Ontario to affiliate to the NDP.

There were lots of delegates from affiliated locals at the 2003 NDP convention that elected Jack Layton. I don't know how many were from CAW locals. For the 2001 convention the CAW recommended that "all local unions participate in the renewal of the NDP as the Left Party in Canada" and "all eligible local unions send a full delegation to the NDP Federal Convention in Winnipeg, November 23-25, 2001."


From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 25 March 2006 10:05 AM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Moving this to politics.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  
Topic Closed  Topic Closed
Open Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca