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


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » archived babble   » the NDP   » NDP Takedown Strategy

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: NDP Takedown Strategy
notright
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8550

posted 07 November 2005 03:02 PM      Profile for notright        Edit/Delete Post
Given that the NDP caucus is no longer supporting the Liberals, what should the NDP strategy be going forward?

Should the NDP propose a non-confidence motion at next opportunity?

OR

Wait for the Conservative/Bloc caucus to propose a non-confidence motion?


From: Trawna | Registered: Mar 2005  |  IP: Logged
Magnolia
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10086

posted 07 November 2005 03:58 PM      Profile for Magnolia     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It's the Conservative's and the Bloc who have the first opportunity,next week. Now Harper is saying he won't put forward a condifence motion before Christmas. What is he playing at? It looks very weak on his part to say you want to take down the government and then not do it when you have the chance.
From: Ontario | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718

posted 07 November 2005 04:05 PM      Profile for Reality. Bites.        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Magnolia:
It looks very weak on his part to say you want to take down the government and then not do it when you have the chance.

If he wants to look weak, why should we stop him?


From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
James
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5341

posted 07 November 2005 04:07 PM      Profile for James        Edit/Delete Post
It is my understanding that the NDP's strategy is to vote against the government's budget estimates on December 8, as will the other oposition parties. That would constitute a vote of non-cofidence. The are also anticipating that in such an event, the election date would be set so as to permit a month long campaign after New Year's.

[ 07 November 2005: Message edited by: James ]


From: Windsor; ON | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Albireo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3052

posted 07 November 2005 04:08 PM      Profile for Albireo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I posted this in another thread. How would this be, for a strategy?:
quote:
Originally posted by albireo:
Wouldn't it be HILARIOUS if the NDP moved non-confidence purely on the basis of the Liberal government's failure to stop healthcare privatization??!!! Then the Harpercons would be forced to choose between (a) acknowledging that privatization is a bad thing by voting non-confidence, or (b) "propping up the Liberals"!

'Twould be beautiful!



From: --> . <-- | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Magnolia
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10086

posted 07 November 2005 04:17 PM      Profile for Magnolia     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
If December 8th is the date of an election call, will we still go right into an election with a week off over Christmas and an E-day around Jan 23 or Jan 30th?

Would the week off be at our discretion or would there be a publication ban for advertising etc?


From: Ontario | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
James
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5341

posted 07 November 2005 04:19 PM      Profile for James        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Magnolia:
If December 8th is the date of an election call, will we still go right into an election with a week off over Christmas and an E-day around Jan 23 or Jan 30th?

Would the week off be at our discretion or would there be a publication ban for advertising etc?


The last time it happened, (1980), there was an all=party agreement.


From: Windsor; ON | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Stupendous-Girl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10729

posted 07 November 2005 04:21 PM      Profile for Stupendous-Girl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Harper should bring the motion if for no other reason than to save face. He can't have it both ways "The Liberals are corrupt and Canadians don't want a Christmas election so we will wait until after Christmas" and then in the same breath say, "Oh, the NDP moved no-confidence? We'll support that".

He might be a policy wonk but he has the political savvy of a potato chip.


From: Alberty - Land of the Ralph-Bucks | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
Albireo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3052

posted 07 November 2005 04:24 PM      Profile for Albireo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stupendous-Girl:
[Harper] might be a policy wonk but he has the political savvy of a potato chip.
As a potato chip addict, I resent that comment.

From: --> . <-- | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 07 November 2005 04:28 PM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
What I heard today was that both the Cons and the BQ thought they had Jack onside last spring; then at the last moment he accepted a deal with the Liberals; thus both Harper and Duceppe are saying it's Jack's turn, this time, to introduce the non-confidence motion, and they'll follow. Don't shoot the messenger, I'm just reporting what I heard.
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 07 November 2005 04:48 PM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by albireo:
As a potato chip addict, I resent that comment.


From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718

posted 07 November 2005 04:57 PM      Profile for Reality. Bites.        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by albireo:
As a potato chip addict, I resent that comment.

Received via email:

As a potato chip, I resent it too.

Sincerely,

H. Dumpty


From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
lonewolf2
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10589

posted 07 November 2005 05:59 PM      Profile for lonewolf2     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Layton won't back Liberals
... The earliest date for such a motion is Nov. 15. ...The Tory leader said his party won't introduce a confidence motion before Christmas because he doesn't believe Layton will follow through with a three-party opposition attack.

If Layton is serious about bringing down the government, Layton has to present "a clear confidence motion that speaks to corruption in the Liberals," said Harper.

The Bloc Québécois leader, Gilles Duceppe, echoed Harper, saying that though he has no confidence in the government, Layton "has to make a move."


CBC News

Looks to me like Cons and the Bloc want an out to "blame" Layton for calling an election just because he can't control parliament alone.

Jack needs to make a VERY clear motion of non confidence citing both the Liberals ineffectiveness in addressing Canadians' number one issue - health care - AND he has to include the corruption issue.

It is important for NDP fortunes that the election be seen as called for by everyone but the Liberals.

(That way during the campaign all other parties can blast the Liberals for wanting to stay in power at any cost).


From: Toronto | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
Merrick
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10855

posted 07 November 2005 06:08 PM      Profile for Merrick        Edit/Delete Post
I think they should tell the conservatives to do it. This would allow them to say they are willing to work for Canadians with the rest of the country. Everynoe knows the Cons want Libs out sooooo bad. All the NDP have to do is say "We feel we are doing what's in the best interest for Canadians, and we are doing our duty for Canada, not out of political lust for power". They shouldn't let the Bloc do it or it only bolsters the Bloc's wish to strengthen their support in Quebec.

I see the potential from a fall of the Liberals as a good thing for the NDP.

It takes seats from the Liberals from people who have liberal voting tendencies. The ones who go vote for the Cons will return to the left eventually, and if the NDP appear to be the party who can promote the leftist policy who aren't marred federally with scandal.

Problem is, of course the cons will get more seats and that is the furthest thing that the left wishes for. NDP will make out like bandits if they play their role right and keep pressure on government regardless of who is in power.

During the election, they have to attack the Liberals. To take seats from the liberals only further reinforces gains made by recent polling. Conservatives will then of course land in government, BUT! It's a minority and they will still require government to work together. If they keep on the conservatives, and assuming the conservatives do something that is contradictory to popular opinion. then it's Harper in cement shoes. The cons would have gotten in on liberal corruption, not on a mandate to radically change the social structure of Canada.

This is when Layton has to pound on the cons. I'm not talking like a fanatical lunatic, but with well thought out examples of "See, they aren't looking to protect medicare either" type arguements. They can say "We took down the feds because they won't protect the system. Now, we have to take the cons out because they aren't fixing the system either".

I'm sure they've thought it all out though. Chips have to be in the right place for all this to happen.

[ 07 November 2005: Message edited by: Merrick ]


From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
lonewolf2
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10589

posted 07 November 2005 06:17 PM      Profile for lonewolf2     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
excerpt from Layton's speech

quote:
So unfortunately for those among ourselves who wanted to have this parliament go through, go ahead, to have things, there is no reason for our party to express its confidence in this government because the NDP, the New Democratic Party, can not express their confidence in a government that cannot protect our public system of health. A government that's controlled by the Liberal party, whose ethical behaviour was denounced by Justice Gomery.

Looks like Jack is hitting on both points - failure to address healthcare and ethics/corruption.

Let's hope the public sees it that way.

CFRB news report... Jack being challenged to make it a Christmas election...

quote:
With the possibility of a non-confidence motion coming forward as early as Nov. 15, the prospect of an election between Christmas and New Year suddenly emerged as a distinct possibility.

But mindful of offending voters, none of Prime Minister Paul Martin's political rivals was willing to commit to introducing the non-confidence motion that could plunge Canadians into their first holiday campaign in 25 years.

"We certainly don't want to see Canadians inconvenienced in their holiday period by having to have an election during that period," said Layton. "I don't think anybody would want to see that happen and there's no reason why it would need to happen."



CFRB

[ 07 November 2005: Message edited by: lonewolf2 ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
Suaros
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10562

posted 07 November 2005 07:39 PM      Profile for Suaros     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
If you watched Harper's press conference, he said that he would be open to the option of Layton using the Tories' opposition day on Nov.15 for a no-confidence motion. That seems to be the best way of showing a united opposition, and with noone being "the grinch".
From: Toronto | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
Rufus Polson
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3308

posted 07 November 2005 08:25 PM      Profile for Rufus Polson     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Stupendous-Girl:

He might be a policy wonk but

. . . I haven't actually seen a lot of policies coming from him. To be a real policy wonk, shouldn't you have, y'know, policies? And ideally want to talk about them? I mean OK, maybe you shouldn't have to have actually *originated* any policy ideas (as Jack Layton has), but you should at least have some definite ideas about which policies proposed by others you favour, and display some desire to talk about them.
I think people just *think* Harper's a policy wonk because he has no personality, is boring, and doesn't appear to have a life. So they imagine he must fill that void with policy, even though there's no actual evidence . . .

To be fair, I expect Harper actually has lots of strong ideas about policy. It's just that he knows they're all policies the Canadian people hate, so he keeps quiet about it.

Now, Layton seems to be a policy wonk, at least on certain issues. Nobody notices because he *does* have a personality.


From: Caithnard College | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
James
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5341

posted 07 November 2005 08:31 PM      Profile for James        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Suaros:
[QB]If you watched Harper's press conference, he said that he would be open to the option of Layton using the Tories' opposition day on Nov.15 for a no-confidence motion. ...QB]

I did watch it, and he said exactly the opposite to that. The suggestion was put to him directly, and after a few weasel words, he said "We're not giving up our opposition day".


From: Windsor; ON | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Paul Nomo
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10911

posted 07 November 2005 09:06 PM      Profile for Paul Nomo        Edit/Delete Post
Nah, he actually made it pretty clear that if Jack wanted to approach him and discuss using the CPC opposition days to bring down the government, he would be happy to listen.
However he also said that he wouldn't just turn the day over to Jack to use it to further the NDP's agenda.
Harper and Duceppe made it clear they were tired of Jack playing games.

From: Duckberg | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 07 November 2005 09:12 PM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Paul Nomo:
Nah, he actually made it pretty clear that if Jack wanted to approach him and discuss using the CPC opposition days to bring down the government, he would be happy to listen.
However he also said that he wouldn't just turn the day over to Jack to use it to further the NDP's agenda.
Harper and Duceppe made it clear they were tired of Jack playing games.

Oh God, another one!


From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Paul Nomo
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10911

posted 07 November 2005 09:28 PM      Profile for Paul Nomo        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Rufus Polson:

. . . I haven't actually seen a lot of policies coming from him. To be a real policy wonk, shouldn't you have, y'know, policies? And ideally want to talk about them? I mean OK, maybe you shouldn't have to have actually *originated* any policy ideas (as Jack Layton has), but you should at least have some definite ideas about which policies proposed by others you favour, and display some desire to talk about them.
I think people just *think* Harper's a policy wonk because he has no personality, is boring, and doesn't appear to have a life. So they imagine he must fill that void with policy, even though there's no actual evidence . . .

To be fair, I expect Harper actually has lots of strong ideas about policy. It's just that he knows they're all policies the Canadian people hate, so he keeps quiet about it.

Now, Layton seems to be a policy wonk, at least on certain issues. Nobody notices because he *does* have a personality.


Ah, don't believe everything the CBC tells you.

quote:
Today in Toronto, Leader of the Conservative Party Stephen Harper announced the new Conservative Transit Policy. This is an innovative program that promotes the use of public transit by offering a tax credit. It is hoped that the use of public transit, will reduce the number of vehicles on our roads, and cut back the smog that is caused by greenhouse gas emissions in our metropolitan centers. It will also help dilute the crippling rush hour congestion that commuters face on a daily basis. The Conservative Transit Policy is truly a Made in Canada program that will help our environment.

(snip)

61. Student Loans
i) A Conservative Government will revamp the federal student loan program to eliminate the inclusion of parental income and assets in the assessment of loan applications.

ii) A Conservative Government will provide greater flexibility to students paying back federal student loans by implementing Income Contingent Loans and provide a preferred interest rate on student loans post-graduation.

iii) As the Millennium Scholarship Program currently only assists six per cent of students, a Conservative Government will channel these funds into the student loan program to help more students obtain post-secondary education.


There's more, of course.
http://www.conservative.ca/EN/policy_declaration/


From: Duckberg | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
Kevin_Laddle
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8163

posted 07 November 2005 10:18 PM      Profile for Kevin_Laddle   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
Get lost troll
From: ISRAEL IS A TERRORIST STATE. ASK THE FAMILIES OF THE QANA MASSACRE VICTIMS. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
farnival
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6452

posted 07 November 2005 10:40 PM      Profile for farnival     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well, it is easy for Harper to be a policy wonk by reading the NDP policy book and then presenting the ideas as his own, now isn't it.

I have a suggestion: Jack should introduce a non-confidence motion, using the Conservative day as suggested, to say that he has no confidence in the Liberals to protect public health care, or the public purse or anything else for that matter.

He should then introduce a Confidence motion endorsing the Conservatives and the Bloc. Confident that the Conservatives will ruin every public institution created in the last 40 years and turn us into a Socio-Con Republic, and confident that the Bloc is absolutely commited to ending the country we call Canada.


Then he should throw up. Right on the Commons floor, displaying to the entire country that he is sick of people not caring about and for other people.


From: where private gain trumps public interest, and apparently that's just dandy. | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
up
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9143

posted 07 November 2005 10:50 PM      Profile for up     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
If you want to campaign on Layton and leadership, which the NDP can do this time with success, Layton should step up, demonstrate leadership and shut parliament down.

If, however, they hand over the opposition day there are all kinds of different stuff we can do.


From: other | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
James
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5341

posted 07 November 2005 11:42 PM      Profile for James        Edit/Delete Post
No party is going to willingly be blamed for a Christmas election or campaign. No opposition party will introduce a non-confidence motion. But, the Dec. 8 "estimates" vote is unavoidable; the govt. can't operate without money, and none of the opposition parties can resile from the positions they have taken.

So, Paulie goes to see the G.G. on the 9th, (conveniently, a Friday). He then announces that, in consultation with her, and taking into account that Canadians want to enjoy their traditional Holidays and family times, and that in such a huge and wonderful country, it rakes at least a month for the various parties to fairly distribute thier message, its been decided that January 30 is the earliest reasonable election date ( insert disparaging comments on the irresponsible conduct of the opposition parties in causing this conumdrum)

I have it on pretty good authority that the NDP expects and will endorse that timing. It will be interesting to see what Harpo does with it. Will he rant on about the unprecidentended delay - clinging to power, yada yada or will he bitch that the election is being held just 2 days before Justice Gomery delivers his report on this scandal-ridden government

There will either be an all party agreement to postpone overt campaigning until after New Year, or some parties will spend a ton of money during the heavy Christmas advertising cycle, and earn only the resentment of the electorate for "messing up Christmas" for their wasted money.


From: Windsor; ON | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
farnival
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6452

posted 07 November 2005 11:55 PM      Profile for farnival     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I think I would be very disturbed to see Stephen Harper blankly staring out at the corrupt world during the middle of A Christmas Story.
From: where private gain trumps public interest, and apparently that's just dandy. | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Guêpe
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4757

posted 07 November 2005 11:56 PM      Profile for Guêpe   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by albireo:
Wouldn't it be HILARIOUS if the NDP moved non-confidence purely on the basis of the Liberal government's failure to stop healthcare privatization??!!! Then the Harpercons would be forced to choose between (a) acknowledging that privatization is a bad thing by voting non-confidence, or (b) "propping up the Liberals"!

'Twould be beautiful!


My question is...would the media be able to make the distinction?


From: Ottawa | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
up
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9143

posted 08 November 2005 12:08 AM      Profile for up     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I don't think Cdns will be upset with a Christmas/new years election, not at this time.

Besides, when do you think the voter is more recepive to the NDP message, during the 'goodwill towards men' run-up and during the holidays, or the oh my god I spent that much?? phase of the holidays when the cc bills come in?

In January, the CPC tax cuts will be sounding pretty good. In December the warm fuzzies of the NDP will be sounding pretty good.


From: other | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
davidt
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8006

posted 08 November 2005 09:38 AM      Profile for davidt   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
We should grab the bull by the horns and pull the knife (that the Liberals have stabed us with so many times) out of our back and stab away.

If the cons want to play tough guy no action let them, right now the oppoition parties are looking like a bunch of fools.. we got to make it clear we have had enough of this game and Harper is all hot air, but we are not playing the all talk no action game that the cons are so fond of.

Looking strong is more important than taking the blame for the winter election (and how effective would that blaim be the bloc and cons have to back us up)And if they dont back us up, we can point the finger at the weakling conservatives, who last week were calling Layton a chicken, but in the end were nothing but blowing hot air. We should make an anouncement tommorow that we will gladly table the motion and the cons can follow our lead if they want to.

Take the lead on this show the canadian public that we lead, and the conservatives follow.
And if the cons dont follow... even better, it shows everyone what a bunch of big mouth do nothings the cons are. Lets remind everyone about harper calling us chicken and then running with his tail between his legs, when action is required.

We got to lead and lead hard. Its a clear win win situation. We are viewed often as the liberals idiot twin brother.. lets finish that view off. Lets just yell out "we are sick of this crap and we are going to do something about it and who is going to follow our lead".

We got to talk as tough as posible and do everything we can to give action to our words.

The cons have giving themselves plenty of rope lets hang them, by doing what they only have the nerve to talk about.

We need not play the con/bloc game, we have an oppertunity to set the table, lets do it.


From: hong kong | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
rinne
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9117

posted 08 November 2005 11:02 AM      Profile for rinne     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I agree, now is the time to be absolutely clear that the NDP will not support the Liberal Government, if we do not speak up it will appear that not only have we been "sucker-punched" but that we don't even know it.
From: prairies | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
davidt
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8006

posted 08 November 2005 11:25 AM      Profile for davidt   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
At this point we have two options,
(a) go for the gusto and back up everything with as much retoric and action as we can. And we can just let loose with the ("gutless waiting on the NDP to take the lead" tories and liberal "crooks") slamming vitrol/action. We can show that only party that can take out the Liberal trash is the NDP and that we are going to do it.

or

(b) lets look foolish and weak after talking a tough game (the role for the big mouth weakling has already been filled by steve "chicken" harper..call me crazy but I want harper to play the village idiot).

[ 08 November 2005: Message edited by: davidt ]


From: hong kong | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
up
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9143

posted 08 November 2005 11:49 AM      Profile for up     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
He's really backed himself into the corner now. I don't think its win/win. I just think the only option Layton has left is to squeeze the trigger. both barrels. It has to get messy now.
From: other | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
davidt
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8006

posted 08 November 2005 12:01 PM      Profile for davidt   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
No matter what...the better option is that the NDP have to be strong now or else. You may think that we have backed ourselves into a corner but I think that we are double our alexa support levels and we are acting like a serious party that has power for the first time in almost twenty years.

We have two options the first to look like weaklings or to take the pissed off voter thunder that have inflated the conservatives these last few polls and make it our own.


We are not the scary conservative wingnuts, and we will not get the "oh no the conservatives are crazy lets think twice about this and change our vote back to the liberals because we are only angry not nuts" type voter who then freaks out and goes back to the liberals.
We have to be the pissed off voters obvious choice and if we play this right we can do it.


From: hong kong | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged
tallyho
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10917

posted 08 November 2005 12:29 PM      Profile for tallyho        Edit/Delete Post
Most of this is much ado about nothing. There will be an election in the next 3 months. The 4 major parties are known entities. No new leaders. No change of policies. The ins and outs of who brings down the government, will the election be in December of Januarrry, etc. are fodder for politicos to tie themselves in knots over. The press needs something to talk about.

Canadians don't notice or care. Some will hear the policies during the campaign and some will watch the debates. Come election day nobody cares who pulled the trigger for the election.


From: The NDP sells out Alberta workers | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
lonewolf2
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10589

posted 08 November 2005 12:44 PM      Profile for lonewolf2     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Better for the NDP to put forward non confidence as soon as possible.

Possibility: Liberals call for election first in January, showing they are 'take charge guys'

Advantage to Christmas election: things will be very different and novel for voters. People may well want to look forward to celebrating New Year's with getting rid of the corrupt L:iberals.


From: Toronto | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
tallyho
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10917

posted 08 November 2005 12:50 PM      Profile for tallyho        Edit/Delete Post
Please excuse the pun but that all sounds like psycho-babble. The NDP needs to present its policies and let the people decide.
From: The NDP sells out Alberta workers | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
kropotkin1951
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2732

posted 08 November 2005 01:57 PM      Profile for kropotkin1951   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
NDP Federal Party
News flash NDP has policy on all major issues.

Oh if only the news media actually reported on our policy. Harper's "anti-corruption" platform got great airplay but hardly a word about the NDP policy released prior to the Conservatives jumping on the bandwagon. Even CBC the last two days has had various Liberal and Conservative spin doctors both elected and not elected on to spin the NDP stance with nary an NDP spokesperson let alone Jack himself.

I am tired of hearing what Ujal and Steven have to say about Jack without Jack getting a rebuttal.


From: North of Manifest Destiny | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
DandyLion
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10150

posted 08 November 2005 02:46 PM      Profile for DandyLion     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I reckon that Layton has crossed the Rubicon and now has to vote against the Libs.

Harper and Duceppe seem less keen about a campaign overlapping the Christmas period.

Either of them could come up with the line that the Holiday season is for families, that an election causes great numbers of people working for the parties or Elections Canada to be out working, and that he thinks it is more appropriate that all these people spend time with their families, so that they will do nothing to bring on a Christmas election.

Having said that, I really don't know how any of the parties can credibly vote with the Libs on the Dec 8 budget appropriations measure, or whatever it is.


From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
m0nkyman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5027

posted 08 November 2005 08:07 PM      Profile for m0nkyman   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by kropotkin1951:
NDP Federal Party
News flash NDP has policy on all major issues.

You want to give me a direct link to the NDP policy book? Seriously. I've been looking in a lazy fashion for the NDP's official policy on firearms for years. Unless of course you think that the registry, or the criminal use of guns is not going to be a major issue this election.


From: Go Left. Further. Bit Further. | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
kropotkin1951
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2732

posted 08 November 2005 09:58 PM      Profile for kropotkin1951   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by m0nkyman:

You want to give me a direct link to the NDP policy book? Seriously. I've been looking in a lazy fashion for the NDP's official policy on firearms for years. Unless of course you think that the registry, or the criminal use of guns is not going to be a major issue this election.



I'm sure it will be very important to your friends. I suspect that the NDP is not their first second or third chioce.

No time for troll slaying sorry.


From: North of Manifest Destiny | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
m0nkyman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5027

posted 09 November 2005 02:10 AM      Profile for m0nkyman   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by kropotkin1951:

I'm sure it will be very important to your friends. I suspect that the NDP is not their first second or third chioce.

No time for troll slaying sorry.


Seeing as I have been an on and off member of the NDP since 1981, calling me a troll is a cheap shot. I was working on parliament hill as a volunteer for the NDP when the NDP caucus voted against C-68 with the exception of Svend. Yes, firearms policy is important to me. I was told that the NDP had a position on every important issue. I'm asking what to be pointed to that policy.

ps I'm writing this on a laptop named Kropotkin. My other computer is Kronstadt, and my iPod is named Emma.


From: Go Left. Further. Bit Further. | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 09 November 2005 02:51 AM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I believe if the NDP wait until December 8th it will be too late because that is the Martin Liberals estimates money bill and it is a confidence voting bill however the Martin Liberals will load it up with all sorts of goodies and make it quite difficult for the opposition to vote against.

I hope the NDP take advatage of any opportunity in the next week or so and defeat the government ASAP. Let's strike while the iron is hot.


From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 09 November 2005 10:23 AM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Originally posted by leftcoastguy:
I believe if the NDP wait until December 8th it will be too late because that is the Martin Liberals estimates money bill and it is a confidence voting bill however the Martin Liberals will load it up with all sorts of goodies and make it quite difficult for the opposition to vote against.

CBC reported yesterday that the Cons may not vote against the Estimates bill on Dec. 8th because it likely will have some measures that the Cons will support; Harper wants the Liberals to be brought down a motion of nc that _explicitly_ mentions "corruption".


From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Magnolia
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10086

posted 09 November 2005 12:19 PM      Profile for Magnolia     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I now have a bad feeling about the NDP toppling the government now. It seems that Phil Fontaine, Buzz, Ken Georgetti, David Miller and most likely the environmental leaders are putting pressure on the opposition parties not to derail important meetings and legislation from going ahead.

I think that Jack should make an announcement that he is going to act responsibly towards the timing of an election because of the meetings on Aboriginal reform, the meeting on climate change as well as money to the cities for transit etc. among other things. I think he will look better if he says that Harper can play "chicken" with Gilles Duceppe if he wants to but that he and the NDP were not sent there to play games and people expect them to act seriously and responsibly.


From: Ontario | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
tallyho
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10917

posted 09 November 2005 12:57 PM      Profile for tallyho        Edit/Delete Post
What's the goal of the NDP? If it's to increase seats up to 25, then so be it. This second guessing and strategizing dooms the party to be a footnote in any election (again). The party has to take a chance and rock the boat if it actually wants a breakthrough.

Layton should come out swinging at the Liberals. Take a stand and make some noise. Take charge of the election date. Put itself front and center or this duking it out between the B.Q. and C.P., etc. will push the NDP under the rug.

The NDP is in a tough position. If it can't command the front page then the election will be between the big 2 parties.


From: The NDP sells out Alberta workers | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 09 November 2005 01:00 PM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
CBC just announced it will carry live Jack's press conference at 130 EST on whether he will use his Opposition Day to bring down the government, or not.
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Winterpegger
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6899

posted 09 November 2005 02:41 PM      Profile for Winterpegger     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Watching CBC Newsworld live at the moment.

Credit is due - it is a brilliant plant, and cuts the LPC and CPC off at the knees.

It will be a confidence motion to bring the government down in January, voted on in November, and address both NDP issues (likely to be on Healthcare privatization - were I a betting man) and LPC corruption.

I've never voted NDP, but given the political bungling of both the LPC and CPC...


From: Winterpeg | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
lonewolf2
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10589

posted 10 November 2005 12:46 AM      Profile for lonewolf2     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Liberals set to stare down NDP motion
The minority Liberal government appears set to stare down a parliamentary challenge in two weeks that will call on it to resign after the holidays and hold a federal election in February.
But the opposition parties warn that Prime Minister Paul Martin would do so at his own political peril.

The Conservatives and the Bloc Quebecois have rallied behind NDP plans to introduce a motion Nov. 24 that would ask the minority Liberals to give up power in January.

The motion is not a confidence matter and is not binding on the government, New Democrats conceded Wednesday.


I think this is a very dumb move. Jack should pull the trigger right away and let chips fall where they may. First time he's looked weak.

[ 10 November 2005: Message edited by: lonewolf2 ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 10 November 2005 12:52 AM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Not only that:

quote:
Under a plan revealed today by the NDP, a federal election could be held in the middle of February.

What do you think of the timing?

I want an election ASAP, even if it's over the holidays. 70.5%

I want an election after the final Gomery report, sometime in March. 12.4%

February is fine with me. 16.9%

Total Votes: 937



From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
lonewolf2
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10589

posted 10 November 2005 02:17 AM      Profile for lonewolf2     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I find this weird...

quote:
The NDP’s common sense solution:

Thats what ndp sent in email to me regarding the plan to call for Feb election.

Shouldn't Jack know 'common-sense' is the Ontario hated Harris trademark?

or is he being 'canny and cunning'?

[ 10 November 2005: Message edited by: lonewolf2 ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 10 November 2005 02:27 AM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yes!
From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718

posted 10 November 2005 08:12 AM      Profile for Reality. Bites.        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by leftcoastguy:
Not only that:


Meaningless, unsourced online poll. Not worth the effort of a cut and paste.

EVERY real poll, including the immediately-post Gomery ones, has shown that people are more than willing to wait for Gomery.


From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
Bookish Agrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7538

posted 10 November 2005 08:21 AM      Profile for Bookish Agrarian   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Those questions are always framed by the question do you want an election right now, or over Christams, or whatever, or in the future (Gomery) which also makes them meaningless in this new reality.
This is a pragmatic approach that finds a compromise for those who want an election right now, a growing and sizable portion of the Canadian electorate, and those who don't want one running through the holiday season.
Jack Layton is showing that he is the only national leader looking for solutions. He is focused on making sure Parliament gets the work done it needs to, but that Liberal Party corruption, confirmed by Gomery, is held to account.

[ 10 November 2005: Message edited by: Grant I R ]


From: Home of this year's IPM | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718

posted 10 November 2005 08:38 AM      Profile for Reality. Bites.        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Grant I R:
Those questions are always framed by the question do you want an election right now, or over Christams, or whatever, or in the future (Gomery) which also makes them meaningless in this new reality.

Nice try, Grant, but not supported by facts.

quote:
The Leger study of 1,500 people, which is considered accurate within 2.5 percentage points 19 times out of 20, also indicated that an overwhelming majority of Canadians did not want a snap election.

Only 17 per cent of respondents wanted Martin to call an immediate election, while 37 per cent favoured the prime minister's stated option of launching the campaign within 30 days of Gomery releasing his second report on Feb. 1.

Another 36 per cent preferred an election at a later date. Ten per cent didn't know.


Considering that 36% think even post-Gomery is too soon, What is your basis for your claim?

The desire of the opposition parties for an early election is rooted in their desire to deny Martin the obvious advantages he gains in getting to choose the timing. And that's a perfectly legitimate tactic for people who, after all, are trying to increase their votes in a system where the governing party, even in a minority, has enormous advantages.

But let's not pretend it has anything to do with what people actually want. People know perfectly well that an election costs a lot of money and isn't going to change a damn thing for Canada, only for politicians. We're not going to get an NDP government. We're not going to get a Conservative government and we're certainly not going to get a Bloc government. We're going to get a Liberal minority or Liberal majority.


From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
Bookish Agrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7538

posted 10 November 2005 08:52 AM      Profile for Bookish Agrarian   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well RB I spend a good deal of my time talking to voters most days.
I say those polls do not necessarily reflect what a growing number of people are thinking. Presented with a real, viable alternative we will see. There are voters who think any election is too soon. So I don't put much stock in those poll numbers.
As well, Liberal support is soft, soft, soft. I have never seen the NDP universe so large, nor the Conservative one shrunk to such a small, but admittedly committed rump.
Jack Layton and the NDP is showing the only national leadership and is focused on getting resluts. Paul Martin has demonstrated clearly he is not prepared to do much beyond holding photo-ops, especially on important issues like health care.
With a proposal out there to wrap up the few positive things the Liberals have been pushed to do and give Canadians a chance to pass judgement on 12 years of Liberal broken promises and corruption I expect we will see growing support for going to the polls in early February. Something Paul Martin will ignore at his peril. Of course if anyone actually believed anything Martin said about the renewing Canadian democracy his ignoring of a clear will of the House will put the lie to yet another Martin pronouncement.

[ 10 November 2005: Message edited by: Grant I R ]


From: Home of this year's IPM | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 10 November 2005 09:51 AM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Originally posted by Grant I R:
Of course if anyone actually believed anything Martin said about the renewing Canadian democracy his ignoring of a clear will of the House will put the lie to yet another Martin pronouncement.
-
Oh, brother. Virtually every commentator with parliamentary experience that I've heard in the past 12 - 16 hours has said the Layton plan is contrary to parliamentary tradition and Martin should ignore it. I thought while Jack was announcing it yesterday, that it was the most amateurist thing I've heard from a parliamentarian in a while. I'm scratching my head wondering why Broadbent and Blaikie would let such a confusing, convoluted motion slip through the door. I predict Martin will ignore it, that life will go on, and eventually a nc motion will carry, then and we'll get to a real election.

From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Left J.A.B.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9046

posted 10 November 2005 10:09 AM      Profile for Left J.A.B.     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Thanks for the Liberal talking points.

Anyone who knows anything about parliamentary tradition knows that 'tradition' is often created by the will of the House. If the House expresses a clear will then a way can be found to follow through on that expression.

Grant it right to point out that Martin will ignore it at his peril. Many Canadians will see this as a reasonable compromise. If the Liberals continue to huff and puff about the rules and arcane stuff Canadians will think that's pretty rich coming from a party that, as Sheila Fraser said, "broke every rule in the book" and they will look increasingly desperate to cling to power at all costs.
People in my admittedly small circle of friends and acquaintances already think the Liberals are horribly arrogant and corrupt. They were willing to overlook that when it looked like we were getting a government that would fight for things like health care. Martin has put the lie to that thanks to Layton. I don't think that the people I know are all the different from most other Canadians. We are sick of Liberals, don't want the Conservatives and are at least prepared to consider the NDP. Martin thumbing his nose at the majority of the House will reinforce Liberal arrogance.
This is not amateurish at all, it is brilliant strategy and a realistic proposal that Martin will eventually feel compelled to follow.

[ 10 November 2005: Message edited by: Left J.A.B. ]


From: 4th and Main | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 10 November 2005 10:21 AM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
One _good_ thing about yesterday's performance: it was nice to see that "Amateur Hour" hasn't gone off the airwaves.
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Left J.A.B.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9046

posted 10 November 2005 10:28 AM      Profile for Left J.A.B.     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You didn't tell us you were on promoting Liberal talking points, sorry I missed it.
You should have let us know I'm sure we would have all been fascinated to see you on the tube.

From: 4th and Main | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 10 November 2005 10:39 AM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Ack!!! Do I detect a note of sarcasm?
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718

posted 10 November 2005 11:48 AM      Profile for Reality. Bites.        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Grant I R:
Well RB I spend a good deal of my time talking to voters most days.
I say those polls do not necessarily reflect what a growing number of people are thinking. Presented with a real, viable alternative we will see. There are voters who think any election is too soon. So I don't put much stock in those poll numbers.

Sorry Grant, but as someone who spends his days not talking about politics, I'm leary of the anectdotal evidence of politcos who do. As you know from here, I'm certainly not lacking in opinions, but anyone who brings up politics in my presence is likely going to get the impression that I'm in agreement with whatever they say, because I tend to nod and say non-committal things so it doesn't escalate into an argument. I don't think I'm alone in doing that.

Even if that were not the case, and everyone you speak to is telling the absolute truth about what they think, your perspective, like any individual's, is extremely limited. You speak only to the people you encounter in the places that you frequent.


From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
SteelCityGuy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6293

posted 10 November 2005 12:31 PM      Profile for SteelCityGuy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Let's be realistic about NDP gains - they CAN come. But, for all the talk about the "shrinking" conservatives and "very soft" Liberal support, these parties are STILL ahead of the NDP.

Target the 65 ridings that are winnable. The party can realistically win 30. But this talk of third going to second among the federalist parties is just that: talk.


From: Ottawa | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Bookish Agrarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7538

posted 10 November 2005 12:47 PM      Profile for Bookish Agrarian   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Sorry RB I've been in the barn all morning so I missed this. I'm merely trying to make a simple point that the dynamic is changing, likely has changed.
I actually spend most of my time listening to what people are saying, rather than telling them what they should think. Novel eh? I've also been doing a lot of traveling around southwestern Ontario lately, so my perspective is beyond my own neighbourhood if not Toronto based.
I am sensing a change in the electorate that is reminiscent of other big watershed elections. People aren't fully there yet, but something is happening on the ground. I might be wrong, but I usually have pretty good 'spidey-sense' about these things.
Every election when timing has been an issue, one party or another tries to make hay with it, I've never seen it last beyond a week. Could happen I guess, but people don't go into the polling station thinking boy I'm mad I have to vote and cast a ballot based on that. Again could be wrong, but I doubt it.
What I am sensing is that people have had more than enough of the Liberals and that they want to get a chance to pass judgement on what is happening in Ottawa in general, and that includes the obstructive behaviour of the Conservatives, by the way. I am also sensing that as time stretches on that Liberal arrogance is waning their support. If they don't handle this right, then my guess is they will confirm the worst of people's underlying feelings.
My point is solely that it is the Liberals who are now in the box and it will be them who may pay a price for delaying, not those who support going early.(Post Christmas that is) My other sense is that it's about a 50-50 split on wanting an election sooner as opposed to later of those who might actually vote.
But you are right these are just my impression, but I think you will note that I, unlike a few posters, never give my opinions the weight of divine revelation, I just lay them out there.

And RB 'politico' oooh that hurts. Right in the gut, make me pretend I have a eyelash in my eye to hide my crying kind of hurt. I do have other interests you know. In fact I'm off to do one of them now. Now where are my clown shoes.


From: Home of this year's IPM | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Being
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7768

posted 10 November 2005 07:40 PM      Profile for Being   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
The NDP should aim to be the second and even first choice among federalist parties. There is a lot of soft support in all of the other parties. The NDP's policies and platform, while not contradicting the core, should appeal to voters who are parked with the CPC, LPC, BQ, and GPC.

If the NDP is successful at claiming CPC voters, they will bring Liberal voters with them. Ethics and Accountability goes to the Martin Liberals as well as CPC supporters, especially those of whom still identify themselves as 'Progressive'. Democratic Reform also goes to the Paul Martin voters, and the Reform segment of the CPC. The Prosperity Agenda goes to Conservative and Liberal voters alike, and attacks head on the problem that the NDP has in being perceived as bad economic managers.

The NDP can draw in even more of this right wing support if it makes a stand on government waste and corporate welfare.

At the same time, the NDP can energise its core and appeal to Trudeau/Chretien Liberals by mentioning that they are the only Party which will hold the line on Medicare, and enforce the Canada Health Act. This could also appeal to progressive soft nationalists in Quebec.

While in Quebec, the NDP could mention that it has a much better chance at power in Ottawa than does the BQ. Voting NDP would be a way of increasing influential representation from Quebec while still punishing the Liberals, and not voting for the Conservatives.

As well as having the best Green Platform, the NDP might be able to capture Green votes by stressing Ethics and Accountability, and making the NDP appealing to the 'protest' vote.


From: Toronto | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
outlandist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10253

posted 10 November 2005 10:34 PM      Profile for outlandist        Edit/Delete Post
outlandist's partner - I think that laytons strategy is actually being manipulated by Martin, Jacks been in bed with Paul for so long all this election strategy smells of Martin.
From: ontario | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
Scott Piatkowski
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1299

posted 10 November 2005 10:59 PM      Profile for Scott Piatkowski   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by SteelCityGuy:
But this talk of third going to second among the federalist parties is just that: talk.

Yeah, that's kind of what we do here.

More talk: I wouldn't be terribly disappointed with Official Opposition, but I want to see us in government.


From: Kitchener-Waterloo | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
lonewolf2
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10589

posted 11 November 2005 12:03 AM      Profile for lonewolf2     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Trust in government hits new low: poll
Only 27 per cent of those polled said they trusted the federal government, compared to about 58 per cent who were surveyed in the late 1960s

G&M

More proof Canadians are evr more cynical about governments and politicians


From: Toronto | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
Malcolm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5168

posted 11 November 2005 03:45 AM      Profile for Malcolm   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by tallyho:

Layton should come out swinging at the Liberals. Take a stand and make some noise. Take charge of the election date. Put itself front and center or this duking it out between the B.Q. and C.P., etc. will push the NDP under the rug.


The best strategy for the NDP in just about every situation is to go after the Liberals. Oh sure, take shots at Harper et al as well. But that's just a formality. The Liberals are, always have been and always will be the enemy.

And those unprincipled faux New Democrats who want to pimp for a Liberal victory (hello Basil Hargrove) should be expelled from the party.


From: Regina, SK | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 11 November 2005 04:48 AM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Boom Boom:
Originally posted by Grant I R:
Of course if anyone actually believed anything Martin said about the renewing Canadian democracy his ignoring of a clear will of the House will put the lie to yet another Martin pronouncement.
-
Oh, brother. Virtually every commentator with parliamentary experience that I've heard in the past 12 - 16 hours has said the Layton plan is contrary to parliamentary tradition and Martin should ignore it. I thought while Jack was announcing it yesterday, that it was the most amateurist thing I've heard from a parliamentarian in a while. I'm scratching my head wondering why Broadbent and Blaikie would let such a confusing, convoluted motion slip through the door. I predict Martin will ignore it, that life will go on, and eventually a nc motion will carry, then and we'll get to a real election.


Hey Liberal hound dog.

Don't make us laugh.

Try watching something that isn't a Liberal spin show, eh!


From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Singingwithin
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7344

posted 11 November 2005 06:14 PM      Profile for Singingwithin     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Boom Boom:
Oh, brother. Virtually every commentator with parliamentary experience that I've heard in the past 12 - 16 hours has said the Layton plan is contrary to parliamentary tradition and Martin should ignore it.
-------------------------------------------------
quote:
Originally posted by leftcoastguy:

Try watching something that isn't a Liberal spin show, eh!

Actually the differences between media coverage on this have been all over the map. It's clear that the Layton plan is new in parliamentary tradition, but every tradition has to start somewhere and newness is not necessarily amateurish.

All media have agreed that the Layton motion is not by itself enforceable.

Some then go on and label it as nonesensical and useless. They imply that there is no way that the motion could be made enforceable.

Others point out that it might be made enforceable through a motion to change the Parliamentary schedule and to schedule an opposition day early in January. Indeed, I understand that the opposition parties have said that they are discussing this option.

The fact that the former did not even mention that there were opposition discussions on how the motion could be made enforceable strikes me as the height of misleading reporting. Not a surprise, but disappointing nonetheless.


From: Vancouver | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged
Hephaestion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4795

posted 11 November 2005 06:21 PM      Profile for Hephaestion   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
Long-dotted-line-without-breaks inspector coming through...

Excuse me. Pardon me.

Yup, that's one, all righty. Looks like all is in order here.

From: goodbye... :-( | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 11 November 2005 06:31 PM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I think it is going to go something like this:

Plan A - Martin comes to his senses and realizes that, under the circumstances, having lost the democratic will of the House, and that Martin no longer has moral authority to decide things, that Layton's proposal is quite reasonable and agrees to the writ being dropped in the first week in January for an election on February 13, which was Martin's original timetable for the election, until he managed to delay the date of the release of the second Gomery report.

Chances of that happening:

Zilch as Martin Liberals are just too arrogant to compromise on anything.

Plan B:

This is where the action is going to be, and it is going to get dicey, because if there is no limit to the election time period, what is to stop Martin from scheduling a three or four month election campaign no matter when the government is defeated?

Even if the government falls in the first week of January what is to stop Martin from scheduling the election for April or May? Is it the negative public pressure that would stop Martin or is it something else that might or might not involve the Governor General?


From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 11 November 2005 06:36 PM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Malcolm French, APR:

The best strategy for the NDP in just about every situation is to go after the Liberals. Oh sure, take shots at Harper et al as well. But that's just a formality. The Liberals are, always have been and always will be the enemy.

And those unprincipled faux New Democrats who want to pimp for a Liberal victory (hello Basil Hargrove) should be expelled from the party.


I think the New Democrats needs all the allies possible for the coming election campaign.


From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Policywonk
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8139

posted 11 November 2005 09:24 PM      Profile for Policywonk     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
This is where the action is going to be, and it is going to get dicey, because if there is no limit to the election time period, what is to stop Martin from scheduling a three or four month election campaign no matter when the government is defeated?

I think the election has to be called within a certain period of time after the non-confidence vote, which if exceeded would obligate the GG to dissolve parliament without the government resigning first. And there is a limit on the length of the campaign.


From: Edmonton | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Reality. Bites.
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6718

posted 11 November 2005 09:40 PM      Profile for Reality. Bites.        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Policywonk:
And there is a limit on the length of the campaign.

Not that we've been able to find in the Election Act. However, I do believe that if Martin tried to play fast and loose with that, the GG would shoot him down. I think she'd allow a longer period to permit a holiday break, but that's it.


From: Gone for good | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 11 November 2005 10:11 PM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
But what about the proroguing Parliament aspect, which is the aspect I find most disturbing. Can Martin do this without any warning whatsoever? could he do it Monday? I have a feelin' it is going to get about as nasty as we have ever experienced a situation:

Pollsters, strategists warn against Christmas election

quote:
But at the end of last week, opposition parties, who found themselves in a never-seen-before situation, threatened to resort to a "nuclear" option, and they warned they were prepared to pull the plug on the House if necessary.

"If there's a clear signal that the Liberals intend to prorogue, then the opposition parties will reassess the situation," NDP MP Pat Martin (Winnipeg Centre, Man.) told The Hill Times. "The confidence motion, which would end this Parliament is like dropping a nuclear bomb, that's the ultimate weapon."

But he said the opposition parties were hoping to avoid allowing things to go that far.

"We're trying to find a less absolute way of concluding this Parliament putting the Liberal record to the people," he said. "But that option still remains and this is one of the tools in the opposition parties' tool chest."



From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
leftcoastguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5232

posted 11 November 2005 10:49 PM      Profile for leftcoastguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Policywonk:

I think the election has to be called within a certain period of time after the non-confidence vote, which if exceeded would obligate the GG to dissolve parliament without the government resigning first. And there is a limit on the length of the campaign.


Right

And she was appointed by Martin just like Gomery was appointed by Martin.

[ 11 November 2005: Message edited by: leftcoastguy ]


From: leftcoast | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
up
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9143

posted 12 November 2005 12:53 AM      Profile for up     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
February???

This is as good as a position the NDP could get going into an election and we should go now while we can start the news cycle.

We won't start the news cycle in February. when was the last time the NDP had the chance to go into an election starting the news cycle?

We are going to lament this chance for a long long time.


From: other | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
Policywonk
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8139

posted 12 November 2005 04:10 PM      Profile for Policywonk     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
And she was appointed by Martin just like Gomery was appointed by Martin.

She still has to adher to the Constitution and electoral law.


From: Edmonton | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca