Photo: Chris Wattie/Reuters
Sometimes I think that Jack Layton exists just to delight in teasing the Liberal Party. At any moment when the Liberals seem like they might be in danger of finding a section of vertebrae, the NDP sidle up to Stephen Harper and play “let’s make a deal.”
Not that I really think the Liberals will ever defeat this government on a confidence vote. Their near-perfect record of supporting the Conservatives has been untarnished for half a decade now, and there doesn’t seem to be any danger of that changing with Ignatieff’s suitcase at the helm.
Even as the socialists were having a frank talk with the Conservatives, I suspect Michael Ignatieff was still busy mulling over the possibility of doing something. With political reflexes like that, you’d imagine this man would have got around to declaring war on Germany in 1946.
What I find even more surprising is that the NDP made the deal in the maelstrom of the Bev Oda affair, which I suppose in the world of the 24-hour scandal cycle in Ottawa may as well have happened in ancient Babylon. Still, I expected a half-hearted squeak from the NDP, and the rattling of a few paper sabres. Sheesh, they don’t even go through the formality of impotent threats anymore.
The reason for the NDP’s eager announcement that they have wrung hard-fought socialist concessions from the Conservative government — like cutting taxes — is pretty clear. They’ve taken a beating in the polls of late, and would lose as many as 16 seats if an election were held today.
This is interesting, because even though the Liberals would gain 15 seats, it wouldn’t come at the expense of the Conservative Party, projected to gain a single seat. They would come all from the boys in orange, which makes their unwillingness to oblige even the unrealistic prospect of defeating the March budget nothing more than a spectacularly irrelevant work of fiction from Gloria Galloway.
It’s amazing that some pundits even entertained the idea that the opposition would play parliamentary roulette with the current poll results showing a resurgent lead over the Liberal Party. We’ve established the gutlessness of the Liberals, and the NDP have no interest in trading away their tiny presence in the House of Commons on the basis of principle.
And some might even ask what principle has to do with anything? The actual policies of the Conservative government are difficult to assail from a socialist perspective, their “sullen, haughty, can’t-be-bothered-tone” notwithstanding, of course.
It’s also rather difficult to criticize the Conservatives for their apparent flexibility of ethics, when the other contenders for the government seem to so willingly let these transgressions gather the dust of irrelevance in time for the weekend. Like so many other grievances that have disappeared in arrogant, contemptuous refusal to address them, the opposition has dutifully returned to their rightful place at the dog’s water bowl of power.
So, when do I expect the Conservatives to be answerable to the past two and a half years of malleable principle and rubbery promises? Well, I don’t know the date, but I do know that it will come at a time and in a manner of the choosing of the ruling party. To expect any differently would be to ignore the “not” in Oda’s memo.
Yeah, except for a chance of ” Election by accident ” as in all the Opposition mistakenly believe that another of the Parties will support the Government and they all end up voting against a confidence motion the odds of a Spring elction are getting lower all the time.
I don’t think the Block cares much either way since their position is currently fairly secure with the odds of losing or gaining a handful of seats wouldn’t make much difference for them.
Duceppe can play ” bâton dans les roues ” ( Stick in the wheel spokes of a moving bicycle ) as usual whatever the results of an election so he can vote down the Government or try to blackmail it with outrageous demands for money for Québec: If he gets the money he can say the Block is good for Québec, he doesn’t get the money he can do the usual
” Québec is being treated unfairly crocodile tears “.
If Harper’s concessions ( face saving for Layton ) are not economically destructive and are to help the low income retired and do something useful making medicare more efficient I can live with it even if it seems ” socialist “, but then some social programs and a safety net can be a good thing as long as they don’t ultimately destroy our economy and the country goes bankrupt ! Like a poison ” socialism ” is all in the dose: Below a certain tipping point it can be a good thing ….
One could argue that we are way past this tipping point but that might be for another discussion.
For a deal with the NDP to be worth it the concessions have to be good for the country and the NDP also has to support business and economically friendly policies that are opposed to their normal ways of seeing things. Compromise has to be in both directions and although I think we should avoid an election if we can at some point a line is crossed where the compromises aren’t worth the temporary reprieve.
In any case in a year from now the looming election won’t be optional for anyone whatever the polls say at the time.
Heh, so Layton will be saving Ignatieff from himself after all, eh? Layton, at the very least, will be able to say he got SOME of his party’s priorites passed while Ignatieff and the Liberals are completely by-passed.
In the last five years the Liberal party has accomplished almost nothing as an Official Opposition. In those last five years, the Liberals have either abstained, supported, or, just like today, have been relegated to irrelevancy when it come to anything of import.
The NDP might as well be the Official Opposition. Ince the Tories have come to power, the NDP have done way more to earn that title then the Liberals ever have.
I expected a bone to be thrown to the NDP and said as much. This works well on several levels. We still are very much in a likely election cycle.
It is funny how you people seem to think this is still about Ignatieff wanting to avoid an election. For months now the LPC have drawn the line in the sand at corporate tax cuts. It seems pretty clear they will vote against a budget that includes them.
The LPC have nothing to lose in an election. As you say, if the numbers hold they will gain seats. That is not a bad thing. The only parties with something to lose are the CPC (who will likely retain minority government though they could lose seats in the process) and the NDP.
What amuses me is that the NDP, who for some silly reason crowed over and over again when the broke LPC propped up the government are now propping up the government. I like the NDP, and I vote NDP, but until they rid themselves of Layton and stop thinking they are ever going to be in government, they will always be a bit of a joke.
Quote: ” We still are very much in a likely election cycle.”
Well, it’s still a minority government which by definition is something unstable: How likely an election varies from a little to a lot and can change on a dime but it seems less likely this Spring than previously anticipated, the Fall is just too far away to guess about, but in 2012 it becomes a question of letting the clock run out versus taking a chance even with bad polls for the Liberal and NDP.
For the NDP there is a possibility of growing at the expense of the Liberals by seeming to be a better and more effective Opposition party than the Liberals that just opposes for the sake of opposing !?
The NDP weakness in the Poll may be a primary reason for the NDP to act this way but if they spin it right they can come out looking mature versus the infantile behavior of the Liberals: Sometimes the high road is the best road since the low road just means wading through muck up to one’s chin LOL.
I’m giving that round to Gayle. I’ve watched for years as the NDP strutted and pounded its chest to the theme of “moral superiority”, and, it always confused me how a party could call itself the “ordinary kitchen table” party when the vast majority of ordinary kitchen table Canadians will not vote for them. Being in Opposition means, you oppose, its a very difficult job because you may actually believe in the what the govt is doing, but, your job is to oppose and find alternatives, its a very tedious job for either Libs or Cons, but, it has to be done and done properly, the NDP never has to act responsibly in opposition, they never have to worry about what they say or do because in opposition because, they’ll never be in power. Ed Broadbent knew he would never be in power, yet, worked behind the scenes to accomplish many NDP goals, Jack Layton is an ASS, he’s about camera’s and photo ops and rhetoric, and, if allowed will put the NDP movement back 50 years.
Nah, the Liberal stole the NDP mindset and policy by suddenly reversing themselves about the corporate tax cuts and are now the proud owners of that hot potato i.e. The Liberal now on the left of the now more pragmatic NDP.
In power the Liberal would probably return to “rule to the right” if they where still the Liberals of the Pearson or even the early Trudeau era ( before he did all the damage ) where they where still a centrist Party. They would understand the economic advantages of lower corporate taxes ultimately filling the coffers of Government more than higher taxes.
When a corporation pays higher taxes it just raises the price of it’s wears and the public pays. If it raises it’s prices too high it fails by not being competitive and companies in other parts of the World sell to us, but jobs here are lost as well as hurting the economy.
The remaining Liberals members of Parliament have lurched way too much to the left for their own good I think. ( Or at least the surviving Liberals after the last few elections have been too many of the Loony Left variety for the Party to remain Centrist ).
Strangely enough all of Ignatieff’s writings, as well as his support for Bush, the Iraq war, ” Not necessarily torture but torture if necessary ” would have made him much more of a conservative than a Liberal before he joined the Liberal Party and started to try to sell a more to the left agenda than his personal inclinations would make him comfortable doing: Maybe why he has such a hard time selling policies he may not believe in very much ?
Quote: ” Being in Opposition means, you oppose, its a very difficult job because you may actually believe in the what the govt is doing, but, your job is to oppose and find alternatives,”
Actually this I think shouldn’t be the role of a good opposition i.e. oppose just to oppose, but it seems to have become the default way to oppose.
Why shouldn’t an Opposition Party support what it thinks is good policy from a Government ? In the short term it might seem bad politics to strengthen the Party in power but longterm one would get a reputation for putting the country before the Party and much more credibility when opposing would be the right thing to do !
-Layton took ‘no corporate tax cuts’ out of the Dipper equation in 2008.
That was the price to purchase cabinet seats, in the coalition of losers.
Strategic error, big time, for Donolo/Iffy to resurrect it.
-Media want to spin ‘NDP will lose seats’ as the reason for Layton to capitulate.
Ha.
The longer the very unpopular (even amongst Liberals) Iffy is Lib leader, pushing policy Dippers have long abandoned, the weaker Libs get.
-Far from being stupid, Layton knows he has to move closer to the center to replace the LPC as the official opposition.
You move to the center with policy,
OR by sucking in another party to move to your left.
I love watching Jack out game Iffy!
-The NDP being the Official Oppostision is something BOTH Harper and Layton want.
-Keep in mind, the second choice of Quebecers who vote ‘Bloc’,
is the NDP.
Jack needs more time to bring over that soft Bloc support to the NDP,
and I bet he can count on a wee bit of help from Stephen Harper.
Wilson I agree the NDP is becoming the New Liberals and the Liberals are becoming the Old NDP and Jack as given Iggy custody of the “ugly kids” in the divorce settlement i.e. old bad NDP policies that don’t get you elected and Iggy fell for it by moving so far left he is now left of the NDP.
Harper may get his majority but the NDP has a chance to overtake the Liberal in freefall the later the election is called and become the official Opposition.
It’s possible, but I’ve noticed in the past few years the opposition parties telegraph their intent almost every time. It makes it much more convenient to strategize. Sometimes it just a bluff, but I think it sets up these deals.
It’s easy to vote against the budget when you know it will safely pass.
It sure is. Of course they have been saying they are going to vote against the budget long long long before Layton took corporate tax cuts off the table.
Liberals now holding the socialist anti-business bag, pro-tax hikes, pro-new social programs, waaaaaay out there in left field,
and another year with Iffy dragging down LPC numbers.
Wilson and Jean – so funny.
Corporate tax cuts are hugely unpopular in Canada.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/corporate-tax-cuts-could-bring-down-government/article1887996/
This is NOT a loser for the LPC. The fact the NDP are even considering it shows they are very worried about losing seats.
Sure Harper desperately wants Layton to overtake the LPC, and he will do anything he can to push the fortunes of the NDP over the liberals, but getting NDP support for corporate tax cuts is not the way to do it. I doubt there is ever going to be any way for the two of them to accomplish this goal, no matter how closely they work together to attain it.
But you keep up with your wishful thinking.
Yes, but it just take a little ” education ” to explain that taxing corporations is just a second hand way of taxing the common folks since at the end there is only one payer !
It might take a bit effort to convince people of this while the tax the rich or tax the Corporations thing depends on people ” feelings ” of jealousy and envy of the rich and the mistaken belief that the taxes raised are spreading the tax load more fairly while in reality it reduces the productivity of the country leading to everyone being poorer instead of richer !
The Liberal used to believe and understand this until they fell off the the cliff on the Left side of the Centrist road.
Now if you really believe in socialism making everyone richer why aren’t you NDP ? But then Liberal or at least Classical Liberal was something different than the current left lurching Liberal Party in my opinion.
And thanks I will continue with my ” delusions ” and you can enjoy yours as well ….. only time will tell who has it right and we can certainly agree to disagree LOL.
What makes you think I am not an NDP’er? I am certainly not a liberal, despite the fact you have leaped to that conclusion.
“Yes, but it just take a little ” education ” to explain that taxing corporations is just a second hand way of taxing the common folks since at the end there is only one payer!”
That’s like saying it just takes education to teach taxpayers that a tax on carbon is a good idea (it is), or that increasing jail sentences is just an expensive waste of time and an exercise that does not make people safer.
In other words – simple explanations is what sells.
Iffy was foolishly depending on Dippers to reinforce the ‘no corp tax cuts’, but Jack had already tossed the policy in 2008.
That policy was the cost of 6 cabinet seats in the coalition of losers.
Iffy is all alone in left field proposing a hike in corp taxes.
The Libs wouldn’t bring in new social programs when they had 3 majorities and 6 back to back surplus’,
only a crazy person would believe Iffy would do it with a deficit budget.
Jack is not crazy.
Without Dippers piling on with the Libs, Iffy is alone singing that song.
Jack will just say, it was a done deal in 2007 and won’t be in the budget,
and time to move on with making Parliament work.
Ignatieff is quite happy standing alone with the majority of Canadians. If Layton and Harper want to stand together giving big corporations tax breaks while the little guy struggles that is their choice.
Face it wilson, no matter how hard you try to spin it (and you are definately trying hard), this works for Ignatieff.
Apologies for the assumptions: If you are not a Liberal or even if you are not ” officially ” an NDP-er: You can easily be a non-partizan but you generally argue from the Left: Or at least that is the impression one gets from most of your posts in the same way that most of my posts tend towards the Conservative or Libertarian side of things.
” A little education ” only means a clear explanation of the theory from our point of view: If people accept the theory is a separate issue as in buy into it as making more sense to them or not.
It’s not that simple explanations sell so much as people have maybe not heard the explanation from our side and part of politics is to try and convince others that we have a better idea or a desirable idea.
When people hear diametrically opposed theories about economics or other issues they may chose one argument over the other as making sense to them or they may end up not being able to decide which theory is the better one and remain confused.
” no matter how hard you try to spin it (and you are definately trying hard), this works for Ignatieff. ”
Like any such statement the conclusion is only true if the premise is true.
“” A little education ” only means a clear explanation of the theory from our point of view”
Which does not contradict my point at all.
Well good thing the premise is true then.
“If Layton and Harper want to stand together giving big corporations tax breaks while the little guy struggles that is their choice.”
The ‘little guy’ needs a job.
Best social program there is happens to be a job.
Where do you think JOBS come from Gayle?
Walmart is a big corporation.
The less they pay in corp tax, the more likely it is comsumers pay less for goods and less likely the Walmart greeter gets canned to keep costs down.
I don’t really expect a Dipper to get that,
but I’ll put it out there for yah anyways.
The ‘little guy’ that has a job needs to give less to the government so as he or she can pay the bills.
The only tax the ‘most vulnerable’ pay,
is the GST.
LibDips want to increase taxes on the most vulnerable.
Blah blah blah
You are missing an important factor in all this wilson – the little guy DOES NOT SUPPORT THE TAX CUTS!
The entire basis of your little “analysis” is that somehow Ignatieff is going to lose votes because he alone supports what the majority of Canadians want. I am not sure how you get there, but I have to say you are not very convincing.