Yes or No: Will a federal election be called before the end of September 2009?

129 posts / 0 new
Last post
mybabble
Unionist

mybabble wrote:

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/692801

 

The election is good to go!

That was five days ago - when Layton said:

Quote:

The NDP wants improvements to EI and pension protection, as well as a reduction of credit card rates and elimination of ATM user fees.

Layton said his party will not accept minor changes in exchange for propping up the government. "It would have to be something significant that addresses all our proposals," he said.

 

George Victor

If the NDP can have a "helping hand", a coup de main, martin?Smile

martin dufresne

It has probably been said up-thread but this seems like a golden opportunity for the NPD to demonstrate what the government should do and isn't doing, by voicing demands and making Harper responsible for calling or forcing an unpopular election by ignoring them.

PC story this morning: Le NPD pourrait empêcher des élections à l'automne

Le Nouveau Parti démocratique (NPD) est toujours prêt à travailler avec le gouvernement minoritaire de Stephen Harper. Le chef, Jack Layton, espère ainsi empêcher le déclenchement d'une élection cet automne.
Quelques minutes avant le retour en chambre des députés fédéraux, ce lundi matin, le chef néo-démocrate a tenu un discours à ses troupes. Il a soutenu qu'il y avait une différence entre appuyer un gouvernement sans rien obtenir en retour et faire fonctionner le parlement. De son côté, il opte pour faire fonctionner le parlement.
(...)

Debater

remind wrote:

Good article by Laxer, I agree Boom boom, and calling Flaherty a bonehead was great.

Unfortunately, Flaherty is in a pretty strong Conservative seat and so it's unlikely voters who dislike him will be able to get rid of him.

Doug

This is perhaps the best argument against an election now, but it does look like Elections Canada will be trying to soldier through it.

Elections Canada prepares for poll amid possible H1N1 outbreak

Polunatic2

Harper appears to have upped the ante for the NDP's support. They have included ratification of the Canada-Colombia Free Trade deal as part of the confidence motion on Friday which also includes the home renovation credit. 

 

What extracting concessions looks like in action

Quote:
Now that we see the text of Friday's ways-and-means motion, it turns out that in order to support Harper's government, the NDP will also need to support the Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement.
So I guess there'll be an election. 

 

melovesproles

Ibbitson's recent column summed one of the better arguments for another election.

Quote:
If the election returns another conservative minority government, the future of every party leader will be in question. Yet there are no obvious successors.

Perhaps we need these elections to burn through the remaining crop of politicians who rose to prominence in the last century. Perhaps we're waiting for a political party to realize that this century's Canada needs a new generation of leaders. Perhaps we will end this foolishness when we elect a Parliament that resembles the Canada that is to come.

Its too bad that that is what its come to but with the kind of political leadership we've had in Canada this is all we can do.  Hopefully we can rid ourselves of a lot of these guys this time out.  We deserve better choices and eventually we just might get them.

 

janfromthebruce

I was waiting for Harper to tag something along the ways and means motion. Neither the Bloc or NDP can vote for ratification of the trade deal, so that leaves the libs. The libs don't care about "human rights" where they have already supported it. Iggy is an expert on human rights but I'm started to think that it's human rights for "a few" and the rest be damned.

However, he said he would support another confidence motion, so he pulls the plug - interesting times. Back to Iggy's court now.

Slumberjack

NDP poised to support Conservatives

"While Layton seemed to be grasping for a Conservative olive branch, it was far from clear the Conservatives were even extending it.  Layton repeatedly pleaded with Harper during the Commons' daily question period to commit to working with the opposition parties. Harper flatly ignored him."

The energy expended in taking note of these farcical developments as they unfold needn't extend beyond spontaneous bursts of laughter, which appropriately is the only review that this theatre of the absurd deserves.  Anything else only serves to lend validity to pretence, when instead the effort would be put to better use in ignoring the buffoonery.

ghoris

If today's polls are any indication, Harper has a lot less to fear from an election than any of the opposition parties.

NorthReport

ghoris,

Bingo!

Every time I suggest something to that effect some people here accuse me of being a Harper supporter.

I suppose the real world is a little to harsh for some so they prefer fantasy.

 

 

melovesproles

I'd still bet Harper would have a hard time pulling off more than another minority and another election would highlight the fact that he is just totally unable at leading a functional minority government.  His best before date is rapidly expiring and would be hastened by another election.  The governing party often polls well before unwanted elections and that could change fast during a campaign.  His only real advantage is that outside of Quebec he is still the most competent of a weak crop.  

madmax

The Columbia FTA looks like a Poison Pill for the NDP.

Harper is playing the LPC like a fiddle.  The LPC will support the home reno act and the LPC will support the FTA with Columbia.

However, maybe its Friday Election... ?

 

miles

no -- libs are all rhetoric and no action. iggy does not have the guts

Rob8305

__

janfromthebruce

madmax wrote:

The Columbia FTA looks like a Poison Pill for the NDP.

Harper is playing the LPC like a fiddle.  The LPC will support the home reno act and the LPC will support the FTA with Columbia.

However, maybe its Friday Election... ?

 

It's not a poison pill for the ndp - READ THE LINK

"The ways and means motion does not contain support for the free trade.... All it contains is a provision to amend the tariff schedule if the free trade deal receives royal assent before the ways and means motion does." h/t Dawg

Therefore, the NDP could support this motion as it does not compremise their position on free trade and human rights abuse & supportive of the ways and mean motion.Wink

Now the libs could vote against it - both things they support by the way.

At least and so far, the NDP aren't compromising their principles unlike another party in govt.

Stockholm

Incidentally, I was watching the news tonight and they were showing snippets of Ignatieff during question period - STINKEROO!!! I honestly can't believe how bad he is on TV. I was seriosuly trying to be objective, but I found watching and listening to him to be like having fingernails scrapping a blackboard

Centrist

janfromthebruce wrote:
It's not a poison pill for the ndp - READ THE LINK

"The ways and means motion does not contain support for the free trade.... All it contains is a provision to amend the tariff schedule if the free trade deal receives royal assent before the ways and means motion does." h/t Dawg

Yeah, it's not a vote for the agreement. And then this:

Quote:

Just a couple of hours ago,  the NDP's Brad Lavigne  was in the Commons foyer telling reporters  an election would be averted only if Friday's  motion did not contain a "poison pill." I wonder if this meets that definition?

*******Update: Via Twitter (h/t Brian Lilley), I learn that the NDP HQ is phoning around and saying that it's not necessarily a poison pill... Stand down.

 

http://thestar.blogs.com/politics/2009/09/a-freetrade-election.html

 

And CTV News reports that the NDP will not support the Libs non-confidence motion later this month.

It all seems to add up to an election next spring at the earliest.  

Aristotleded24

Sean in Ottawa wrote:

As well, a third campaign needs to address the risk of strategic voting collapsing support to the Liberals. It is important that the aprties work together but their supporters should not abandon their first choices otherwise the next parliament could be unrepresentative of people's true wishes for that reason.

I'm not sure I agree. The Liberals have urged Canadians to vote strategically in every election since 2004 and each time they lost seats to the Conservatives, while the NDP came out with more seats overall. I think strategic voting is more Liberal hype that the media plays up than it is reality.

janfromthebruce

Why should NDP support the liberal motion of non-confidence? So far all Iggy and libs have offered is to change the leader, their platforms and what they support are basically the same - so that iggy can be king?

Anyway, I thought Iggy wasn't talking to anyone these days such as the other opposition parties? So perhaps that is a rumour because one has to talk to find out.

anyway, too funny that Iggy bargain's for one day to shine - so to speak - and it looks like at this point in time that he might take that day off for some "reflection" and contemplation.

Polunatic2

So would the NDP be voting in favour of amending the tariffs for a deal that they oppose? 

janfromthebruce

sure because it doesn't matter - go read My Blawg

It would be horrible if it were true, but Robert actually read the ways and means motion and here’s what he found:

Coordinating Amendments
Bill C-23
24. (1) Subsections (2) and (3) apply if Bill C-23, introduced in the 2nd session of the 40th Parliament and entitled the Canada–Colombia Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act (referred to in this section as the “other Act”), receives royal assent.
(2) If subsection 48(1) of the other Act comes into force before section 22 of this Act, tariff item No. 9801.10.30 in the List of Tariff Provisions set out in the schedule to the Customs Tariff is amended by
(a) adding in the column “Preferential Tariff / Initial Rate”, above the reference to “GPT: Free”, a reference to “COLT: Free”; and
(b) adding in the column “Preferential Tariff / Final Rate”, above the reference to “GPT: Free (A)”, a reference to “COLT: Free (A)”.
(3) If subsection 48(1) of the other Act comes into force on the same day as section 22 of this Act, then that section 22 is deemed to have come into force before that subsection 48(1).

CONT

"Passage of the ways and means motion with this minor clause does not signal support for the Colombia FTA that still has to be passed by Parliament; which by the way, looks like it will do with the support of Silver’s Liberals."

Liberals and Cons - same party different wings Laughing

Unionist

This is nonsense, Polunatic. All Harper has to do is withdraw this irrelevant clause about the free trade deal - allow Layton to declare victory - and Bob's your uncle. The issue is, what concession is the NDP gaining here - or is it so insignificant that we'll need a drama about Colombia to bring it home?

I've already posted about the yawning gap between what Parliament already passed in March on EI reform - the same which now appears on the NDP web site - and what Harper is offering. Let's ensure the NDP keeps its eye on the main prize. If they can get a serious significant concession, why not? It doesn't mean Harper will be there forever. But if they really are afraid of an election and try to dress up a defeat as a victory, they will pay the price for a long time to come.

 

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

I agree - the 'poison pill' thing is simply a diversion. Let's hpe the NDP gets a more significant concession from the Cons on EI. But even if they do, I'd still like to see another election in the hopes that this country will say they've had enough of Harper.

West Coast Lefty

Unionist wrote:

This is nonsense, Polunatic. All Harper has to do is withdraw this irrelevant clause about the free trade deal - allow Layton to declare victory - and Bob's your uncle. The issue is, what concession is the NDP gaining here - or is it so insignificant that we'll need a drama about Colombia to bring it home?

I've already posted about the yawning gap between what Parliament already passed in March on EI reform - the same which now appears on the NDP web site - and what Harper is offering. Let's ensure the NDP keeps its eye on the main prize. If they can get a serious significant concession, why not? It doesn't mean Harper will be there forever. But if they really are afraid of an election and try to dress up a defeat as a victory, they will pay the price for a long time to come.

 

Well said, Unionist.  The issue is what real gains will Layton achieve in return for supporting the government on confidence votes. I'm not an expert on EI but my sense is that today's package is positive but fairly minimal, as you suggest.  That should mean a very time-limited support for Harper from the NDP in return- i.e. you have until early October to bring in more substantive changes or we vote you down on the next confidence motion. 

Minister Finley did suggest today that more action is coming on the EI self-employed coverage for maternity and parental benefits in the coming weeks.  If they actually move in the direction of Chris Charlton's motion from March, then Layton can legitimately consider letting Parliament continue until the spring budget.  I think Jack is right to take each vote on a case-by-case basis, no blank cheques, but also no rejecting legislation until we see it.  It's what Duceppe has been doing since 2004 and it has worked well for the BQ.

KenS

ghoris wrote:
If today's polls are any indication, Harper has a lot less to fear from an election than any of the opposition parties.

NorthReport wrote:

Bingo!

Every time I suggest something to that effect some people here accuse me of being a Harper supporter.

I suppose the real world is a little to harsh for some so they prefer fantasy.

 

Your self-congratulation is misplaced. Because you don't suggest just that. What gets people scratching their heads is your constant refrain that Harper is going to get a majority.

I'm not going to repeat myself, but I have suggested a number of times that Harper does have a lot to fear from an election. In fact, in my opinion is that it is Ignatieff who is now in the 'works either way' position. 

That said, as I've also said: there is so much going on and so many variables about which the parties including the Cons may know something we don't, that as unlikley as a Conservative majority appears to be.... and maybe even despite Harper knowing that the odds are against it... yes, he may prefer to go for it.

Polunatic2

Quote:
If they can get a serious significant concession, why not? It doesn't mean Harper will be there forever.
I'm sympathetic to that position and understand that the NDP needs to distinguish itself from the other opposition parties and demonstrate that they were elected last year to do a job. On the other hand, I really liked Murray Dobbin's piece on Rabble last week. 

Pages

Topic locked